Why wouldn't they?
What Seperatist wouldn't want:
- an anglophone from Ontario;
- who is percieved to be backed by Calgary, not to be a friend of Quebec;
- who speaks halting french; and
- who put his campaign chair in the Senate to fill a void in the province,
Again, silence from Harper about his newly found bedmates.
However, it does give the Libs more time to build a leader.
I suppose there is a bright side to everything.
9 comments:
The NDP also said they would work with the Tories. How come that isn't a headline? Also the Bloc voted with the Liberals on same sex marriage and the first budget. How come that wouldn't be considered as being in bed together. You can't have it both ways.
Not a headline because the NDP don't have enough votes to matter.
The Bloc are only doing this to get exactly what they want for Quebec. They dont't give a darn about the rest of the country. The Premier of the Province wants the liberals Daycare plan, so are they going to vote against that too?
I agree. Let them make their bed for the next year. With a strong center left position coming out of the policy convention, the liberals will be able to out flank both in Quebec on social policy.
btw, there was lots of talk post election about the closet conservatism of Quebec. This goes against both my intuition and experience there. Does this ring true to you?
Why no headline? Well, principally because the Seperatists have set their overarching goal as an independant Quebec.
Thusly, would it not make sense that supporting the Tories would be at the very least, complementary to this goal?
If this is true, should not Harper at least be out there welcoming them to federalism? Or does he care?
How can Harper control who props him up and who doesn't? Just because another party decides not to bring down a minority government doesn't mean they are in bed with another party. Look how much the NDP propped up the Liberals during the last minority. Does that mean that the Liberals and the NDP held regular meetings? No it doesn't. Just like the Bloc and the Conservatives. So to somehow suggest that the Conservatives are in bed with the Bloc is completely false.
Ann has it right. The Bloc and the NDP have a history of going whichever way the powerful wind blows, particularly if it makes themselves look good.
One major difference that Anonymous doesn't take into account is that we're not talking about a specific issue, like the NDP did in the last parliament. They were willing to work with the Libs if it brought results, issue by issue. The Conservatives gave very little about making the last parliament work. They spent a lot of energy making sure it failed and failed miserably (not that it was all their fault). Now you've got a party, dedicated to breaking up the country, saying they'll back away from keeping the gov't (one elected with 36% support) honest and making sure that Canadians/Quebecers rights and services are preserved, just to prop up a party that is not known for sympathizing with Quebecois issues. It's kind of like Harpo's decree that he will bring honesty, integrity and ethics to Ottawa, then slap a senate-appointee into cabinet with the keys to the treasury. Now they are working at a plan to allow the dismantling of medicare (which wasn't being protected very well by the last gov't, I admit) into a 'every province for themselves' system. God forbid you don't live in a rich province, or are not rich yourself. But there are a lot of people who have a lot of time for this kind of gov't. Most of them adore George W. too.
The Fathers of Canada’s Deconfederation ...
Do yourself a favour: dig out the Robert Harris painting of the 37 Fathers of Confederation. Now place before you photos of Stephen Harper and each Premier.
These are the new Founding Fathers of Canadian Deconfederation. Some artist should start work on a painting similar to that of Harris, to record for posterity the faces of these new Fathers.
Why? Because these men are now busily and stealthily engaged in the constructive deconfederation of Canada, under the guise of Harper’s “New Federalism” and “fiscal imbalance.”
They are avoiding open discussion in Parliament and their respective Provincial legislatures, because they know that there would be an outcry from citizens should it become apparent – through such debate – that these men are trying to do in private rooms, that which could not survive in the light of day. They are agreeing – without mandates from their respective voters – to change the nature of our confederation in such a way as to significantly weaken the bonds that bind this country together.
You don’t believe me? Then google fiscal imbalance harper. Read the commentaries you will find referred to there. Read Sinclair Stevens. Read Andrew Coyne.
Listen to the modern Canadian Paul Revere’s, riding furiously to warn citizens, crying One if by open debate, two if by stealth.
And then do your part as a citizen of Canada: Light two lamps, to signal to the body politic that their Confederation is being stolen from them by stealth.
Post a Comment