News Sections
Ignatieff must unite Grits to become PM, experts say
CTV News Video
|
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
Andrea Janus, CTV.ca News
Date: Fri. May. 1 2009 7:06 AM ET
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff must restore the party's presence "in every part of Canada," experts say, if he is to convince Canadians that he can be the country's next prime minister.
Ignatieff, who took over as interim party leader when Stephane Dion stepped down last December, will be formally named as leader at this weekend's Liberal convention in Vancouver.
The party appeared to be in tatters after losing 26 seats in last fall's election, which preceded a leadership contest that led to bitter infighting between Ignatieff and leadership hopeful Bob Rae.
When Rae stepped aside and Ignatieff took the post, Ignatieff hailed the moment as an opportunity for the party to move forward and rebuild in advance of the next election.
Since then, Ignatieff has crisscrossed the country, pitching the party to Canadians who have felt alienated from the Liberals, particularly Quebecers and Western Canadians.
"I think he's getting a running start on rebuilding the Liberal Party in every part of the country," Liberal strategist Steve MacKinnon, who served as Ignatieff's leadership campaign director, told CTV.ca.
"It's going to require continued persistence and drive and an unbelievable amount of energy to do it, but yes, it's a very visible and not a secret part of Liberal strategy that we need to restore our presence in every part of Canada."
In a speech to the Quebec wing of the party in late March, Ignatieff said the Liberals are the best choice for Quebecers who want their province to gain more influence in Ottawa.
"Quebecers do not deserve to be in a permanent opposition in Ottawa. Their place is in power," Ignatieff said.
"The red has returned. I am so proud to be a Liberal; I am so proud to be Canadian. The time has come for Quebecers to get their place back in Ottawa," he added later.
The overture appeared to pay off, as this week, a LaPresse/CROP poll found that the Liberals have moved ahead of the Bloc Quebecois among Quebec voters for the first time in five years.
Earlier in the year, Ignatieff reached out to voters in the West, telling an audience in Edmonton that protecting the oilsands is a national unity issue, but warned that they must be made more environmentally sustainable.
Former Paul Martin advisor Robert Asselin said Ignatieff's objective is likely to reach out to every region of Canada, but he points out that he has a difficult task ahead.
"Each region has its own grievances: Quebec identity, the West feels that the centre doesn't always listen to them. So I don't underestimate his task," Asselin, assistant director of the graduate school of public and international affairs at the University of Ottawa, told CTV.ca.
"But I think one of the big differences he could make up with Harper is that he will be much more a uniter as a prime minister, and I think he's right to play that card now, and also in the future. But will he succeed? That's a big question."
Polls indicate that national support for the Liberal Party under Ignatieff is on the rise. A Strategic Counsel poll conducted in early April found the Liberals to be in a virtual tie with the Conservatives.
The poll found the Liberals had 34 per cent of voter support, while the Conservatives were at 32 per cent, a 10 percentage-point gain for the Liberals since Ignatieff took over the party leadership.
Do Canadians like Ignatieff?
But it's yet unclear whether Canadians are enamoured of Ignatieff or tired of the Stephen Harper government.
What the Liberal leader needs to do, Asselin said, is spend the coming months introducing himself to Canadians after spending 30 years living outside of the country, and defining what a Liberal government would look like.
"I think he needs to give some sense, and I think he will, of what he stands for, what his vision of the country's future is," Asselin said "How would he do things differently from the current government? What he does envisage as his main priorities as prime minister on the international affairs front, on the domestic side?"
A big part of differentiating himself from the Conservatives, both men agree, will be to prove that he can help the country recover from the ongoing economic crisis.
"It would be unwise to think that he could get away without addressing this main thing. But in a crisis, I think a leader sees opportunities for the future, and I think Ignatieff's challenge is to define how he will address this big crisis and make Canada stronger for it," according to Asselin.
