With Iggy sending the message to the Governor General this weekend that she stands to personally gain if she grants a coalition request in the event of a possible non confidence vote before the end of her term; that really begs the question who should lead that new government? Jack Layton is an option, and so is Mike Ignatieff. Just to be sure that all your heads don't explode while considering these two options, I decided it prudent to add a third option. I had to ask myself, which comical character in the world of pop culture would most resemble Ignatieff and/or Layton running a country. Look no further than the Swedish Chef.
I can only imagine what it would look like if Iggy were in power creating government policy. It might look a lot like this. On second thought, it would probably look more like this...
Canada's Next Prime Minister: Ignatieff or Layton?
ReplyDeleteOr Duceppe?
They all signed an agreement together so it is not one or two but three prime ministers but I think that the media has already acknowledge the opposition parties as leaders or PMS.
Of course, each of these media's prime ministers will want a huge part of the pie. they didn't sign that Coalition agreement for nothing.
\\
The coalition deal does not expire until June 2011, and Jack may have held another round of negotiations.
ReplyDeleteSwedes FTW.
I voted for the Swedish Chef. It's the Abba, Ikea, Ingrid Bergman thing.
Why do you let your brain even think this. It's not on, never was, never will be, perish the thought, ohmygawd.......
ReplyDeleteIgnatieff, he's the best leader out of all the major parties sadly.
ReplyDeleteIs that what your prof told you?
ReplyDeleteThe Bloc agreed to vote with the coalition on any matters of confidence for 18 months.
ReplyDeleteThey signed Dec 1, 2008...the coalition of losers deal, at least the part that gives Iffy/Jack a majority, ends in June 2010.
Between Jack and Iffy,
I'd go with the Canadian!
Unless Ontarians (particularly Con supporters in Ontario must get out there and campaign hard) show more support for this government,
we may very well see another coalition of losers,
IF the BLOC wants 'in' again.
This time, the coalition of losers will do it right, 'before' PMSH is appointed PM by the GG.
...
unless
PMSH (being the incumbent PM, he gets first chance to form a govt) forms
a coalition (Dippers or Libs in cabinet) or
union government (break away MPs).
Think about the unthinkable,
would you refer a LibDipper coalition w/BLOC at the decision table,
or
a ConDipper coalition, no BLOC
or
a union govt with a dozen Lib MPs is preferrable, but do they have the nerve?
Don't discount Jack making a deal with PMSH.
Dipper's sitting in a Con govt boosts NDP future political prospects far more than once again being a Liberal rump.
PMSH has worked with the NDP for 4.5 years.
Yes because I cannot think for myself.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it that you think makes Iffy the best leader of all the amjor parties, Posc?
ReplyDelete-that he has never won a leadership race?
-that he has never sat in cabinet?
-that he has less political experience than 3/4 of his caucus?
-that he was 'for' the coalition of losers before he was 'against' it,
for the carbon tax before he was against it...rinse and repeat on every issue?
-that it took him 3 years, after his return to Canada after a 34 year absence,
to realize that separatists want to break up our country, and maybe that isn't such a good thing?
I see a man who, because of the entitlements of bloodlines , was successful in baffling his audiences with bull sh....
http://www.ignatieff.me/
...or more importantly. What if we had a time traveling space yacht? Which universe would we go to first?
ReplyDeleteWilson, I strongly doubt that there will be a Conservative NDP alliance.
ReplyDeleteBe vigilant people: the coalition is not dead at all. Every Canadian who votes next time must be made well aware of what could happen if they waste a Green vote (or an NDP vote in a swing CPC-Lib riding), of what the rules are and what is possible.
ReplyDeleteWe have already seen that the coalition can pass a terrible law to effectively make sure almost all future Supreme Court judges are from Quebec and Eastern Ontario, as they have done with our national public service. This will also change the culture of Canada, excluding many from growing western Canada and the maritimes, as there will be a huge Eastern imbalance.
Language and culture do go together, as Quebecers would quickly agree. Urban, leftist judgments for all Canadians will not pre-dominate to an extent that is uncomfortable.
As for Quebec, they appear to need a new and TRUE in-depth curriculum for grade 12 students, covering our national system of government, which shows how having an MP at the national cabinet table is a good idea for them. People in rural Quebec get it, e.g., the Beauce!
Urban immigrants do not get our system, so they need some vastly different information, as I am not sure that all of them are "informed voters" when they select BQ. The way to influence policy is from within cabinet and working on bi-partisan committees (assuming they function collegially, as they did in the past vs. being hijacked for political purposes). Shrieking outrage and demanding stupid things from the opposition benches to capture "sound-bites" does not effect positive change.
Look at England - it appears that their tradition, in what they call "a hung parliament", is to invite the government of the day to form the government, which would be Browne who may come 3rd. Our tradition has been different, as we have had more hung parliaments, albeit most short-lived. The GG normally asks the winner party (most MPs) to form the Government. Is this a tradition or is it in the constitution - I am not sure. What happens if he/she is challenged? I am no constitutional expert, but we better all get smart very fast.
And we should also let the GG Facebook group know that Captain Kirk's starship could be headed for Greece, if he is not committed to hours of study on how parliamentary democracies work. The price of NDP-Liberal coalition policies will ensure that Canadians have increasingly fewer choices to manage their lives and livelihood.