(Cdn PM) Martin, (NDP leader) Layton Extend Talks Deadline

[iverglas]

If you're a fan of the West Wing, you should be following Canadian politics this week. ;)


Toronto Star
(may require free registration)

Prime Minister Paul Martin and NDP Leader Jack Layton are continuing talks aimed at securing the support of the New Democrats in passing the budget and fending off a snap election, a spokeswoman for Martin said today.

... The negotiations are aimed at keeping Parliament working and not only increase the chances of the federal budget being passed, but also demonstrate the Liberals and NDP can work together “in good faith,” a senior Liberal adviser said today.

“The Conservative Party of Canada and Bloc will be exposed as having a common agenda focused on little more than forcing an unwanted election,” the source said. “Canadians would rather see the Liberals and NDP working together to keep this Parliament functioning.”

Layton has demanded that the Liberals eliminate $4.6 billion in proposed corporate tax cuts so that the money can be spent on social programs. In exchange, he would throw the support of his 19-member caucus behind the Liberal budget bill.

Defeat on a budget bill is an automatic vote of non-confidence, which requires that the government resign. Theoretically, another party could seek the confidence of the House to form a government, but in this case we'd have another election.

But even if the Liberals agree to Jack's proposal, it's no guarantee the bill would pass; it would still require the support of the independent MPs, or the support (or at least abstention, which might be smart) of the Bloc Québécois.

Because party discipline is strong in Canada, we don't see wheeling and dealing in our legislative bodies very often. If a party has a majority and forms the government, its legislative initiatives get passed sooner or later.

When the governing party holds only a minority of seats, things can be different. Here's how it now stands:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/04/26/mp-independent050426.html

SEATS
LIBERAL ..................... 132
CONSERVATIVE ........ 99
BLOC QUEBECOIS ..... 54
New Democratic Party ... 19
Independent ...................... 3
VACANT ..........................1
TOTAL ........................ 308

Liberal + NDP = 151
BQ + Conservative = 153
Independent = 3

Layton is demanding that Martin remove the corporate tax cuts from his budget. The Liberals did *not* make any mention of corporate tax cuts during the 2004 election campaign -- but did make various social program spending promises that the budget does not live up to.

I think Layton's move is brilliant, given the hand he was dealt.

The Bloc Québécois purports to be neutral on the fate of Canada overall, but to be socially progressive. Defeat the Liberals on a budget that promised socially progressive spending? Subject the entire country, including Quebec, to an unnecessary election? Doesn't look wise.

The Conservatives are of course scum who will use any excuse to defeat the government ... except ... they really can't be sure of faring any better in an election now than they did last summer.

The supposed issue is the Liberal Party corruption scandal under former PM Chrétien: the payment of large sums of money to ad agencies in Quebec to administer the federal "sponsorship" program meant to enhance pro-federalist feeling in Quebec, when in fact the ad agencies provided little to no services, and funnelled considerable sums back into the Liberal Party coffers as political donations.

Now, most of this was known before the last election -- except for the donation part, but cripey, why did anyone imagine that the Liberals were doing this?? I know what I imagined, and oh look, I was right: public money going to Liberal pockets. Anybody who didn't know that the Liberals were corrupt wasn't paying attention for the last half century. (Not that Brian Mulroney's Conservatives didn't give them a run for their money on that front.)

Martin appointed a judge to hold a commission of inquiry to investigate it all, and he has been hearing the testimony of the corrupt officials and ad agency execs; criminal trials are pending. The inquiry is ongoing, with a report expected at the end of the year. Martin recently promised to call an election when it was in.

All sorts of people want to "punish the Liberals". That would be ... by submitting themselves to Conservative rule for a few years. Hey, that sounds good. Let's cut off their noses to spite our faces.

This isn't likely to play big on Fox or CNN, so if you're interested in how it plays out, check with

http://www.cbc.ca
http://www.torontostar.com
http://www.globeandmail.com

This is a good brief read: NDP awaits Martin's decision -- and contains links to background about the issues.

[Minstrel Boy]

1. great post, iverglas

I think the only sure winners in an early election would be the BQ. To my understanding, Quebeckers are following the inquiry closely, and are likely to be unshaken in their determination to punish the Liberals. That could all but eliminate Quebeckers from the cabinet of whichever party forms a government. (Martin excepted, naturally, and a handful of other Liberals. And likely no Conservatives, though in last week's CBC poll they were ahead of the Liberals in the province. But it's hard to imagine that holding up, or even making a difference, given the concentration of the Liberal core vote.)

I can't help but hope for the collapse of the Liberal Party. The only chance the NDP has of forming a national government is to pass it on the left, and the best chance for that is at a time of severe regime fatigue and resistance to the Conservative alternative. This may be that time.

[iverglas]

2. ta ;)

It must be just too complicated for our US cousins. ;)

I can't help but hope for the collapse of the Liberal Party.

But of course. And if wishes were horses ...

The only chance the NDP has of forming a national government is to pass it on the left, ...

... *and* getting the votes we need for that to happen! You can't form a government without having the votes.

And you can lead the voters to goodness and reason, but you can't make 'em vote for it. Witness George W. Bush.

... and the best chance for that is at a time of severe regime fatigue and resistance to the Conservative alternative.

Unfortunately, what experience tells us on that point is that the voters switch back to the Liberals. For some reason, they want to believe the lies. Or they just don't remember. Or they're just not real bright. Or they don't care. Or they don't actually like goodness and reason, and prefer greed and corruption. Because they actually benefit from Liberal policies, or because they're too dim to realize that Liberal policies hurt them ...

That's a big reason why I *don't* want to see a Conservative govt now -- not just because it would be extremely unpleasant, but because it would likely help the Liberals, next time around. They're just wizards at reincarnating themselves and playing the messiah.

It may be because I'm old, but I don't put much stock in that bring on the revolutionary circumstances business any more. I've watched evolution work pretty well on the Canadian stage for a while.

Making the Liberals dance to our tune to the extent possible strikes me as the most useful and beneficial strategy. If we get that child care program, it's going to be hard to take it away -- just like the health care plan and old age pensions that we achieved by governing indirectly, you might say. We may *never* actually form the government, but we might continue to drag governments along the right path.


(typo fixed)

[Minstrel Boy]

3. likely so:

"We may *never* actually form the government, but we might continue to drag governments along the right path."

I can talk a good game re: heightening the contradictions, but the times are too perilous as is to risk a Conservative government, even an incompetent and short-lived minority.

[iverglas]

4. well, just in case anyone's curious

It looks like the Canadian government may not fall.

This is goodish news for USAmerican liberals/Democrats/progressives, if any of them happen to notice it. A Conservative government in Canada would not exactly be a beacon of light in a George W. Bush dominated hemisphere or world.


http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/04/26/martin-layton050426.html

The Liberals and NDP have reached an
agreement-in-principle on support for the minority
government's budget, NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

The tentative deal could help
Prime Minister Paul Martin's
minority government survive.

"This budget isn't perfect.
But it's better. And it's
balanced, and it includes tax
reductions for small business.
But it also invests in
people and our environment,"
Layton told reporters.


Things still hinge on what the 3 independent MPs and/or the Bloc Québécois decide to do.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1114510174459&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050426.w3martin0426/BNStory/National/

However, the agreement is not completely finalized.
The smaller details of the deal are still being
worked out by Liberal House Leader Tony Valeri
and NDP House Leader Libby Davies, he said.

Mr. Layton said he spoke with his constituents,
who told him they want a government that takes
action, and actually governs.

He said the indications he received are that voters
do not want an election right now.