"You have two choices when you're leader. You can manage a crisis to make sure you don't get hurt too much, or you can take more the Obama approach and try to do a small revolution in how you do things going forward."
Speaking of Obama, much has been made of Ignatieff's ties to officials within the U.S. president's administration.
He's close friends with Larry Summer, Obama's economic adviser and a former president of Harvard, as well as with White House foreign policy adviser Samantha Power.
Ignatieff travelled to Washington last week to meet with U.S. officials, and took a 30-minute meeting with Obama when he made his first official trip to Canada in February.
But Ignatieff should not, and likely will not, emphasize his personal ties with the Obama administration just to hitch his wagon to the popular president's train, Asselin said.
The two men share liberal political views, such as a more interventionist government and a pro-active foreign policy.
So Ignatieff "will try to convince Canadians that the policies both believe in are the best solutions for the problems we have now," Asselin said.
But what about issues that could hinder Ignatieff's political aims, such as last winter's attempt by the Liberals and NDP to bring down the Conservatives and form a coalition government supported by the Bloc Quebecois?
Both men agree it's a non-issue.
Ignatieff noticed early on that Canadians did not support the concept and was quick to distance himself from it, MacKinnon said.
"Do I think there's a residue? No, I think Mr. Ignatieff's views on that notion have been pretty well communicated and well known from day one," he said.
As for Ignatieff's image of a patrician academic who lacks the common touch, Asselin said that while being smart is not a weakness, particularly in someone hoping to become prime minister, he should get out of the so-called Ottawa bubble of pundits and politicians and talk about day-to-day issues with ordinary Canadians.
"I think if he keeps that touch, he'll be fine. He's a very charismatic man. He's able to connect well with most Canadians," Asselin said. "But obviously that's something that as a politician you need to always work on."
User Tools
Related Stories
Related Websites
Most Popular
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
Please let's not even entertain any protectionist responses to this issue. Canadian consumers go south to shop because of the cheaper prices. How about resorting to competitive pricing as a solution...that will keep Canadian shoppers at home.
Email
Comments are now closed for this story
Victor in Vaughan
said
If Iggy and his old guard think they represent change, it's a joke.
Liberals want an election so they can have power, they have nothing to bring to the table.
Doug BC
said
When Martin took credit for balancing the budget,and then immediately went of a spending spree in hopes of winning a majority for the socialists in the party,I ran to Conservatives.Not because I'm conservative,and not because I like Harper.I left,hoping the Liberals would re-build,and I would then return to a centrist party with principles.So far they give me no reason to think they are anything more that "NDP Lite"
No western Canadian should even consider voting Liberal until they present a valid policy on Senate reform of some kind.That is THE VERY LEAST we need.
Perhaps this convention will show us their policy towards the military,our role in NATO,their policies for debt reduction,where the money is coming from to pay for their increased social spending,and some detailed policies on a host of issues dealing with immigration and crime.
So far,they stand for nothing because their caucus is a mixture of socialists and special interest group lobbyists.Anything that looks like a concensus in the party,is usually just papering over the conflicts within their own party.So theysend a message that provides no details,and give the impression they have their act together.
They do not.The only thing I fear more than a Harper majority,is the Liberals back in power.They need to lose another election to get the message.FIX YOUR OWN PARTY before you pretend you can govern for ALL of Canada.
Mike on the tropical island of Morris, MB
said
1st - The Conservative were planning to cut ALL the parties' funding, including their own. It was not just opposition funding in this proposal. In fact, the Conservatives stood to lose the largest amount of $$, because they got the most votes in the last couple of elections. It may not have been a massive sum of $$, and may have had an alterior motive of screwing the other parties' fundraising efforts, but that's beside the point. If you're not ready to fight, don't...
2nd - When the Conservatives were plotting to bring down the last Liberal government, they were doing so by planning a non-confidence vote with the support of the Bloc & NDP, thereby forcing an election, which is generally how parliament works and has worked for over a century. They were not planning to band socialists and separatists together to run the country as a coalition party (ConBloc-o-Crats?)
