I don't trust Jack Layton's intentions.
He has had some unfortunate health issues,and he isn't looking well.
My guess is, after the Federal NDP get their collective heads handed to them in the election,(again)he will resign as party leader.
5 will get you 10 that he is as good as gone.

I think your assessment of Layton is a bit unkind.

I listened to a radio interview CBCone last fall during which Ed Broadbend (we all remember him) related about his tireless efforts to get the federal NDP and the federal Liberals to join forces either by official co-operation (by setting policies which meet the needs of both parties and then standing up together) in parliament or by forming a new party altogether, perhaps named the Liberal Democratic Party of Canada.

He could not get anywhere, yet. The logic is that by splitting the vote which constitutes the Middle and the Left - the federal NDP always enables the Right to frustrate the majority of Canadians.

Even in this election it is happening again:

Harper 39%
Ignatieff 29%
Layton 16%

Combine the last two: 45%

Whenever the Right is in power Canada becomes less and less Canadian and more and more americanized.

Five years of a Harper majority and we will be just second class Americans.

I don't think I am being unkind at all,PrinceGeorge..I am only stating what I think is going to happen.
Time will tell.
I always respected Ed Broadbent,even though I never voted for him.
Seems he ran for the wrong party,and he was a bit too idealistic, as opposed to realistic.
His policies would only apply in a perfect world, and we don't have one.
We have a me...me...me first, world.
And I seriously doubt it is even possible to unite the NDP and the Liberals.
Their basic structure and patforms are too far apart.
Can you imagine the infighting?
I am no Harper fan at all, but the options scare the hell out of me!

Well, you said you don't trust Layton.

"We have a me...me...me first, world."

I certainly agree with that statement. Politicians claim to be representing the people which elected them and their views and intentions. So does Layton. If he too however is in it only for the *me first trip* then he certainly can not be trusted either.

In Canada in politics (and often in other respects) we seem to have a problem as far as an attitude of co-operation and arriving at a consensus for the common good is concerned.

I have been told by apologists for the NDP that Glen Clark, Bob Ray and Ujjal Dosangh were not real NDPers.

Now I may add Ed Broadbent to the list of fakes if you are correct.

Too bad, isn't it?

BTW, in Britain (!) they have a coalition government. It works over there, as it does in many other countries, most of them in Europe.

If we insist that we would rather have endless infighting and that we are incapable of compromise and co-operation we are admitting that our politics are condemned to be off the rails practically all the time, like now!

I would call this a rather primitive state of affairs.

Perhaps the 40% that don't vote have a reason for preferring that option.

Its good one of the leaders is visiting our "outback" town. Won't sway my vote. Conservative all the way!!!!!!

I agree Prince George.
Any politicial system that ensures our politicians actually listen to their consituents,is a damn sight better than what we now have.
But that is a major drawback to the "party" system itself.
Those we elect are not given a choice...they play follow the leader...or else, and we just saw that happen with Campbell and with Carole James.
We would be much better off,(well,maybe)if we were the ones electing the leaders and not the party.
It might make them listen better.
Mind you,we are also to partly to blame because we have a tendancy to forget very quickly when we get to the ballot box.
No accountability.
The politicians know that very well, and use it to their advantage everytime.
Christy Clark just put pretty much the entire Campbell cabinet back into play,even though she said there would be a "new" Liberal government.
We didn't get to vote her in,the "party" did that.
We just got scammed again, and I wonder how many people actually believed her?
It is no wonder so many people don't get out and vote.
Seems they have just given up, as the whole political process continues to repeat itself over and over.
I am begining to wonder if a coalition isn't the way to go,inspite of the infighting there would be?

Your comments make my day! You say that Christy Clark just put pretty much the entire Campbell cabinet back into play,even though she said there would be a "new" Liberal government.

Well, not quite, as far as the make up of the cabinet is concerned. Rest assured that the NDP would have to do the something similar when a new leader re-organizes his flock. Without recognizing and accepting the seasoned and experienced ones, he wouldn't have any real supportive inner circle.

Or a party which supports the leader instead of ganging up on him or her. Both Clark and James are good examples of what can go awry. Of course Campbell resigned.

It's not a scam but simply a matter of reality.

A coalition is the way to go, but there can not be any infighting as the purpose of the coalition is to co-operate by an exchange of ideas and give and take.

Political gurus are predicting that there will be a coalition (or a new party) in Canada and that the best way for Canada to eliminate the separatist threat is to include Quebec into a coalition where it can promote Quebec's aspirations in a co-operative manner with the other partners.

I know that it seems impossible at the moment but circumstances change and whatever will be, will be.

My issues are
1) It would be nice if everyone got to the polls and voted, but in the past it seems that especially with a fedral election by the time I get home from work the election is over and the winning party is in. Thats one of the nice things about living in the west, now I believe they are working on fixing that, but I think it still has its bugs.

2) The provincial Libs are going to try whatever trick they can to stay in power as they want to finish their agenda and they don't want to pay back the 1.6 billion the feds gave them to introduce the HST, so their lives are on the line find some smoke and mirrors to throw us all of the scent and I mean right now, or pay back the money they don't have, imagine the uproar that will cause when they start looking for ways to come up with the money for that little foray?

