There is a whole wing of the party that felt betrayed by the Edmonton convention.
I don't think that liking Angus, or liking Singh, necessarily means wanting to settle old scores re: Edmonton.
I think there are just a lot of NDP supporters who don't feel that nationalized barber shops are the rock on which to make their stand.
I think there are just a lot of NDP supporters who don't feel that nationalized barber shops are the rock on which to make their stand.
hehehe... thanks for the laugh, Mr. Magoo. How right you are :-)
Charlie Angus's climate change announcement:
Legislate a Federal Carbon Budget that places a hard cap on emissions over a five year period which is then allocated to different sectors and subsectors of the economy.
Will the Carbon Budget with hard cap include the carbon that we export?
That is a good question.
Charlie talks the talk on indigenous rights but in answering pipeline questions about Kinder Morgan he seems to not be willing to stand up and be counted. I would be fascinated to hear how he intends to live up to this statement while denying the right of First Nations to say no.
The other issue is implementing UNDRIP. Working to build a credible relationship with Indigenous communities is going to be a priority for me because I think it's a priority for Canadians.
If he actually cares about UNDIP and wants a credible relationship with Indigenous communities then as a white politician from Eastern Canada he might have mentioned the fact that the terminus would be in unceded territory and those First Nations are suing the Federal government to ensure the pipeline never gets built.
But instead he focused on a carbon tax and working with that nice white woman Premier from the province directly to the East to offset any problems the people of that province might have propping up a toxic industry. His focus in the interview tells me he doesn't get what it means to stand for aboriginal rights. Supporting UNDIP either includes the right of First Nations to say no to development on their territorys' or it is just meaningless feel good words similar to the bullshit we are getting from the Liberals.
With the Trans Mountain pipeline now past the major hurdles of federal and provincial approvals, three First Nations in British Columbia say they’re focusing on the courts as a key battleground in their fight against the $6.8-billion project.
Members of the Coldwater Indian Band, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation and the Squamish Nation appeared together in Vancouver on Tuesday to reaffirm their opposition to the project, citing environmental and health risks as well as their concern they have not been properly consulted. The bands all filed lawsuits in the Federal Court of Appeal late last year.
They used the event to stress unity among First Nations opposed to expansion, which would triple the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline that runs 1,150 kilometres from Edmonton to a marine terminal in Burnaby, near Vancouver.
“It’s really to showcase the collaboration amongst the various First Nations, who are filing judicial reviews to challenge the federal Crown in their decision to approve this project,” Chief Ian Campbell of the Squamish Nation said following a news conference declaring common concerns.
“It’s really saying we’re not going to be passive in this process, that we’re not going to accept that this is a done deal, that we’re going to challenge it through legal remedies and take any means necessary to challenge the Crown’s decision to approve this project atop of our aboriginal rights and title.”
He added there are concerns about alternate routing, shipping issues, spills response and impact on marine life, including orcas and wild salmon.
“None of these concerns were met with any real analysis or consideration for the Squamish Nation. Every one of the concerns we put forward was met with vagueness and generalities, and that’s simply not acceptable.”
Earlier, in the news conference, he acknowledged that other First Nations have signed agreements with Kinder Morgan Canada, owner of the pipeline.
A total of 51 aboriginal communities – 10 in Alberta and 41 in B.C. – have signed mutual-benefit agreements with the project proponent, with 12 signing on after the federal government approved the project, with conditions, in late November. The mutual-benefit agreements will see $400-million shared with the communities.
Mr. Campbell said First Nations are distinct and the parties gathered Tuesday were not presumed to speak for other First Nations. “We are responsible for decisions within our own homelands and waters,” he said. “That is their choice, their autonomy to make their decisions within their territories.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-first-nations-u...
re: angus interview
..angus has his climate eggs in a carbon budget with hard caps. i believe, like notley he thinks that will provide enough cover to get the pipelines through. but it won't for a whole lot of reasons.
..his carbon plan won't work because today, right now both man and sask will not sign to trudeau's weak plan let alone anything stronger. and there is a very good chance that the alta ndp will be out and then they won't sign on either. i believe there is no way an ndp fed position will have the kind of strength to take that on. not without the movements and even then it will iffy. without a clear position on pipelines the movements will be uncertain as to what exactly they will be involving themselves with.