So get your head out of that dark place it's in right now, and have a look at the bigger picture please.
Joey from Regina
said
Daniel
said
DCR-Toronto
said
As for those who say that it is the same thing to have one party (ie:Bloc or NDP), support the EXSISTING government, and having all three oppositions partys OVERTHROW the exsisting government, are not looking at this in a clear light. The majority of people voted the Conservatives in. Not a coalition. Ya Ya..60 % didn't vote Conservative, but the Conservatives sat at 52% in the polls during this "coup" attempt.
These same people are the ones screaming for Harper to work with other parties.
It's a shame some can't have "reasoning" on these things. The coalition was a power grab. The Consrvatives working with other parties, is what the Canadian people want. So please, don't p*** on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Not the same at all.
Conservative
said
Wade - Party stilll has no credibility
said
Mike
said
..and the sheep listen which is what is so amazing, then when the %$#@ hits the fan because nothing ever gets done they wonder why.
Liberals promise but rarely deliver - case in point - McGuinty who gave out 400 promises during his election - anything to get POWER.
Nancy: Looks like the Geriatric Convention
said
It was more interesting rearranging my sock drawer.
Western Voter
said
Just exactly what is his position on anything? Is he pro-coalition, pro separatist, pro socialism pro-democracy or pro anything?
All I've heard so far is mouth candy from a politician that is opposed to anything Harper does just to make himself look good. He hunkers up to the Albertans knowing full well they have the resources and the money to support Ontario, something new for Liberals. Just ask fuddle duddle about that.
Won't get my vote unless he can prove he has a better idea.
John Savard
said
It might be unlikely, and it might not reflect my political views well, but that's different.
Ontario voter
said
That is the Liberal way of winning . The next Election could be a very tight race .
margaret / Calgary
said
Jack Layton has a PhD, by the way; as does Dion, and so does Ignatieff. Check out the resumes of the Liberals as compared to the Tories some day. It's interesting, how much more qualified the Liberals are, how much more hard-working.
* * * * * *
KMC (Markham, ON)
Allison Garesh
The so-called "coalition" was, very much like former PM Paul Martin's registering his ships off-shore to avoid paying the very taxes he, himself, as Finance Minister, imposed upon the Canadian people, it may have been technically legal, but it was morally reprehensible.
The "coalition" was the result of a "loophole" in the parliamentary democratic system which was exploited by the "used car salesman" Jack Layton.
Hugo Giovanni Felice Yassin
said
The Rt. Hon. Paul Martin, Sr. his political, puerile vendicative actions were his political destructions.
Right now, I am not a Liberl party member nor other parties members, butduring the democratic freedom to vote, I choose the candidate name.
My personal vision, I am certainly the pretyendent Liberal leader is a person who is a right-win and does not care about the next federal election although he says to be a Liberal party's MP, his previous political actions can testify.
If he would elect officially the leader of the party,and win next and eminent federal
elections, it should mean a man who professed in Conservative ultrus could go, and the head of the executive would be another radical Conservative . In math there aretwo operations which are identical proprieties so called commutative: Addition, if we change the order of add, the sum does not change : Ex.: (1+2+3)=6 as (3+1+2)=6. Also in moltiplication: if we chang the order of factors, the result does not change . Ex.: (4X3)=12 or : (3X4)=12.
Hugo
Margaret / Calgary
said
The coalition was perfectly legal. That's how Parliament works. That's what's great about it, that an incompetent government can be overthrown by a coalition of opposition parties. Harper brought the whole thing on his head himself, because of his mean-minded bullying tactics. His "intelligence" only goes as far as the end of his nose.
We do have a lousy education system, which has not made learning about our own country a priority for Canadian children - as has been proven during the coalition crisis.
