Grits And Tories Are The New Coalition, Layton Says

Poor Jack. Hoping one day to be as adequate as Ed Broadbent.

But, a minority government is supposed to work with the opposition in order to govern. It's not a bad thing. An opposition is not supposed to work with Separatists to end-run the will of the electorate. That is a bad thing. Perhaps Jack should work at getting back his traditional support base, but getting rid of the BQ.

Yes, much better for the opposition to work with traitors who want to merge the country into the NAU using stealth methods.

Just one more demonstration that they ALL put the Party before the People. Its getting bad when the Separatist leader is starting to look like the only leader you can believe. He, at least is honest in his aims!

Not so sure I agree with you here, Dr. C. The furor over separatism in Quebec has largely subsided (though there will always be a core group), and the Bloc Quebecois is only doing for the province what any regional party should be doing -- getting what they can for the people. That is why the Bloc keeps getting elected over the other parties.

As for working with the opposition, in a minority government situation, just who is the opposition anyway? Just because the Cons got the most seats, they also dropped in the popular vote. Working STRICTLY by the rules, that makes them the government (at the pleasure of the GG, if there is no viable alternative).

And personally, I trust Ignatief about as much as I trust Harper............

"Not so sure I agree with you here, Dr. C. The furor over separatism in Quebec has largely subsided (though there will always be a core group), and the Bloc Quebecois is only doing for the province what any regional party should be doing -- getting what they can for the people. That is why the Bloc keeps getting elected over the other parties."

For one thing, just because a movement driven by ethnic nationalism that wants to wreck Canada is on the decline doesn't mean that we should invite its electoral organ into our national government. Quebec keeps electing the Bloc because the long-standing technique of threatening to separate in order to get attention and goodies from the rest of Canada works. Forming a coalition with the Bloc would have been a slap in the face to Western Canada, which had been screwed over in favour of Quebec by Liberals and Tories alike until the Reform Party finally brought Western concerns into the House of Commons.

The Reform Party began as a regional party. Rick, did you feel that the Reform Party was doing "what any regional party should be doing" in terms of its advocacy of Western Canada? The difference of course is that they *weren't* separatists and *weren't* ethnic nationalists. You didn't see Preston Manning getting drunk and bashing ethnic voters.

Reform Party -- same stock:
http://www.separationalberta.com/

There should be no regional parties. We are Canada! We are better off united!

Stephen Harper wants to wreck Canada. What's the diff then from a separatist?

Good question, islandcynic! I doubt anyone could rightly answer that one............

I would say the difference is that the separatists, as they have done it in Europe, want to achieve a certain degree of independence, while the Reform coalition wants to sell the country.

Then both are coming under the control of the multinational corporate mafia, as they have in the EU.

Dave Ruston: "There should be no regional parties. We are Canada! We are better off united!"

Regional parties exist for a reason. There are regional inequities in the Canadian system that go all the way back to MacDonald and the National Policy. Today, one need only read the editorial section of the Toronto Star to see perfect examples of the type of condescending, imperial attitude many Central Canadians take to those in "the regions". As with many things in this country, Pierre Trudeau made this situation much, much worse.

The different regions of the country have very different interests and local cultures. That is what makes the provincial level of government so important.

islandcynic: "Stephen Harper wants to wreck Canada. What's the diff then from a separatist?"

Harper doesn't want to wreck Canada. He wants to take it in a different direction than that established by the Liberal Party. Under Clark, Stanfield, etc., the Tories were little more than an ideologically compatible spare tire for the Liberals. Canadians could slap the spare tire on when the Liberals got too arrogant and corrupt for even Central Canada to stomach. But it stayed on only long enough to get the country to the garage.

RickW: "Good question, islandcynic! I doubt anyone could rightly answer that one............"

Canada will not dissolve into pieces if the federal government stops trying to dictate to the provinces on matters within their constitutional authority. Canada will not sink into the see if the state cuts back on the social engineering and PC indoctrination programs. Canada has survived not having a state-owned airline. It has survived free trade and it has survived private specialty health clinics and it has survived the end of universality in government programs. To treat Canada as a hothouse flower is to doom it remain stuck in a 60's/70's paradigm that no longer works (and probably never really did).

New Democrats. Same stock.

http://www.marijuanaparty.ca/






As Indy says though, there are regional inequalities. If the feds actually did equally for all Canadians, we wouldn`t need special interest parties.

I thought the Grits and Tories were always the coalition. What the hell is so new about that? Either Jack is jacking or he don't know jack...

Yes, a cozy 141 year coalition -- and they don't want to give it up, they don't. The only thing Jack got wrong is that is isn't really new -- just more of the same.