..the ndp, i suspect, might be in a minority or at best a small majority position. they will be totally wrapped up in protecting that position. how the brunt of the climate issue will be dealt with is just about the same as it is being dealt with today except for the possibility of more funding. that is the resistance to tar sands expansion via community resistance and indigenous sovereignty.
Previously the NDP proposed having a national revenue neutral cap and trade arrangement, with proceeds from that going to fund things like home retrofits, etc. I see nothing of a carbon pricing plan in Angus' proposal.
Plot to dump Mulcair last September revealed.
http://ipolitics.ca/2017/06/16/canadian-labour-congress-linked-to-failed...
Does it take courage for a Vancouver MP to grandstand at the expense of party unity in a leadership race about a controversial project deeply unpopular to his own base?
Is it wise, if you’re the only woman candidate, to fling epithets at the supporters of one of Canada’s — and one of the party’s — most admirable woman leaders.
Does it demonstrate leadership to deride a competing candidate seeking to find the balance a federal party’s leader must necessarily strike on internally divisive issues?
The questions answer themselves.
His competitors may or may not be terrified of Jagmeet Singh — though that is certainly the impression they gave to the media and debate watchers recently — but that’s not the point. What they should really be terrified of is the retribution that will follow for any candidate using the politics of insult about a controversial issue, while giving succour to the party’s enemies, damaging the party’s reputation and any chance it has at rebuilding under a new leader
... New Democrat voters will support the candidate who demonstrates maturity, even if they do not agree on pipelines or other issues. Like every voter, they too decide on the basis of character, as well as policy.
Some interesting questions! There's more of the piece by Robin Sears at the link:
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2017/06/18/letting-ambition-p...
Ah, Robin Sears, last sighted as Brian Mulroney's mouthpiece, during the hearings about the brown bags full of $100 bills. A true Blairite if ever there was one. I'm surprised his head didn't explode when Corbyn did so well last week.
I'm noticing that the people who were big into Mulcair are big into Angus. There is a whole wing of the party that felt betrayed by the Edmonton convention. The people who thought we really needed to keep Mulcair seem to me to be skewing heavily towards Angus.
The question the Mulcair loyalists were never able to answer was this: What possible sense did it make to keep a leader who had dragged the party down from second place to third place? Why should any leader who did that-before anyone brings him up, Gary Doer was NOT in that category in Manitoba. He didn't drag the party down to third place; he took over a party that was not only in third-place but at the point of total electoral wipeout, at 6% in the polls, and raised its support to well over 20%, keeping the Manitoba NDP caucus in double figures when there was a real possibility that every Dipper in the legislature would lose her or his seat at the start of the campaign-be kept in the job, when a third-place finish under that leader in one campaign had to mean the party would finish third place in ANY campaign that leader stayed on in?
What was it about Mulcair that could possibly be worth that?
It would almost have been like keeping Bob Rae in the Ontario NDP leadership after the 1996 election. Is there anyone here who thinks THAT would have made sense?
I'm noticing that the people who were big into Mulcair are big into Angus. There is a whole wing of the party that felt betrayed by the Edmonton convention. The people who thought we really needed to keep Mulcair seem to me to be skewing heavily towards Angus.
The question the Mulcair loyalists were never able to answer was this: What possible sense did it make to keep a leader who had dragged the party down from second place to third place? Why should any leader who did that-before anyone brings him up, Gary Doer was NOT in that category in Manitoba. He didn't drag the party down to third place; he took over a party that was not only in third-place but at the point of total electoral wipeout, at 6% in the polls, and raised its support to well over 20%, keeping the Manitoba NDP caucus in double figures when there was a real possibility that every Dipper in the legislature would lose her or his seat at the start of the campaign-be kept in the job, when a third-place finish under that leader in one campaign had to mean the party would finish third place in ANY campaign that leader stayed on in?
What was it about Mulcair that could possibly be worth that?