Stephen Harper was preparing to do exactly the same thing when he was in Opposition; but when the tables were turned on him as PM; he wasted no time in demonizing Quebec, accusing the Liberals of making an illegal deal, because, being a cunning person, he knows that Canadians aren't well educated about their own government. He knows he can play on ignorance - and that's what he did. He's not to be trusted.
As for the comment about whether Canadians like Ignatieff or they're just tired of Harper -- I disliked Harper on sight; call it instinct, but he gives me the creeps.
Ignatieff proves to be a very likeable person, he's proven LONG ago that he's a hard worker and organized, which Harper has not really shown . . . in fact I think that when the going gets tough, Harper gets going to the US for help in polishing a resume.
Ignatieff is not putting on a false front, he's honest, and he's genuine. 20 years as a freelance journalist is good preparation for a political life. Harper never would have made it in that career, not on your life. He doesn't have what it takes
Ian K
said
You (and others) are mixing apples and oranges. Voting with the separatists on particular issues is not nearly the same thing as signing a formal agreement with them to form a coalition and giving them de facto veto power over federal government legislation. The coalition in effect wanted to bring separatists into the federal cabinet - and that is totally unacceptable.
My biggest problem with Ignatieff is that he is insincere. He chose to live outside of Canada for 30 years - and now suddenly has re-discovered his patriotism and wants to save the country. If Canada meant that much to him, he would have worked for the country - or at least in it - all those years.
Ironically, I've lived in Canada for 54 years (more than Ignatieff) but cannot become PM because I was not born here and didn't live here till I was 7.
Golf Company Grunt
said
Jeez how many P.M.'s from Quebec have we had since Trudeau? Quebecers seem to be going quite well in the civil service too. They practically run it all in Ottawa.
'Pro Patria'
exasperated
said
James T, for example. A coup d'etat? I'm not even going to touch that one. Oh, and if you actually read the entire article you would have seen that Ignatieff chose to be luke warm with regards to the coalition. He certainly wasn't the catalyst for the notion. SaneCanadian makes a great point too about Harper overthrowing Paul Martin in corroboration with the Bloc and NDP.
Big-Jim...the immigrants are going to take over OUR Canada huh? Yeah...just look at all the minorities represented all throughout the Commons. And hey...there's no such thing as a non-immigrant that abuses the system or doesn't follow the law, right?
Sounds to me like some conservative sympathizers on here are a little bit worried. And afterall...what with, as John Savard said, Harper doing things like trying to cut off opposition campaign funding, he's definitely nothing like the dastardly, insidious Liberals right? Right. Sheesh.
WestofTheRockies
said
True Liberal, just what Canada needs, a holier than thou, arrogant academic who spent much his life cloistered in a University in the USA somewhere. For sure this is the type of life experience, and a Liberal membership card makes great Prime Ministers.
If Canada is so important to Iggy why did he spend his working life in the USA?
Why wasn't he here living, working and contributing to Canada, the country he “loves”?
Lust for Money, Power, Greed = Liberalism
said
Liberal times are always tax and spend times and we certainly don't need that misguided approach anymore.
Sadly, the one thing that the Liberals ever want is unfetterred access to the public purse so they can look after their friends around the country in the hopes that they can buy more votes for the next election and they have been doing that for decades except they got caught at it with the Adscam / Sponsorship scandal which never put a politician in jail for fraud but should have.
Then again most judges were liberal appointees... see a pattern here?
Dr. James Bradford
said
Ignatieff is a hawk whereas traditional Liberals are opposed to war, opposed to defending the free world from tyrants preferring to ignore what goes on on other countries if it means mobilizing our military.
How Ignatieff thinks he can be poster boy to these lefties one never knows but he will no doubt be doing a lot of doublespeak and political rhetoric in hopes of gaining power which at the end of the day is the only thing that ever unities Liberals which is the prospect of POWER and they will do whatever they can to get it including forcing an election nobody wants or should be forced to go through.
