04.26.2011 10:57 AM

Clip and save

The Dipper war room will be furiously working to get this headline changed, of course.  So, as a public service, I’ve got a screen grab, below, for you to clip and save.

The worst political wounds are always self-inflicted, etc. etc.

31 Comments

  1. blurg says:

    I don’t have a problem with this. Canada needs to talk about the disconnect that is Quebec and the ROC. With the vote shifting (possibly) in this election I think it shows that voters in Quebec are feeling more secure in their position in Canada and are feeling able to be engaged in national and global politics without having to be on the defensive. I say bring it on. Constitutional stalemate is like a wound covered with a dirty bandage. time to rip it off

  2. Now lets see if the media gives him a free pass on this or whether they decide to ask him the tough questions about how he intends to get Quebec on board. Meech Lake lead to the creation of the Bloc and the referendum that nearly destroyed the country. I believe he has just handed the Bloc a gift – how does he intend to get them to sign on? Will there be another national referendum? What happens if that referendum is rejected? How will he get the provinces to sign on…

    Is anyone asking Layton these questions? Liberals should pounce on this. Chretien should rip Layton a new one in a VERY public way – he knows more than anyone how this is a powederkeg!

  3. MontrealElite says:

    Jack’s now babbling about “eventually” getting there.

    I thought fuding was something you do after the election.

  4. Cath says:

    what a stupid move. Political suicide to open up THAT can of worms. You’re right on that county WK.
    In a quick response to your NCCCC day summary I don’t think you really needed to have three factors actually because your first point pretty much killed this for Ignatieff. There are more people not just pissed at having this election but personally insulted by it in a way I’ve not heard before. That goes for folks of all political stripes.

  5. wassup says:

    Most potential NDP voters either don’t remember the Constitutional Wars of the 1980s and early 1990s, or are too clueless to understand the carnage that was created.

    I will say this for the Liberanos, if we ever find ourselves staring down that separatist gun-sight again, even I might be willing to let that olde war horse Creten back into 24 Sussex. If PM Jack does get his 24 hours of fame, it will end with the Liberanos coming to the rescue.

  6. Al in Cranbrook says:

    So much for the NDP surge…at least out here in BC.

    In other news, someone’s gonna have some fun with the numbers in this report just released. Apparently the average Canadian family now spends 41.3% of their income on taxes. (Cue socialist hoards: Is that all???)

    The report calculates that since 1961, the average Canadian family’s total tax bill has increased by 1,686 per cent. In contrast, expenditures on shelter increased by 1,175 per cent, food by 498 per cent, and clothing by 510 per cent from 1961 to 2010. Additionally, the increase in taxes has far outpaced the increase in the Consumer Price Index, which was 642 per cent between 1961 and 2010.

    “The average Canadian family has seen its total tax bill increase by an astounding 1,686 per cent over the past 49 years. As a result, taxes have become the most significant item in family budgets,” Veldhuis said.

    • Namesake says:

      gee, imagine that: taxes in Canada were lower before Medicare. Shocking!

      And, not coincidentally, so were lifespans.

      Mind you, the labour participation rate was much lower, too. And the wages for the bread winners were comparatively much higher.

      So, does the Fraser Inst. advocate a return to those living wage levels? Didn’t think so.

    • W.B. says:

      Oh for the good old days when you died at home in pain and misery because the cost of medical care was beyond the reach of an hourly worker. And remember the outcry when the Liberals introduced the first of age pensions $40.00 a month, and when only the children of top echelon of income earner could even think about university. Those damned taxes.
      But as the great Amanda Lang said to your pal O’Leary, ” I prefer to drive on roads that are paved”. Now that quote can be extrapolated endlessly. I prefer to go to hospitals with doctors, or i prefer to land at airports with runways. Make up YOUR favourite version Al.

  7. Dr.J says:

    Well according to good old Frankie Graves he is going to win 100 seats and become PM with the help of the third party..the Liberals…

  8. R says:

    The real constituation is

    HUMAN RIGHT for each individual language cosntituation

    what I mean

    every person as a child open thier eyes and learn first language from mother or call it mother tongue

    then this is up to you to learn second or third or so on

    everybody who know one language completly read write speak that is enough to work and study

    if person is rich enough can hire translator to help him in Quebec in work and in writing and so on

    all world politician are seat and all world business men seat and work without FORCE one that must go and learn
    some one else language to seat with me or enter to my country or able to work there

    French can not force people who french is not thier first language to learn french by FORCE

    but that person can hire translator if that french do nto know his other party langage in work ir politic and so on

    force some one language to other person you must know my language is racist act and must stop among English and French immidetly

    this is plan for seperatism

  9. Rob says:

    Look, Jack has to make up for lost time… if he’s going to be the PM of a minority coalition, then he has to start practising PM-scale screw ups to make sure he’s ready for the role.

