John Barber: NDP serves only to give victories to Tories

[unimaginative2]

However look at the fact that Chretien run a very centre right govt...

I'd say he ran a pragmatic centrist government. I don't really think that fiscal responsibility and spending within one's means is a right- or left-wing value (the right-wingers are generally pretty terrible at it), but I suppose you could consider that to be on the right. They also introduced tax cuts targeted at low- and middle-income Canadians, as well as economic development policies and tax cuts for corporations to spur economic growth, if you want to call all tax cuts right wing. They supported the WTO, like every other OECD government. They also tightened up the UI/EI program.

On the left side, the Chretien government introduced gun control. They preserved Medicare despite howls of opposition, not least from the provinces like Mike Harris' Ontario and from the Reform Party opposition, and they introduced the Child Tax benefit. They opposed the Iraq War and championed the International Treaty to Ban Anti-Personnel Land Mines, known as the Ottawa Convention.

 

[lordmandeep]

yeah and that is why Chretien and the Liberals were unstoppable then.


They understand that Canadians are a bit fiscally conservative yet mostly socially Liberal...


If the Liberals return to those roots, imo they can easily dominate again...

 

[salvius]

I'd say he ran a pragmatic centrist government. I don't really think that fiscal responsibility and spending within one's means is a right- or left-wing value (the right-wingers are generally pretty terrible at it), but I suppose you could consider that to be on the right. They also introduced tax cuts targeted at low- and middle-income Canadians, as well as economic development policies and tax cuts for corporations to spur economic growth, if you want to call all tax cuts right wing. They supported the WTO, like every other OECD government. They also tightened up the UI/EI program.

Well, tax cuts for the low and middle class I would say is a right-wing solution to the problem. Meanwhile, the national housing funding went to zero, minus a pittance paid out in 2001. In addition, national welfare standards were scrapped. I wouldn't say that's even particularly centrist. He resisted increasing social spending, famously saying "We must, and we will resist, these pressures." In fact, social spending went down during Chretien's era; the massive surplus and further tax cuts show that this didn't have to be done this way.

On the left side, the Chretien government introduced gun control. They preserved Medicare despite howls of opposition, not least from the provinces like Mike Harris' Ontario and from the Reform Party opposition, and they introduced the Child Tax benefit. They opposed the Iraq War and championed the International Treaty to Ban Anti-Personnel Land Mines, known as the Ottawa Convention.

Yes, I have to hand it to Chretien for gun control. On the other hand, medicare was 'preserved' because the national standard legislation was not repealed. Seeing as how that's a matter of legislation, it was not hard to preserve it, especially since it is massively popular with Canadians. Chretien's era certainly did not spend federally more on health care; just the opposite could be argued.

 

[ShonTron]

David Olive: The Spoiler and the Turncoat

David Olive has it bang on.

October 10, 2008
The Spoiler and the Turncoat
Popped into The Big Picture's in-box is this Bob Rae letter, below, reminding us that it was Jack Layton who forced the 2006 election and ushered in the The Harper Years.

No mention that Harper made it impossible for Layton to support him. Or that the Grits subsequently ran one of the worst campaigns in history. Or that the Liberals have since propped up the Harper government.

Kind of ungracious, after the Dippers propped up the Martin government.

Rae says Layton has an Obama complex, which we hadn't noticed. The sole substance for this might be that Layton did attend the Democratic National Convention in Denver. Rae accuses Layton of "advancing his own political ambitions," which as you know is rare among politicians. Certainly it's something Rae himself studiously avoided, except for that time he was instrumental in bringing down Joe Clark's government in 1979. Certainly at Queen's Park, Rae didn't advance his interests. I mean, he didn't plan on being Ontario's least successful premier.

Anyhoo, what's important here is that the Grits see the NDP gaining ground on them and must therefore smear Layton. And who better than a former Dipper to do the deed?

"As for Jack Layton's delusion about being Barack Obama, he could not be further from the mark. If there is an analogy to be made, it's with Ralph Nader, whose candidacy for the U.S. presidency in 2000 was perhaps most responsible for George Bush's narrow win over Al Gore."

So that's it. The CCF/NDP, which has been around for 76 years, is supposed abandon the field to let the Grits handle the Tories on their own. Which they did such a triumphant job of in the past two elections.

Oh, and not that it matters, but while Nader may or may not have been decisive in 2000, there were bigger factors in Gore's loss:

Gore ran such a lousy campaign he failed to carry even his own state of Tennessee. Had he done so, he would have become President.
Disgusted by Lewinskygate, Gore distanced himself from the Clinton record of unprecedented job creation (23 million new jobs from 1993 to 2001), budget surpluses, annual double-digit declines in crime rates in almost every major American city, and so on. Instead, Gore ran on a promise to protect Social Security ("I'll put it in a lockbox"), which only Gore and close family members regarded as a compelling campaign issue.
Republican goons at the direction of James Baker and Karl Rove, dispatched to Florida during the recount there, verbally and physically assaulted the volunteer vote recounters for days until increasing numbers of the intimidated volunteers stopped showing up.
The five Republican-appointed members of the U.S. Supreme Court installed Bush as President, with the four Democrat appointees dissenting. In doing so, the Court broke with its states-rights philosophy and practice, overruling a Florida Supreme Court ruling that the recount continue. The Supremes then reverted to their states-rights prediliction. Bush v. Gore, one of the thousands of Supreme Court cases Sarah Palin was unable to cite when asked to name even one case other than Roe v. Wade, is widely recognized as the second-worst Court jurisprudence after Dred Scott.
That Rae, a careful student of history, knows all that makes his letter all the more farcical:

The House Jack Built
Le français suit
Dear David,

Jack Layton says he wants to be Prime Minister. He's even trying to pretend he's Barack Obama. It's time for a reality check.

Jack’s problem is that there’s an obstacle in his way: the Liberal Party of Canada. He knows he can’t get anywhere until he tears down the Liberals. So time and time again, he’s undermined initiatives he claims are important to him and allowed Stephen Harper’s Conservative government to cancel programs and tear up agreements that should be at the core of any progressive government.

He forced the 2006 election and campaigned to defeat the Liberal government, knowing full well that Harper’s Conservatives would cancel the Kelowna Accord and the National Early Learning and Child Care agreements, and abandon the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

Since then, Jack Layton has done everything in his power to condemn Liberal policies, even those that are supported by the progressive thinkers he admires. Jack claims to be serious about the climate change crisis, but environmental leaders like David Suzuki have said the Liberal green shift plan is exactly the right thing to do.

Jack’s positioning is not principled. It is aimed at advancing his own political ambitions, even if, time and again, that means real setbacks for the people he claims to be helping. Thankfully, there are many former New Democrats who see through this tactic, and know how short-sighted and counterproductive this approach really is.

As for Jack Layton's delusion about being Barack Obama, he could not be further from the mark. If there is an analogy to be made, it's with Ralph Nader, whose candidacy for the US presidency in 2000 was perhaps most responsible for George Bush’s narrow win over Al Gore.

There is only one viable alternative to the Conservatives: a Liberal government under the intelligent, principled leadership of Stéphane Dion. Please support us in building a richer, fairer, greener Canada. Don’t let Jack Layton and Stephen Harper hold us back any longer.

Sincerely,

Bob Rae,
Liberal Party of Canada

Authorized by the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada, registered agent for the Liberal Party of Canada