Alanna, Saskatchewan
said
Balgonie Bob
said
Its me
said
j bean mississauga
said
DaveEast
said
Iggy would be a befuddled cat's-paw to the backroom boys. He's seen his best days and they were nothing to write home about...
Bruce
said
His fellow Liberals will toss him under the bus just the same as they did with the hapless Dion.
Iggy stated in Vancouver that the party is finally out of debt, they would not be if it wasn't for the Chretien $1.95 per vote taxpayer subsidy. It's very telling that there own members won't buck up and donate to the party.
The policy items up for debate are the same old ideas that have been trotted out by the Liberals since 1993 and when they had the chance to implement them they chose not to.
The only thing you won't hear them say is to promise to scrap the GST.
Jim in Edmonton
said
BMIA
said
Not even half of the voters in his riding voted for him.
We can only hope that the voters of Etobicoke - Lakeshore can save Canada from ever having to hear from this guy again.
KMC (Markham, ON)
said
The so-called "coalition" was, very much like former PM Paul Martin's registering his ships off-shore to avoid paying the very taxes he, himself, as Finance Minister, imposed upon the Canadian people, it may have been technically legal, but it was morally reprehensible.
The "coalition" was the result of a "loophole" in the parliamentary democratic system which was exploited by the "used car salesman" Jack Layton.
Layton managed to convince Stephane Dion who was in shock, having just received a thorough drubbing, in the election, with the lowest election results in Liberal Party history, that the "coalition" was a means by which Dion, the poor man, could redeem himself and still slip into 24 Sussesx Drive, by the back door.
Ignatieff was a fool to sign on to the "colation". There are good men in both the Liberal and the NDP Parties and there were rumoured to be at least 24 Liberals who would not support Layton's attempted grab for power.
Ignatieff's participation in Layton's "coalition" was, a gross judgmental error which left a bad taste in many Liberal/NDP mouths and tarnished their party images among the electorate.
Again, the "coalition" may have been technically legal, but, like Paul Martin's tax dodge, it was morally reprehensible.
Loyal Canadian
said
As a political scientist it is neccesary to clear up a misconception regarding the forming of "coalitions"
It is legal to form a coalition when called on to form a government.
It is legal to form a coalition to bring about a non-confidence vote in the House of Parliament.
It is not proven to be legal to combine the two to defeat and replace a lawfully elected government.
The GG has the power and responsibility to act in the national interest, regardless of what Parliament does. She has the authority to FIRE the entire house-or any member- if she chooses to do so (though it would likely spark a constitutional crisis).
The "coalition" of Liberal-NDP-Bloc that wanted to defeat and replace the government would have been "technically" legal but against the constitution in spirit and represented an act of sedition in that sedition is defined as plotting the overthrow and replacement of the lawful government. Note, that sedition does not include a lawful vote of non-confidence in the house, but you are not allowed to overthrow the government-there is a difference.
Since this will never occur now, can we please put this nonsense behind us... or do the liberal hacks really want to drag this out further to distract us from the real issue; the party's competence (or lack thereof) to lead and Iggy's unfitness to be PM.
Red X
said
Funny that the conservative posters don't have a problem with the Reform Alliance Progressive Conservative Coalition.
The proposal is cap and trade which happens to work well in the EU. Canada signed and ratified Kyoto. The U$ is the only signatory not in the frame work...
Ray Jacques, Glen Robertson, ON
said
As has oft been said:
1) THE POTENTIAL COALITION WAS 100% LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL (NO CONSPIRACY)
2) Had Paul Martin not called an election, Harper was planning to form a coalition with the smae Bloc & NDP as well
3) Mr Ignatieff actually did not use that option, rahter supporting the Conservatives for some unfathomable reason.
I think that he should have used the Coalition option if only to dump the WORST Prime Minister Cnada has ever had unceremoniously if only to partially prepay him for his un-Canadian and un-civilized hatchet job on Stephane Dion
Once again, I thought that CTV wwere going to screen posts so that they are consise ?
