Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Layton's Deal

Jack Layton and Paul Martin have agreed on the deal that everyone was waiting for them to come to.

I admit that I predicted that this wouldn't go through but I think my analysis of the long terms effects hold.

Layton: Nothing but good here. If voters are mad about Adscam and were considering the NDP there is no way they're now moving to the Tories because of this. Maybe Green, but doubt it. (BTW, he's much better on the radio than tv, he could have been PM fifty years ago.)

Martin: I still don't see how this helps him. What electoral difference does "we got our budget passed" and "we tried our hardest to get our budget passed" make? Only imaginable advantage is that he lives until he can prorogue for the summer.

Harper: Does look like he was left out of the minority parliament's dealmaking. Might consider abstaining on the budget if he's sure NCV will pass soon after it. Again, this Harper-BQ alliance talk is really pissing me off. Concurrent desires does not equate to collusion. The Conservatives are not separatists. (Also note that Harper does not have a separatist as his Qeubec lieutenant, see: Jean Lapierre.)

Finally, what about the numbers on all this. No one seems to be talking about the absent MPs any more. Is it assumed that they're well enough to make it to the Hill if they have to? Also, I can conceive of a situation where Chuck Cadman or David Kilgour would vote for the budget but against the government in a subsequent vote of confidence. This would fit their MOs as political opportunists--not that I blame them.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home