[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Iggy cleans up (click to view)
Date: February 2, 2009
January 21 was deadline day for Prime Minister Harper; that was the day in which the Liberal Party was to decide whether or not to support his economic update in parliament, and thus determine whether or not he would be non-confidence voted out of power.

As we've discussed, Stephane Dion, the old Liberal guy, was eager to move ahead, by hook or crook, with non-confidence voting, in the hopes that he himself could be installed as prime minister in the aftermath. But Mr. Dion is gone now, and Michael Ignatieff is now in control of the party. And he has backed away from the whole zany coalition government idea Dion was peddling. Iggy said the Liberals would support the economic plan as long as Harper promised to regularly update parliament with future economic updates.

"Really? That's all?" said the Conservatives. "Sure! Sounds good to us!"

[Bibbi]

It's certainly good for the Conservatives, but politically dumb on Iggy's part. How is he going to differentiate himself from Conservative ideology in the next election if he creates a history of fully supporting the budget and other forthcoming bills? How is this any change from Dion and his abstensions?

[roger-roger]

Do you think Iggy had any other choice? You saw how the other two babies have acted, with Layton calling for blood. The coalition wouldn't have stayed together anyway and it would have resulted in an election that the liberals cannot afford.

[hurley_108]

In my perhaps flawed estimation, the voters will not punish Ignatieff for supportign this budget. Enough conservatives have come out and blasted it for being too liberal that he will not be seen as having supported a conservative budget. Also I doubt very much they want to go to the polls again. Dion's abstentions very much had the stink of a desperate attmept to avoid an election he couldn't win, but they were also too far from the last election for him to say "we just had an election, and we don't think you want another one yet" with any credibility.

As for supporting further bills this session, Ignatieff will have an easier time on those as well than did Dion. Last year, Harper was on this big kick of calling every last thing a confidence measure, claiming tenuously that everything that came out of the throne speech was a confidence matter. This last throne speech was, by all accounts I've seen, about nothing but the economy, and the budget takes care of that. Furthermore, Harper has blinked. He did a 180 on the subsidies, and then went with tail between his legs to the GG for a do-over. He's finally proved he's vulnerable.

Lastly, Ignatieff's demands for amendments to the budget, while they've been lambasted by the NDP and Bloc as beign a rubber stamp, can also be looked on as being very reasonable and accomodating. If Harper were to have said "no," then Harper would have looked like the petulant one. All Iggy has to do is keep that up, set reasonable requirements for his support, and he'll continue to hold the balance of power.

Now, if Ignatieff supports another budget next year, perceptions may shift, but that's a long way away yet.

[ridenrain]

He signed a deal with the coalition and has now renounced it because it was the politically favorable thing to do. It might be the leader the Liberals appointed but that's not likely the leadership we want.

[Zipperfish]

ridenrain wrote:

It might be the leader the Liberals appointed but that's not likely the leadership we want.

I'm positive that, indeed, Ignatieff is not the leader you want for the Liberal party. I'm sure you would prefer the feckless Dion.

[ridenrain]

I actually would have prefered if they stuck to policy and had a nice big and expensive party leader election in Vancouver like they planned. While there, they could have toured the Downtown East Side and saw the sad state their lax drug policy has caused.

... and keeping Dion would have been great too.

[Zipperfish]

ridenrain wrote:

I actually would have prefered if they stuck to policy and had a nice big and expensive party leader election in Vancouver like they planned. While there, they could have toured the Downtown East Side and saw the sad state their lax drug policy has caused.

... and keeping Dion would have been great too.

Harper's been Prime Minister for--what?--three years now. Time to start taking a little responsibility, methinks.

[bootlegga]

Zipperfish wrote:

Harper's been Prime Minister for--what?--three years now. Time to start taking a little responsibility, methinks.

Nah, it's far easier to blame everyone else for your own actions.

BTW, it's your fault I gained 4 pounds over Christmas...see you in court!

[hurley_108]

ridenrain wrote:

He signed a deal with the coalition and has now renounced it because it was the politically favorable thing to do. It might be the leader the Liberals appointed but that's not likely the leadership we want.

But I thought it was okay to go back on stuff as long as it was politically expedient. I thought everyone did that.

[RUEZ]

Zipperfish wrote:

ridenrain wrote:

I actually would have prefered if they stuck to policy and had a nice big and expensive party leader election in Vancouver like they planned. While there, they could have toured the Downtown East Side and saw the sad state their lax drug policy has caused.

... and keeping Dion would have been great too.

Harper's been Prime Minister for--what?--three years now. Time to start taking a little responsibility, methinks.

Isn't he?

[ridenrain]

Like telling the voters that a coalition wasn't in the works?

Quote:

Term of this agreement

The Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party of Canada will adhere to this agreement until June 30, 2011 unless renewed.

The Bloc Québécois will adhere to this agreement until June 30, 2010 unless renewed.

It's all here:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... ucted.aspx

[Scape]

hurley_108 wrote:

Now, if Ignatieff supports another budget next year, perceptions may shift, but that's a long way away yet.

HA! I have my doubts it will last that long.

[ridenrain]

I guess Iggy's support of the budget add to Dion's record of abstentions?
That puts the number of Liberal abstentions up to 44.

[hurley_108]

ridenrain wrote:

I guess Iggy's support of the budget add to Dion's record of abstentions?
That puts the number of Liberal abstentions up to 44.

Nah, this is #1 on a new counter - liberal bills tabled by the Conservatives to save their own sorry skin.