James T's comments were 100% untrue and I am starting to wonder if these ridiculous posts could possibly be from real Canadians or are just Conservative plants spewing their outrageous Conservative rhethoric all over the these posts ?
Comments ?
KMC (Markham, ON)
said
However, the polls in Quebec are largely responsible for his so-called meteoric rise.
The other parties are not going to remain supine allowing this to go on.
When the Bloc starts pointing out to Quebecers Ignatieff's rabid support for George Bush and the Republicans, his advocacy for the Iraq invasion, his justification for the use of torture, indefinite detention, extreme interrogation techniques, etc., etc; his reference to himself "as an American" and the US Constitution as "our Constitution", and much more, I think Quebecers, and other Canadians, may have second thoughts about their support for Ignatieff.
If all it took, for PM Harper and the Conservatives, to lose support in Quebec, was his reference to the separatist
Bloc Quebecois as "separatists" ( perfectly factual)and some "cuts" to the Arts budget (although the Tories actually INCREASED the Arts funding, over the previous Liberal budget; a point never made by the Liberal biased media) then I suspect when Ignatieff's political philosophies become known the bloom will be somewhat off the rose.
If anyone takes the time to study Ignatieff's various articles and musings,they can't help but conclude that Ignatieff's political convictions are far, far to the right of the traditional Liberal philosophy. Maybe even to the right of Stephen Harper.
Ignatieff is, simply, a political opportunist who, were he true to his convictions, would be applying for a membership in the Conservative Party, albeit Ignatieff's views are farther right than many of the Tory membership.
Loyal Canadian
said
When it comes to the prospect of Iggy becoming PM, that bothers me. He's someone who has done NOTHING for this country. He has no real ties, regardless to what his publicity group claims, to this country. He has no alliegence to Her Majesty. And someone actually thinks that a man who buys his way into a position of power should have more? Are you on crack, or just a liberal?
If you take a close look at the liberal party and it's real record (I have, since I earned my Masters Degree in Political Science) you would see a record filled with corrupt practices, backroom deals, elected officials who breached their duty and some who committed crimes. And then there's their "god", Trudeau. I can't even begin to make a list of all he has done that was bad for this country- and the party thinks that the sun rose only because he told it to!
If Chretien could disband a regiment for the actions of a handfull (4 men), then based on the liberal record, that party should be disbanded and a large number of them should be in jail.
Forget Iggy, at least Dion was honestly foolish, this guy is worrying to anyone that takes the time to put some though into the matter; other than for himself-what does he REALLY stand for? if anything.
Joey from Regina
said
Wow, it is amazing how truly ignorant some people are about their own country. Harper may have been elected, but the people never gave him a majority government. We gave him a MINORITY government, which means that it is as much Harper's job to cooperate with the other parties as it is the opposition's job to cooperate with Harper. Harper tried to use the current ecconomic crisis to attack the Liberals by eliminating subsidies to political parties because he knew it was only way he was ever going to see a majority government. After all, he couldn't win a majority government over the Liberals in the aftermath of the sponsorship scandal, and he couldn't win a majority when his only competition was Seperatist Duceppe, Taliban Jack and Looney Stephane Dion. Because of his pathetic record he decided to attack the opposition's ability to spread their message in order to stack the deck in his favour. The decision was anti-democratic because it was intended to prevent us, the people, from hearing what all parties have to say come election time. Yet the coalition is the one pulling off the coup??? Uh, no. Harper's idea of dealing with the economy was to cut out subsidies which would have saved a measly $30 million per year while providing no stimulus, despite the fact that every other country in the G20 agreed to spend a percentage of their GDP. The fact is, Harper used the economy as a reason to play partisan politics and attack his opposition all while denying that we needed a stimulus package. What he did was undemocratic and incompetent.
A string of poor leadership choices...
said
Martin was a devisive figure who anyone with any political acumen could have predicted would be a failure. Dion, while a true gentleman, and with Canada's best interests at heart was a terrible communicator and strategist. Iggy is ripe for attack from all sides by virtue of the fact that he is not very patriotic given his decision to abandon Canada and return as an opportunist.
