Michael Harris takes a hard look at the deal between the Liberals and the NDP:
The way interim Conservative leader Candice Bergen tells it, the deal between the Liberals and NDP to keep the federal government in place until 2025 is a socialist coup that will destroy the country.
That’s because Bergen makes the equally absurd claim that this deal hands the reins of government to the NDP — saying that Jagmeet Singh is “basically” now deputy prime minister.
Obviously, Bergan got a spotty education in civics:
Bergen has confused a coalition with a co-operative agreement, in which no member of the NDP will have a cabinet post. Or maybe she’s engaging in just more of the poison dart politics that has led the Conservative Party of Canada to three straight electoral losses. You can only go so far in Canadian politics on spite and malice.
She recently called Singh a communist. Her knowledge of history is also pretty sketchy. But all of this isn't surprising:
Willing to stand up for guns, but not the planet; ready to back an unregulated energy sector, but not national daycare; able to champion lawless truckers who brought the national capital to its knees, but not political parties out to perpetrate co-operation.
As the Senate confirmation hearings of Supreme Court justice nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson show, co-operation is something utterly missing from U.S. democracy these days, as it continues to nosedive into strongman politics.
Pierre Poilievre has also called the deal a coalition. And "the Globe and Mail weighed in with an editorial that reached the astonishing conclusion that in making this arrangement with the NDP, Justin Trudeau has figured out a new way to castrate Parliament."
Both Poilievre and The Globe fundamentally misunderstand how parliamentary government works:
What is Parliament but the MPs who make it up? Between them, the Liberals and the NDP won 185 seats in the 2021 election. Between them they had 50.4 per cent of the popular vote. In the cold arithmetic of the system, that amounts to a de facto parliamentary majority, as long as the co-operation continues. So how does that “neuter” Canada’s legislative body? Since both caucuses approved the deal, how is that undemocratic?
As for the agreement itself, with the exception of an income-based national dental care program to be brought in over the next few years, the language of the deal is aspirational, not prescriptive. The deal is non-binding. Although it is slated to last until 2025, either party can opt out at will. Far from being a backroom coup cooked up by power-hungry socialists, it is a list of good intentions, not deeds. The language is pretty oceanic.
Additional “investments” in the COVID-ravaged health-care system; “continuing progress” on a universal pharmacare program; “moving forward” on tax reform; the pledge to “explore ways” to expand voting; “developing plans” to phase out subsidies for the fossil fuel sector; advancing measures to achieve “significant” emissions reductions by 2030; a “significant” additional investment in Indigenous housing….
What really galls the Conservatives is that it throws a spanner into their plans:
The detail may not be there, but the timing of this agreement was astute. With two federal elections in the last three years, not many Canadians are clamouring for a chance to throw the bastards out. Especially when the CPC alternative doesn’t know whether it wants to be run by Pierre Poilievre or Jean Charest. They are as different as cat kibble and caviar.
Three years of stable government may look good to a public battered by COVID, sticker shock at the pump and the grocery store, and the prospect of World War Last brewing in Ukraine. And if the whole thing goes south, the handy benefit of democracy is that you can fire the incumbent government and hire a new one.
So much for that election that the Conservatives thought was only six months away.
Image: Head Topics
12 comments:
The Cons are upset because they had plans to make parliament a madhouse to force an early election. With that now much less likely, the Cons are worried Canadians will get a better look at their leader before going to the polls. Things aren't looking up for that rancid sack of pus Poilievre.
Cap
I think Singh would have been better off supporting things like the dental plan without a semi-formal alliance. He should have knuckled down to some real policy development rather than faffing about with crazy tirades about the Liberals which usually managed to show his utter lack of knowledge---or honesty?--- about the division Federal and Provincial powers. Maybe skipped that lecture in law school?
Unless the dental plan has already been quietly in the works for a while I am doubtful if it can be implemented in 2022. Dental care looks to my non-expert eyes to be a provincial responsibility and Federal/Provincial/Territorial negotiations do not move quickly.
It is, however, a very important addition to the social/health safety net. It's a pity Tommy Douglas did not include it in Saskacewan's initial programme.
When did socialism become a dirty word? I have lived temporarily in the States for the last few year so I have witnessed its fear mongering use from the Trumpists. What shocks me though is this present incarnation of its use by MAGA hat wearing and coffee and doughnut supporters for the trucker protesters. It is true though that conservative, Republicans, capitalists and the like lack the compassion that would benefit anyone who can't "pull themselves up by their bootstraps".For me my 68 years as a Canadian has always allowed me to be "Social" in many ways.
https://www.google.com/search?q=define+socialism&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS986US986&oq=define+socialism&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i512l9.6651j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
It's back to the drawing board for the Cons, Cap. I'm not sure that Poilievre is capable of going back to the drawing board.
It's pretty clear that dental care was in Tommy's head, jrk. But he knew there was only so much he could accomplish at the time.
Historically, zoombats, "social" solutions were the way to govern a large country with a relatively small population.
I am all for repairing and extending our modern social policies and keeping the CONs a long way from power. In my opinion, here's the rub:
"NDP will back higher military spending in exchange for Liberal support for new social programs" ~ Globe and Mail
So, war industries take off and we just watch as fossil fuel expansion is recast as patriotism. War and/or climate catastrophes are being locked into our futures. But we'll have good teeth.
The Ukraine situation has upset the old balance, PoV. It's hard to predict where this will lead.
"You can only go so far in Canadian politics on spite and malice." True enough but if you're a one trick pony what else can you do but throw a tantrum?
It isn't difficult to understand that Bergen does not know what she doesn't know. For example yesterday she was quoted on CBC's noon show out of Calgary, saying (not exactly word for word) that JT doesn't like Parliament. Really? There is an agreement between the NDP and the Liberals if she has not heard this. Anyong
That's precisely what the Conservative Party has become, Mound -- a one-trick pony.
That's the kind of answer Bergen would give, Anyong. She says he doesn't like Parliament because she only understands majority government.
Post a Comment