It would almost have been like keeping Bob Rae in the Ontario NDP leadership after the 1996 election. Is there anyone here who thinks THAT would have made sense?
I am really deep into devil's advocate territory here, but it really can't be said that Mulcair was the only difference between the 2011 and 2015 election. In some sense the Liberal party was and is the "main" competition of the NDP, since that is where most of the crossover voters come from. And comparing the 2011 Liberals under Ignatieff to the 2015 Liberals under Trudeau is like comparing a Honda Civic to a Ferrari. It can be argued that despite going in in 2nd place, Mulcair had a tougher task ahead of him than Layton did in 2011 (not counting Layton's health issues, of course!).
Again, I'm playing devil's advocate here. I don't like Mulcair and I've criticized him frequently in the past. But my criticisms are (broadly speaking) with his priorities, his hubris, and his leadership style. Losing to Trudeau after his predecessor beat Ignatieff is, like I said, not exactly a fair point of comparison.
On the other hand, it is his fault that he did not properly manage expectations or even basic respect for his opponent, and it is directly a result of his aforementioned hubris that he underestimated Trudeau's ability and/or overestimated his own which caused him - and his followers - to have unrealistic expectations. His loss would have been less embarassing - and less fatal - if he hadn't spent the 6 months before the election bravely telling everyone how pathetic Trudeau was and how badly he was going to beat him.
Either you didn't believe him, in which case you probably don't like him that much to begin with, or you did believe him which means he lost to a rookie with no experience, just nice hair. Either way is bad.
Political realities are in the eye of the beholder, I often note. Anyway, I feel it was a mistake to call a leadership review. I feel we should have stuck with Mulcair. But, that doesn't mean I support Angus. So far, my only thought regarding him is that Charlie Angus has become Charlie Ambiguous.
Some highlights of Angus's promises to help indigenous children:
NDP leadership candidate Charlie Angus is promising to find better ways to protect the interests of First Nations, Metis and Inuit children — including by dismantling the Indigenous Affairs Department.
The Ontario MP said he would create a federal ombudsperson for indigenous children, who would have the legal authority to order government departments to comply with policies aimed at improving child welfare.
Angus said he would also audit the Indigenous Affairs Department and Health Canada in order to figure out how the government runs its programs and then work with indigenous communities on giving them the power to run them.
Angus also said he would work with the parliamentary budget office to determine the true cost of delivering service to indigenous peoples, ensure the Department of Justice stops fighting aboriginal rights in court and end the "culture of secrecy" when it comes to government plans and funding for indigenous communities.
http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2017/06/18/ndp-leadership-hopeful-charl...
Jagmeet Singh courtise les Québécois avec une première pub en français
http://quebec.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/06/19/jagmeet-singh-courtise-les-qu...
REB is endorsing Guy Caron:
http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/politics/ndp-mp-ruth-ellen-brosseau-...
If I was her, I probably would, too. If Caron wins, the Quebec NDP caucus survives and gains are possible there. Under Ashton or Julian, the party holds its ground there. Under Singh or Angus...?
The upcoming Québec byelection in Lac Saint Jean to replace CPC MP Denis Lebel may give some clues as to party support in Québec:
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/06/19/departure-of-former-conse...
Jagmeet Singh has released a French language ad, with Roch Voisine music playing while he wraps a pink turban around his head (does Roch Voisine know?):
http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/politics/what-a-roch-voisine-cassett...
"Charlie Ambiguous" . That made me laugh. If he wins don't tell the Conservatives about that, or it'll be in all the attack ads.
"Charlie Ambiguous" . That made me laugh. If he wins don't tell the Conservatives about that, or it'll be in all the attack ads.
I think the Conservatives next time will be focusing all of their attacks on Trudeau and the Liberals no matter who the NDP pick as their next leader.
"Charlie Ambiguous" . That made me laugh. If he wins don't tell the Conservatives about that, or it'll be in all the attack ads.
I think the Conservatives next time will be focusing all of their attacks on Trudeau and the Liberals no matter who the NDP pick as their next leader.
I agree. The next election is likely to be a Liberal vs. Conservative race.
