Monday, December 01, 2008

Tieleman on CBC NewsWorld today - Monday - at 12:15 p.m.

I will be on CBC TV's NewsWorld at 12:15 pm. today - Monday - commenting on the possible federal coalition government - tune in if you can.


Mylegacy said...

For Canadians, the Conservatives have been wrong on almost every issue that has defined what Canadians believe in. On the questions of universal healthcare, and small "l" liberal community standards, the Tories have been swimming upstream. As a result they've spent 90% of so of the last century on the outside looking in. Those of us "of a certain age" remember the vicious lying fight they put up against universal health care.

Harper has "won" two minority governments. Despite an historic Liberal collapse in Quebec he was unable to win a majority. Why? Because Canadians are not ready to hand over our "social network" to the "tender care" of the Religious Right and the Reaganite "Trickle Down, Deregulate, Government is the enemy" crowd.

As in the USA, the "right" doesn't want government "leaner" it wants Government "gone." The US shows us the end game of that philosophy. Canadians know better.

Polls always show a majority of Canadians as being "center/left." Harper's hatred and disrespect of the opposition may have now created the "New Liberal Democratic Party" of Canada.

Thank you Mr. Harper, your disrespect is going to give Canadians the opportunity to elect, "Change we can believe in!"

Anonymous said...

Hi Bill,

I saw you on CBC and almost fell off my chair. The party you have slugged it out for over the better part of your career actually starts making history by restoring majority rule and acting on the behalf of more Canadians than ever and you pull out all the stops to criticize them?

"The NDP can only hope to survive this without losing a significant amount of votes" was your last word.

You Sir, are a way off base with these comments and you have provided nothing substantial accept that it isn't your advice to the party.

I am used to a far more astute perspective from you Bill and am hugely disappointed with your positioning on this issue at this critical time.

Bill M said...

Bill, saw you on CBC and liked your comments. Have watched you a number of times on Vaughn Palmer and generally don't agree with you but you do generally have a well thought out argument. On the coalition I agree with you that this is not what we voted for regardless of your polictical background. On coalitions from the past most of the players are no longer in existence. I vote generally Liberal provincially and Conservative federally. Thx Bill

Anonymous said...

Gosh Bill
Two people saw you on TV but seem to have very different opinions as to what you said. But's that's democracy. We are fortunate that you blog posts folks with different ideas. Everyone has a opinon or we are all in big trouble. Strategic Thoughts has a good, in my view article on Harper's problems and why the other parties appear to be in position to drop him. Last coalition govermment , after awhile, fell apart and the voters returned the guy who was dumped, so go figure. Long time ago but the threat of voter losses to the parties taking over as a coalition. Both the NDP and the Liberals are taking that chance. Should be an interesting week. Now the budget got moved ahead and who knows what else Harper will try so he can keep control. If he worked as hard trying to run a country as he has been trying to destroy the opposition we would be in this mess now.

Anonymous said...

No matter anyone's political stripe, everyone should be angry about the loss of our democratic rights. A coup by any other name is still a coup, and when that coup is achieved against, like it or not, a democratically elected government, the coup is a threat to that democracy.

I do not agree with taxpayer support for ANY party. If the party cannot gain sufficient grassroots support to get itself elected to even one seat, then why the heck should I have to pay for it?

I'm not the first to say it, but I'll say it again...Canada should have a two party system... the government and the opposition. If people have a message they want delivered in Parliament, then it's up to them to stand for one party or the other, and persuade that party to adopt their cause as paart of its platform. If they cannot do even that, again, why should they get taxpayer dollars?

If we do nothing to tell the unelected NDP, the decimated Dion Liberals and the country-breaker Bloc to take their coalition and shove it, then we deserve all we get.

Anonymous said...

anon 2.19 talks about a coalition as if it's a coup. It's not a coup, it's a legal process.Then tells us we should only have two parites. Is that democratic? I wouldn't vote Green or Conservative but if folks wish to nominate folks to run in elections, so be it. To refuse them certianly wouldn't be fair. But it seems that if two parties chose to become a coalition it's somehow wrong? The constitution has a set up where, unlike the US , a higher authority can disolve parliament and bring in the other group to run things. It's called the Governor General. Both Liberal and NDP are taking a big risk going the route they have taken. I doubt they took it without regard to their caucus wishes. They could get crushed if or when the colalition falls. But in the meantime some work can be done. Harper doesn't help by referring to the two opposition parites , in the house today as having a socialist agenda. What was his agenda? Beyond trying to crush the opposition.

Anonymous said...

A coalition is a perfectly legitimate form of government for Canada.

It is indeed a concept fraught with peril, and will no doubt hasten the end of Stephane Dion's hitherto unremarkable political career. But what a brilliant ending he is writing.

Yes - If it backfires, it could also bring down Jack Layton, and the NDP needs to exercise caution.

But I like the idea of a lean, mean cabinet with only 24 members. That is fiscal prudence and leadership on a scale that even the Tories have to admire.

And I do not support waiting for the US budget before drafting our Canadian response.

Obama intends to be much more protectionist than even the Bush Republicans. Canada needs to outline its strategy now, when it is possible to have some influence on the US bailout plans, not later when it is too late and a done deal.

I am a proud nationalist. And I am not happy with NDPers who think it's a great and glorious thing to rely on American funding to win their elections.

Anonymous said...

Anon2:19 probably wants a two-party system because of an unwillingness (or inability) to do the math.

Or the politics.

It's always easier with only two factions - one party wins, the other doesn't.

Imagine, though, if, instead of five major parties competing for our votes, we had had ten. Or twenty (see Italy or Isreal).

If Harper had run and won the most seats with, say, seven percent of the vote (instead of the 34-ish he got) would Anon2:19 still see that as an absolute mandate to govern just because no other party got above six percent? Clearly it is no such thing; he would need to treat with one or more parties until he had a majority (not likely) or a workable minority. And even then he would have to proceed cautiously, respectfully.

In spite of 'winning' two successive minorities, Stephen Harper has never deigned to acknowledge that he is Prime Minister on sufferance of the voting public and at the pleasure of Parliament; he has consistantly and arrogantly proceeded with an extreme agenda that a majority of the voters clearly do not agree with. In the first go-round he was propped up by a timid suitor of an opposition leader. Now, with nothing to lose, Stephane Dion has found the courage to call Harper's bluff.

I am inclined (in spite of my delight at seeing Harper get his comeuppance) to agree with Tieleman that the blowback for the left could be disastrous. But this is not a coup (as Anon2:19 would have us beleive). Steven Harper has done this to himself, not some sneaking cabal of plotters.