Skip to main content

Party Status for the NDP? by Wayne Johnson

Permit me to pontificate on the issue of a minority government. It can be good, when MPs act in the best interests of the nation. The Cons have come right out of the gate claiming that they will derail any of PM Carneys plans. Folks I’m sorry, political preferences aside, our nation is facing some very serious challenges ahead. We are in point of fact at War, with the USA, an economic war. This economic war could very well escalate based on the threats of military annexation. And the Cons seem to want to derail government during a national and international crisis, not just economically but geopolitically, with the War in Ukraine and Trump’s lust for Panama and Greenland, for example. We also know who puts party above country… The Conservative party of Canada hands down…

If I were advising Mr. Carney I would suggest that it is very much in the nation’s best interests to grant the NDP official party status. This is very much doable and has been granted in the past. The NDP has a long and rich history starting with the CCF. I grew up in a union family, both my parents were union leaders. I met them all in 68 when politics was done in a very different way. There were cocktail parties and BBQ’s at the homes of influencers, which they very much were. Full disclosure, by nature I’m a Liberal, but oddly, provincially in Ontario, I voted NDP. Like it or not the NDP bring a lot to the table, a progressive orientation and, if nothing else, at times they act as the sobering second thought to a Liberal minority government, albeit a strong minority. To not grant the NDP official party status would seem incredibly mean spirited on the part of the Liberals, and might very well cost them at the polls in the future. Let’s be frank, an awful lot of traditional NDP voters chose nation over party as did many progressives on the right.

To my mind on balance it would be in the nation’s best interest to grant them official party status. Canada needs stability going forward, we need a functioning government not a government going from one drama to the next. Politically it makes sense as the NDP and Liberals, on core issues, are reasonably aligned. This would be far more pragmatic than working with the BQ who would extract a heavy price for their support. As will the NDP, but at least their costs benefit all Canadians, not just one province. Liberal Party of Canada | Parti Libéral du Canada, Mark Carney consider this my gift to Canada. Think about what I’ve said, now is the moment to put nation above party politics. You have one party who simply will not cooperate in putting nation above party. You have another party, the NDP, who you have more in common with than you think. I frankly feel it is your moral obligation to those traditional NDP voters who chose nation over party. It would be in the best interests of Canada to grant official party status to the NDP, do the right thing.

Other than the Cons and perhaps the BQ, I can’t see a great deal of push back… any Liberal who objects to this needs to give their head a shake. Now is not the time for mean spirited politics, now is the time to put nation first. I would caution the BQ on voting against this. The reality is that they too could have lost seats to the point of being under the 12 seat threshold. Karma could easily bite them in the ass next election. Question… when the Cons were reduced to MGB status aka 2 seats, did they retain official party status? I sincerely believe this would be in Canada’s best interest

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ANY LEFT LEFT? OR WHY I AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE NDP

 By Bil Lee Prior to announcing that they would not support the Liberal budget (thus triggering an election over what was really a pretty left friendly Liberal program) the NDP in Ontario has been wasting a great deal of breath on hammering the Liberals over the "gas plant" scandal. Of course the Libs have been their old tricky and disingenuous selves in many ways and did waste a pile of money (and try to cover up how much) attempting to score some bi-election wins by cancelling the damn things. But the fact is the PC's and the NDP had both made a promise to cancel them if they got into power, so the money ws going to be wasted in any event. So it was all game playing, and pretty boring game playing actually. I am not against a solid critique of the Libs (except I continue to disagree on the utility of playing at the gas thing). My concern with role back of corporate tax breaks that Horvath has muted about as an election promise is that though I clearly support the ide...
4 comments
Read more

RITUALS KEEP CHANGING by Tony Boonstra

It is interesting that since time immemorial people have developed rituals. Sometimes we forget the initial meaning of the ritual. Take Christmas. It was originally “the Mass being celebrated at the time of Christ's birth”. That is literally what the word means. What I found helpful is an idea I came across in my studies at McGill University years ago. One professor shared with us the difference between a sign and a symbol. A sign is literally what it says. So, when one comes to a stop sign there is only one meaning. Stop. No rolling stops allowed. The meaning of a symbol on the other hand, is the meaning that a community embraces. This can change over time as the community's values and belief systems undergo changes. In the Netherlands they celebrate Sinter Klaas-Santa Claus, on December 5. The celebration takes on much of the meaning of what Christmas is in Canada. There is goodwill, exchanges of gifts, celebrations, etc. Then Christmas is a quiet day for reflection and for C...
1 comment
Read more

Lifeboats for the rich will sink us all – Income Inequality and Climate Change

 By: Mike Balkwill Climate change are words that form a constant hum in the background of my thoughts. It is an anxious hum and is the result of a lot of gathering a lot of information about climate change, its causes, its current and anticipated impacts on the ecosystem and therefore on human society. The hum goes like this – “Everything is going to change, everything has to change. Will the people I love survive?” In order for humanity, (and many other species) to survive the effects of the changing climate people who live in societies with capitalist economies are going to have to change everything about how we live.  One source I have read says that in the industrialized economies that means reducing everything we do that uses fossil fuels by 90%. This means anything that we do ten times in a day, or ten times in a week, or ten times in a month that requires fossil fuels we would now be able to do only once a day, one time in a week, or just once in a month. If I...
1 comment
Read more