The NDP is likely to be viewed as the traditional 3rd party again. It will only get attacked if it makes a surprising jump in support.
There is another debate happening right now in Toronto, and it's being carried on CPAC and CBC. It's an unofficial debate, being hosted by the United Steelworkers, focused on the Economy and Labour issues.
There's a bit of point-form coverage of tonight's debate here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-unofficial-leadership-debate-1.4174053
It was announced at the end of the debate that it will be archived on the USW website at www.usw.ca but I don't think it's there yet (at least I haven't found it).
My own viewing was interrupted frequently by the feed freezing up, so I look forward to re-watching the debate on their website. I will say it appeared to me that Ashton might have won, at least if she was judged on the applause she received at the end of her closing statement, which seemed to be far and away the loudest, and carried on into the beginning of Angus's closing statement.
Socialism Is Back. Is the NDP Listening?
Instead of fighting for the scraps of the political centre, the left can score a victory by returning to its principles
https://thewalrus.ca/socialism-is-back-is-the-ndp-listening/
Ashton has clearly grabbed the Sanders/Corbyn mantle.
Singh continued to defend his conservative idea of means testing senior benefits.
Ashton said free university tuition would help end precarious work by creating a better-trained workforce
Precarious work is a problem because there are more university grads than there are jobs that actually require a university education. We need more jobs, not more grads.
Singh continued to defend his conservative idea of means testing senior benefits.
He also failed to successfully defend his position under questioning, which seems to be becoming a theme with him.
A bit more analysis of the Toronto debate, and the race in general, in The Star:
This is a federal NDP that appears determined to shift hard to the left and shuck any vestige of the tepid, disastrous drift to the centre under Tom Mulcair in 2015.
This is a party that needs to be daring and embrace a social democratic era that is personified by Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, and decidedly not Mulcair.
It was likely no coincidence that the biggest cheer of the night came for Ashton, when she invoked the names of the two, rumpled old white guys who have proved, with varying degrees of success, that social democracy or flat-out socialism can be paraded as a platform, not pushed into a dark closet.
... For one night, she pulled it off, but her stridency will likely wear thin because there really are only shades of grey between the candidates.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/06/23/a-hard-ndp-shift-to-the-l...
Canada has been clawing back Old Age Pensions based on income since the late 80s, the guaranteed annual income supplement by defintioin is means tested, and most provincial programs to help seniors are means tested.
Ashton has clearly grabbed the Sanders/Corbyn mantle.
Niki says voting for her is easy as ABC
A for Ashton
B for Bernie
C for Corbyn
ABC!
All five candidates say they will be BOLD
“I have put together a bold plan,” says Guy Caron.
“I have a bold and unapologetic . . . social democratic vision,” says Jagmeet Singh.
Peter Julian is also “bold and unapologetic,” in his social democratic platform.
“We must be bold and progressive,” says Niki Ashton.
Charlie Angus sounded bold, although he broke from the bold-fest by choosing other words.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/06/23/a-hard-ndp-shift-to-the-l...
I've had the pleasure of meeting Nikki, Jagmeet and Charlie. And I have followed these three enough to at least throw in an opinion. But before I do let me be clear. I left the ndp because I seen how this party has become power hungry. I was disgusted to see how quick the party brass throws their founding morals under the bus to kiss corporate ass, swayed by the corporate media to turn on socialist foundations. Furthermore, I'm a Maoist 毛泽东思想！Jagmeet was swayed by the corporate media to be a candidate. That's all that needs to be said about Jagmeet. Charlie has a great fundraiser infrastructure which is borderline too corporate mentality. I got into an argument with him about the senate and all he did was parrot the party policy. To me, this showed a lack of independent intellect. Good luck with Charlie. Nikki impressed me the most!!!! She speaks three languages comes from central Canada stood by core socialist values and is a woman! She has youth and modest good looks. Both intellect and electable. Now in my world, the intellect rules but in the so called democratic word(where ironically you have no power to vote for anything important) you have to be electable. I give a rats ass who the membership elect because last time around we elected a guy that praised Thatcher!
Hi WWWTT,
I'm planning to vote for Niki; so I would encourage you to rejoin the NDP and vote for Niki, if that's who you like the best. Of course the choice is yours.