  10. Transplanted Doerite says:

    I don’t think Jack should have opened this can of worms, even though he is right in saying that the federal government should be interested in “creating the winning conditions.” To not do so, is to sustain the current “losing conditions” in perpetuity. That’s leadership, even if it is bad strategy.

    In any event, it’s not going to matter in the areas where it matters.

    What’s clear, even though there is still a week to go, is that the damage to the Liberal brand is done and irreversible – as you well know. The LPC is a spent political force in this country, at least as a national party. Outside of Ontario and pockets of the Maritimes, where people would crawl across a mile of broken glass to vote Liberal, it is moribund.

    There are lots of kooks in the NDP, but there are also enough people within and near the party who understand what a centre-left alternative to the LPC looks like, and it is a national version of what Gary Doer did in MB.

  11. Michael says:

    News Flash Jack! Quebec will never sign the constitution. Because as soon as they do, they have played their trump card and have nothing to hold over the rest of Canada.
    I hate to sound like a Reformer, but not signing the constitution and electing Bloc MPs has worked out pretty well for Quebecers. Usually provinces or regions are rewarded for voting for the winning party. They get cabinet ministers and government largese. Quebec has managed to get those two things despite sending large numbers of opposition MPs to Ottawa.
    As long as the major political parties think electoral success runs through Quebec, they are in the driver’s seat.

    • Ted says:

      Other than the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Attorney General, who else has signed the Constitution?

      Certainly, no province has ever signed the Constitution so this whole “Quebec never signed the Constitution” thing is buying into the separatists falsification of history as victims.

  12. While Layton’s pandering to Quebec nationism is disturbing, the real lead here is buried at the end of the article:

    “Here’s the story,” he said. “If you’re working for a provincially regulated financial institution at an intersection … then the first language is French. You have the right to work in French, to have your contract be presented to you, your work contract, your instructions as to what you’re supposed to do, in your first language so you can understand them.

    “If across the corner you’re working at La Banque Nationale …, you don’t have those rights. It doesn’t make sense.”

    WRONG!

    Despite being in politcs for decades Mr. Layton seems to have been unable to find the time to read the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and The Official Languages Act. Is Mr. Layton suggesting that french speaking workers at federally regulated finacial institutions are not protected by these laws?

    The debate over adminstering Bill 101 in these cases is between preferential treatment and equal treatment, not between having rights or having none at all.

  13. mushy liberal says:

    heeheehee. What is so fun to watch is the liberal left bouncing off each other and they’re disbelieve that people actually like SH and what he says even when the left thinks they have found some SHOCKING (usually common sense to most people) quote from SH. Until the Libs stand for something, they’ll be on the sidelines. But that would mean they would have to get principled policies instead of left wing opinion poll flave of the day policies. Fun to watch. Keep it up.

  14. Craig Chamberlain says:

    Layton just over-reached.

  15. AndrewOpala says:

    Appealing to the separatists in Quebec? They were all just about to start collecting CPP/QPP. How many more votes can he get by turning over those stones? You can’t win fighting against him on this one. I think the only way to do this is to get Ignatieff to play the piano. I think this is absolutely the only strategy to use. Play the piano. Even better if Iggy could challenge both Harper and Layton to some sort of name that tune competition.

  16. Marco A says:

    Only the Tories have the courage to really deal with constitutional issues, but they would need a majority first. I never see the left-of-centre parties even get serious about reforming the Senate. It’s always aboloish (NDP line) or we cannot reform Senate without constituational change, but we don’t do that (Liberal line).

    I think people should be asking what Harper would do regarding opening constitutional change if he gets a majority, not ask Jack Layton.

    The Senate reform issue is always the show-stopper for me supporting Liberals cuz I can never trust them to get seriuos about it. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are stackign the Senate with people like Mike Duffy who are committed to putting in term limit reform.

    • Ted says:

      He’s already answered that one Marco. Yellow Steve says he wouldn’t open the Constitution for anything. Not even senate reform. Even if he got a majority. He said it on Friday or Saturday, I think.

