Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Liberals Put The Squeeze On NDP

The Liberals appear to have found the counter to the NDP strategy of marginalization:
This is a strategy that distinguishes the Liberals from the other two opposition parties. Lately, the Grits have been targeting the NDP, who took votes away from them in the last election.

And that strategy was clearly on display in the daily Question Period yesterday, when former finance minister and opposition House Leader Ralph Goodale accused the NDP of being "bought and paid for" by the Harper Conservatives.

"Last November, the NDP traded off a national child-care system for their own short-term partisan gain," he said...

The NDP is saying its support is not yet guaranteed, despite Mr. Goodale's comments that the party is in the pocket of the Tories.

I think this is an excellent strategy for the Liberals to counter the "obstructionist" angle. In framing the NDP as apologists, the Liberals can realistically claim to be the only relevant opposition to the Harper government. I have argued that Layton's strategy is dangerous because it leaves the NDP open to criticism, as well as alienating soft supporters. It is just counter-intuitive to envision a left-wing party can working effectively with a right-center(I'm generous) party. Layton may win some minor concessions, but ultimately it will be the Liberals who provide an alternative.

If I were the Liberals, I would use the "in the pocket" argument at every turn because it puts the NDP on the defensive. This strategy also forces the NDP into taking a tougher line with the Conservatives, to counter the appearance of collaboration. I don't see any risk for the Liberals with this tactic because the other parties have already made their strategy known. When the dust settles, I suspect the NDP may regret their decision to work with the Conservatives to marginalize the Liberals. The NDP prides itself on the perception that it is values driven entity, the Liberals may tarnish that reputation by exposing Layton's "unholy alliance". The Liberals may also gain the leverage next election to claim they are the only true alternative to Conservative rule.

9 comments:

Robert McClelland said...

This is the exact same thing the Conservatives did last year when the NDP supported the Liberals. It didn't work then so why do you think it will work now?

Anonymous said...

Steve, you said...

"It is just counter-intuitive to envision a left-wing party can working effectively with a right-centre (I'm generous) party."

Isn't that what is happening now in Germany with their "Grand Coalition"? The Conservatives (CDU/CSU) are in a formal coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD).

Perhaps Scipio was correct when he claimed "Politics makes for Strange Bedfellows..."

Anonymous said...

This is the exact same thing the Conservatives did last year when the NDP supported the Liberals.

Except that the Conservatives were trying to hang the stink of Liberal corruption on the NDP and that was transparently dishonest. This gambit appears to be a little more reality-based, and might serve the Liberals well.

I'm not much of partisan, but the NDP's recent strategy of a scorched-Earth policy towards the battle for social democratic Canadians is leaving me cold.

I admit at this point that the Liberals have to be careful about this, but as far as I'm concerned, the centrist party with a long history of governance and a not-insignificant proportion of social democratic voters can't go wrong in pointing that too cosy a relationship with an ideologically extreme rightwing party is probably not in most of our best interests.

Anonymous said...

Layton blew it when he allowed Harper to stampede him into supporting the New Tories and Bloc in bringing down the Liberal government. Harper pushed and prodded and Layton lacked the gumption to figure out that he was being used as a patsy by Harper. We saw something similar happen in the USA when Bush and Co. stampeded the Democrats into supporting the Iraq war; at that time, very few Democrats had the guts to do the right thing rather than the expedient thing.

Layton and his party will pay a heavy price for his opportunism come the next election. Seats won in the last election will revert to the Liberals, and Layton's future as leader of the NDP will be precarious.

Layton forgot the old adage: He who sups with the Devil need have a long spoon.

Steve V said...

dale

Sure the NDP can do this dance with Harper, but I don't think they do it without losing some credibility on the "purity" angle.

curiousity

The American Democrats analogy is a good one, because their efforts to seek compromise and look conciliatory have effectively robbed them of their core values. The Democrats only hope rests on the disasterous Bush presidency, not some endorsement of their policies by voters.

Anonymous said...

Anyone that can force the Liberals to reallocate 4.6 billion dollars of corporate tax cuts to social spending and then get the Conservatives to honour that reallocation by sending the money out to the Provinces is doing a tremendous service for the Canadian public and will earn more votes in the next election.

Steve V said...

lance

Small detail, the Liberals were in power for 13 years, the Democrats haven't held anything since the Gingrich revolution.

People are seriously delusional if they think Layton won't pay a price for his transparent relationship with Harper. I voted NDP last time, pretty much zero chance of that next election and I'm not alone. Note to Layton- you can't wipe out the Liberal Party, but may make yourself irrelevant in the process.

Anonymous said...

For me the greater issue is that Jack Layton asked for Liberal voters to support him promising the NDP would be more effective than the Liberals in keeping the Conservative Reformers from ramming their social reforms down the throats of "ordinary" Canadians. He's caught in a conflict of interest - should he keep his promise or get rid of the Liberals so the NDP can become a more powerful political force? So it appears he's chosen politics over people, unfortunately. Also he's killed the long standing claim of the NDP that the Liberals and Conservatives are basically one party and the NDP is different. Now the NDP is down in the muck with everyone else because they wants to replace Liberals. If they had any hope of doing that, they could have achieved it through their policies and vision.

Steve V said...

indie voter

"he's killed the long standing claim of the NDP that the Liberals and Conservatives are basically one party and the NDP is different."

Those are great points you make. Layton's approach is dangerous because it betrays the "ideals first" tenet, which is where the NDP has been historically relevant.