3) Harper may not be a saint, but he lowered taxes and gave the Canadian public something to hope for, a future without multi taxes being imposed each year for the rest of their lives, he stepped up the crime prevention, and tried to step out of the limelight a bit. I agree with Prince George, in a manner, that if we could have a system where all parties were represented and were working for the good of the country then we may have a very good thing. But the infighting and the squabbling and the backstabbing that all parties show each and everytime they say or do something makes me nervous about voting for any of them. If they can't get along during an event like an election campaign whats makes us think they will do so in government?

4) Lastly I think the cost of these constant elections are a waste of time and money, I think the government needs to find another way to work with each other as well as the public, other than having an election!

maybe pistols at 20 paces?
thats my rant.

Make that pistols at 10 paces to allow for them shaking in their boots!

Sorry, but I can't stand the Conservatives since Lying Brian and I can't stomach the present leader who shows too little respect for democracy and the truth and went down in history for contempt of parliament!

I find him to be aloof, cold, disconnected, suspiciously secretive and even somewhat scary!

People who have no problem with any of that will endorse his tactics by voting for the candidates of his party.

Then he will really show us.

All the BS about Harper not having respect for democracy and truth, or the over use of the phrase contempt of parliament, is just that BS. Have you ever watched question period. How many MLA's do you see who not only seem to have contempt for Parliament, but contempt for members.

The Opposition had a majority on the Committee that found the Government in contempt. Normally in politics the Government in power controls the Committees, however because of the minority Government the opposition parties were able to find the Government in contempt. This is nothing more than **politicing** pure and simple.

Why is it that we can have 55 Members from Quebec who are members of a party that wish to succede from Canada, not be in contempt of Parliament???

Prince George says **I find him to be aloof, cold, disconnected, suspiciously secretive and even somewhat scary** That is a perfect discription of Ignatieff if I ever heard one.

Harper is nothing more than a guy born in Calgary, raised in Ontario, married with two children, and basically your run of the mill family man.

Lets keep in mind that he has been character assinated by the opposition parties, and the press for a number of years, to the point that some people are actually starting to beleive their own BS.

Not sure what terrible things will befall us if the Conservatives get a majority, however to listen to some folks it sounds like it will be realllllly baaaaaaad.

The sky is falling, The sky is falling.

"Why is it that we can have 55 Members from Quebec who are members of a party that wish to succede from Canada, not be in contempt of Parliament???"

--------------------------------------

They are not in contempt of parliament because they follow the rules of parliament.

Contempt of parliament by a government is a very serious matter. The Harper Government is the only one in Canadian history to have been ruled officially in contempt of our parliament.

To have personal contempt for another person and to demonstrate it in debate with words and gestures is not the same as a government being ruled in contempt of the parliament as an institution.

All MPs do their utmost to belittle and offend the MPs from the other parties. Certain remarks are not allowed and the speaker will ask the member to retract the offensive statement or the member will face the punishment of being banished from the house.

So far Harper has been able to get away with saying that the fall of his government was due to the other parties giving his proposed budget a thumbs down.

That, however, is also not true at all - his government croaked because of a majority vote of non-confidence after the speaker and the committee had ruled his government to be in contempt of parliament.

A vote on the budget never took place.

But, so what? If one can get away with dumbing down the public with spin why not keep doing it?!

Lets not let Politics get in front of common sense.

The Committee on Procedures and House Affairs that found the Government in Contempt is made up of 12 Members. 6 from the Government side and 6 from the Opposition side. ie; 3 Liberals 2 Bloc 1 NDP.

The Chair of the Committee does not have a vote unless it is to break a tie.The Chair was a Conservative. So of course the vote went 6 to 5 in favour of the Opposition, and they found the Government in contempt. The Government put forward a dissenting point of view on the issue, however it never gets mentioned.

The reason that the Goverment was found in contempt is because of the make up of the Committee. As an example, had they made a Liberal, Bloc, or NDP the Chair of the Committee it wouldnt have passed.

So lets not make this out to be anything more than an anomaly in Canadian politics brought about by our Minority Government situation.

This issue was about Government spending on such things as Prisons, Aircraft, etc; and the oppositions parties stating they were not getting accurate information on the amount of money being spent. That in itself was a debatable position, and the speaker of the House sent the issue to the Committee of Procedures and House Affairs for a ruling.

Seeing as how the Committee was controlled by the Opposition Parties, who is surprised by the outcome??? Certainly not me.

This situation allowed the Opposition to have a non-confidence vote, and have the Government fall without having to vote down the Budget which has a number of good things in it.

Sort of a low down, sneaky, way to get around being responsible, and of course they all jumped on the band wagon, Ignatieff, Layton, and Duceppe, each one of them hiding behind the contempt of Parliament fiasco, to avoid taking heat for killing the budget.

The lack of moral fibre in the Opposition parties is their strong point.

Common sense ought to lead one to the conclusion that when a government refuses (having been instructed to do so, repeatedly) to give opposition MPs information which the government MUST make known to the MPs (without blackening out all important details!) - then, as by the laws of our parliamentary democracy - that government is in contempt of the parliament.

The information details HAD to be made accessible. There was no threat to national security had they been released.

It was pure political manipulation by Harper which created this unfortunate situation.

Had he given the orders to do the right thing none of this would have had to take place. Instead he dug in his heels and refused.

Now everyone knows how far a semi-dictatorial individual can push the envelope without going over the edge.

So, what are the still hidden details which a new non-Harper government would finally reveal?

BTW, our political system puts limits on what a PM and his party can do. Some people think that this is a thing which can be ignored, massaged and spun as they wish!

I don't like that.