      As for Senate reform, I don’t think Harper has ever been serious about it. He clearly needs to amend the Constitution to make some of the changes he is proposing, but thinks the law doesn’t apply to him. Other changes need buy-in from the provinces and yet he hasn’t bothered to meet with them once over electing senators, not once. He’s only passed the buck to them instead of showing leadership.

      I think the Senate should be reformed. That is one of the things – along with making MPs and Parliament and Parliamentary committees stronger – that I wholeheartedly agree with from the Reform Party/pre-2006 Harper platforms.

      The reality is that reforming the Senate is and should be difficult. We are talking about the Constitution here. It is not an ordinarly simple piece of legislation. A small group of highly organized politicians should not be allowed to just go and change it.

      And yet Harper, with the support of only about 16% of all Canadians and 22% of eligible voters, without holding public meetings/consultations, without even a referendum or plebscite, thinks he should be entitled to fundamentally alter our Constitution and government forever.

      This is an institution of our Parliamentary constitutional democracy. You don’t change our Parliamentary constitutional democracy by undemocratic, unconstitutional means. It means the Constitution means nothing which is very dangerous.

      If it is fundamental and important enough to change, it is fundamental and important enough to do it right, legally and democratically.

  17. Supernaut says:

    This isn’t going to hurt Jack at all in the ROC. One of the stories of this election is that people are largely discounting policy announcements, scandals, and other traditional issues as white noise and making up their own minds. Why? Elections have become marketing campaigns and are received as such. People are marketed to every second of every waking hour, and have developed psychological coping strategies to discount the message and make room to formulate their own opinion.

  18. artwilliams says:

    At least until this morning, the voting paradigm was that the Conservatives would win. It was simply what type of government (majority/minority) and, importantly, the race for second place. If that is what the average Canadian thinks then it’s okay to vote NDP because they won’t have any real power as the Official Opposition. That makes it difficult for the LPC because to change this mind set you have to suggest that the NDP could form the Government without suggesting that the Liberal Party would have to co-operate for that to happen.

  19. fritz says:

    I have to go with those who think this ‘Layton wants to open the constitution’ is a non issue. Most people outside Quebec don’t know or care that Quebec didn’t sign the constitution. They haven’t a clue what bill 101 is and they are more interested in improving healthcare than stopping the threat of separation. This may be a big deal in the election bubble but in the real world; not so much.

  20. W.B. says:

    Maybe Mulroney will support him and finally leave the Neanderthal Reformers behind.

  21. Nastyboy says:

    GAME CHANGER!!!!

  22. Marco A says:

    Love him or hate him, I will always respect the Tories under Mulroney for trying to mend the constitution with Meech Lake. Not a gr8 proposal but better than any succeeding gov’t. tried since(ie. they did not try at all). Even the hated GST worked out by putting in a consumption tax that the Martin and Dion Liberals supported in last 2 elections. USA maybe forced to finally consider a similar consumption tax to solve the funding of it’s unsustainable middle-class entitlement programs.

    I just want to see a credible courageous gov’t. in office that dare to take on the “impossible” tasks for the sake of the country. I would vote for such a straight shooting leader.

    It was a nice dream anyway.

    • Marco A says:

      Oh, don’t say that; otherwise the sovereignists have already won. Simply accepting that it is impossible to find middle ground between Western provinces and Quebec would simply affirm the BQ’s assertion that Canada is irretrievably broken.

      Doing nothing is not an option because this country would indeed likely be about ready to disintegrate sometime in the future.

      Use Charlottetown as a starting point. I understand the Western point of view that instutionalizing seats for Quebec in the constitution was abhorrent. But, the rejection of the distinct society view was equally abhorrent to Quebec it seems.

      Canada has 2 founding cultures. Not many other countries have this kind of history. How easy the USA makes it look by only having one founding culture where EEE Senates are the rule and there is no distinct society. Special cases require special solutions.

      I think if the constution was changed to use the Senate, not the House of Commons, to instutionalize regional rights like those of Quebec and make the Senate elected and have seats apportioned by regions, not EEE per province, then it would be a good start.

  23. Troy says:

    I don’t get why the media and the Liberals have not gone after Jack Layton on his Quebec strategy. In order to make his precious breakthrough in Quebec, Layton has betrayed Federalists (and anglophones and racial minorities) by calling for more language laws, extra seats for Quebec and wanting to abolish the Clarity Act!!! Why aren’t the Liberals launching an attack ad on Layton showing he wants to abolish the Clarity Act? If they did, his numbers would collapse in English Canada.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*