The base of the Liberal party (of which I once counted myself a member) must start looking at the big picture when they choose their leaders. Otherwise, we're in for a long haul of conservative government.
Dunny from Manotick
said
It would be a great thing if as voters we had the choice between good Conservative and good Liberal alternatives when we next go to the polls. To loose the baggage of the past couple decades the Liberals need to start with a very clean slate and that doesn't mean importing an American to run the party.
david sawkiw[saskatchewan farmer]
said
If this new leader expects to rationalize the registry to people using his intelect,,he, and his advisors are dreaming in technocolor!!!The registry is absolutely HATED by most people out here. I know literally hundreds of people who WILL NOT VOTE liberal for this reason alone!!!I'm not saying that is the only reason for the West abandoning the liberals,, BUT,,this is the ONLY,,I repeat the ONLY issue that will bring people out here back to the liberal party.
So,, if the liberals are short of money [and I heard they are], they would be absolutely STUPID to even try to sway people out West without first getting rid of the registry
The only advice I give to this new leader is to stop and listen to ther little people at the grassroots level, LISTEN to them!! The redneck conservative MAJORITY is not losing any sleep over that threat.
Michelle
said
Loyal Subject
said
Thomas C
said
If he had, he would have had either 50% of the popular vote or 50% of the seats in the House, of which he received neither.
As a graduating law student whose specialties include Canadian Constitutional Law, I can say the attempt at forming a coalition government was a valid expression of democracy within the Canadian political system.
That said, I'm still not entirely sold on Iggy, so I'll give him more time.
caper
said
PM
said
What a joke... this guy hasn't said or done anything substantial... In fact the few times he's tried, it's been a disaster, and he's backed off.
If the Liberals think that's good enough to regain power, they've got another thing coming... for all I care they can stay in opposition for ever.
Allison Garesh
said
While I personally did not support the coalition as it was pulled together in too much haste, I would encourage the blogger who incorrectly thinks it was unlawful and a coup d'etat to educate himself on how a parliamentary democracy works and what a coup d'etat actually is. Spreading misinformation in a time of economic crisis hurts Canada.
John Savard
said
Given Harper's attempt to cut off opposition campaign funding, though, I wouldn't mind seeing Ignatieff given a chance, particularly if this results in the Liberal party being permanently moved in the direction of moderation.
Naveed
said
In short he is making all the correct moves to become our next Prime Minister.
This article questions whether he can do so, I think it is more a forgone conclusion. The only question being when that election occurs, now that the hypocrites (Conservatives) seem to be in bed with what they once termed implied as Canada's enemies the sovereignists (Bloc).
And also with the NDP, the prime mover of that coalition idea last December---who are also now set to support Harpers mandate.
Canadians will find Iggy and the Liberals irresistable. A party that now stands on its own, for the good of Canada.
Not Liberal anymore
said
SaneCanadian, Halifax N.S.
said
God it makes me sad to see how little people know about their own country.
Or maybe it would interest you to know that Harper tried to "enter into a conspiracy with the NDP & the separatists to overthrow the lawfully elected government" back when Paul Martin was PM.
Nah, but it's A OK when Harper does it right?
Dunny from Manotick.
said
Robert White
said
ZZZ
said
James T.
said
How could anyone in their right mind vote for him, no matter how much of The West's prosperity he's promised to "carbon" tax away to buy your votes in Ontario & Quebec?
Doug Ontario
said
land on some solid issues. He blames the Prime Minister's tax cuts and stimulus spending for the deficit, yet he has said he is for lower taxes and the stimulus package was not big enough nor quick enough. He has this great vision for Canada, yet he continues to support the goverbment. I believe that he is a mile wide on intelect and organization, but an inch deep on substance. Does anybody know where he stands on anything?