In any case, it's nice to see a new member on these forums, as we don't get many new people here these days.
Nikki impressed me the most!!!! ...comes from central Canada
That usually is a strike against
Nikki impressed me the most!!!! ...comes from central CanadaThat usually is a strike against
I don't consider it as strike against Niki that she comes from northern Manitoba -- whether we even consider this as part of 'Central Canada" is open to debate, as I've heard that phrase used most often to refer to Ontario and Quebec, with everything west of Ontario referred to as 'Western Canada'.
I'm from the GTA. The reference I make implying an importance to "central Canada" is personal. However I believe it is in the best interest of the ndp and Canada for that matter to diversify where their leader comes from to fairly represent ALL of Canada. I give geographic location consideration if you want to disagree for whatever reason than make your point. I meant "central" in geographic term. Not metophoric. Im still a little new here and I'm actually a little surprised the adjective "central" is so far the most controversial term I used
Im still a little new here and I'm actually a little surprised the adjective "central" is so far the most controversial term I used
You thought it would be "Maoist", right?
Welcome to our world!!
Coming from BC we are used to people from Central Canada assuming that somehow they understand us all by some weird osmosis. I don't actually consider Ashton to be from central Canada and it is not a big part of my judgement.
And of course where are my manners! Welcome to babble..
You thought it would be "Maoist", right?
Welcome to our world!!
Thanks brother/sister!
你说的对！当然我觉得 “毛泽东思想” 让人奇怪
You're right in thinking that if anything, declaring I'm a Maoist would raise a few eyebrows!
Coming from BC we are used to people from Central Canada assuming that somehow they understand us all by some weird osmosis. I don't actually consider Ashton to be from central Canada and it is not a big part of my judgement.
And of course where are my manners! Welcome to babble..
Thanks for the welcome brother/sister!
I think I understand your concern from far disconnected leadership. I'm actually a little disappointed that the BC wing of the NDP caucus didn't make a stronger contest in the ndp leadership for geographic reasons. The ndp have had recent leaders from urban eastern centres and I feel this may be a contributing factor in this stupid rediculous shift right!
Now having said that, I'm not going to go any further about making my case about geographical location
In any case, it's nice to see a new member on these forums, as we don't get many new people here these days.
(whispering) WWWTT has been a babbler for two and a half years.
@WWWTT
Just curious at your reasons for not supporting Julian. I have personal biases (both for and against). For me his upside is that to me he is clearly the most authentic candidate and that is something that is critically important to a jaded electorate.
Julian.... to me he is clearly the most authentic candidate
Glad that was phrased as a personal opinion, becuase it's highly debatable. I'm not questioning that Julian is indeed authentic, because he is. But I do question that Ashton or Angus or Caron are any less genuinely authentic (Singh is another matter!!). We are very lucky to have several excellent choices for leader, each of whom could come across as authentic, honest and genuine to the public at large.
(whispering) WWWTT has been a babbler for two and a half years.
My apologies. I have been out of the loop for some time and have not met Peter before. You caught me in an ignorant moment. After quickly briefing myself on Peter I will have to retract some comments I made. Fist off, the ndp BC federal caucus has forwarded a strong candidate! And since he is from BC his geographical location should be given strong consideration in his bid for leadership. No question he has an impressive proven socialist selfless record!!!! 但是如果我遇见他的话、 我会给他很难问题！If I met him I would ask him some uncomfortable questions to figure him out.
No problem. I think there are uncomfortable questions for all candidates. We should be looking for the ideal, knowing that we will ultimately settle for the best approximation.
NDP needs to remember that it is really the centrists and 'Third Way' that lost in the US and UK
In what can only be read as a rather defensive and bizarre apologia for the NDP's election strategy catastrophe in 2015, former National Director of the NDP Karl Bélanger has penned an op-ed (in the Toronto Sun no less!) called "NDP needs to remember that Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders lost". It is the saddest attempt that I have seen to date from a Canadian 'progressive' to downplay and minimize exactly what it is that Corbyn recently accomplished in the UK....
