NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says his party will bring forward a motion of non-confidence to bring down the Trudeau government in the next sitting of the House of Commons.
“The Liberals don’t deserve another chance,” Singh wrote in a letter on Friday. “That’s why the NDP will vote to bring this government down.”
Can this wait until Feb 1? Give Canadians a bit more of a chance to see the US get fucked first.
Parliament doesn’t sit until Jan 26, so it won’t happen before then.
First sitting on the 27th, to be exact. Source.
Yeah, I’m panicking a lot less now. And depending on the exact rules JT could prorogue it even further.
Somebody in the media mentioned a Liberal leadership election; if he goes that way I’ll be “kalm” again.
A Liberal leadership convention would require ~4-5 months. The Liberals would name an interim leader elected by caucus if JT steps down.
Really? Do you have a link to bylaws or something?
A couple seems like plenty of notice to me under the circumstances.
“The Liberals don’t deserve another chance,”
And Conservatives shouldn’t even get a chance, yet Singh is handing them power on a silver plate.
Burning down the country and democracy in the West “to own the Libs” sounds like a plan we may never recover from.
The Conservatives will win either way. There’s nothing in the next 10 months that would prevent the Conservatives from winning short of PP beating up children.
Voting no confidence now allows the NDP to viably compete for seats like Ottawa Centre where the liberals are weak and rebuild their influence and standing in the house. I don’t see why it’s the duty of every left-leaning party to prop up the Liberals as the natural governing party. Waiting 10 months isn’t going to cause the NDP to sweep into government, it might at best just delay the inevitable if they’re lucky, but more likely delaying will catastrophically wipe out their party by making them look like Liberal stage props.
It’s about optics.
Canada is one of the last few full democracies out there, and seeing how the United States has already failed, to give up and surrender sends a strong message to other nations that democracy just doesn’t work.
Its not giving up and surrendering for the NDP to not support thr liberals. Unconditionally supporting them no matter what because of fear of the conservatives would be surrendering.
Well, Jagmeet said just the other day that what Conservatives have been doing (with these non-confidence votes), was a game, and that he wasn’t going to play.
Now, all of a sudden, he’s caved?
Something either happened behind closed doors, or he’s surrendered.
That’s how I see it, and I could be totally wrong.
So you’re saying that if a viable parliamentary democracy is functioning as intended, it has failed?
viable parliamentary democracy is functioning as intended
I guess that depends on your definition of functioning.
Just the other day, the NDP leader said this: "We’re not going to vote in favour of any of their games because that’s what (the Conservatives are) doing. They’re playing games,” Singh told reporters after the vote was tallied. (SOURCE)
And now he wants to play games with our future by handing Conservatives more power?
We all know that the Conservative party in Canada and the Republicans in the US are not acting in good faith to bring benefit to the people, so is this how our democracy is supposed to work?
We have a democracy FOR THE PEOPLE, and if the people aren’t benefiting from these “games”, then it’s not functioning as intended.
In my opinion, of course.
Democracy’s success isn’t measured by how one person feels about an incoming government - it’s based on the strength of democratic institutions, and liberal democracies are further characterized by strong civil societies and human rights regimes. If the majority of Canadians want a Conservative government in power - why do you feel that preference shouldn’t be accepted?
It doesn’t sound like you even want a democracy, you just want a one-party autocracy, given that you feel that people shouldn’t be allowed to have fluid political preferences. That’s a failure of democracy - a one party state with all decisions made by someone on Lemmy.
I’m not happy about an incoming Conservative majority government either, but my gut reaction isn’t to start claiming that democracy in Canada has failed. I’m able to calmly acknowledge that there’s a party right now that is probably going to win a plurality of votes and ridings because the majority of voters align with their messaging. That’s not a failure of democracy, that’s a success of democracy.
I don’t see why it’s the duty of every left-leaning party to prop up the Liberals as the natural governing party.
It’s the third party fallacy all over again.
Maybe Turdeau should have fucking followed through on election reform like he promised then.
There is no fallacy. It’s a solid split between NDP and Liberals. And that’s really being propped up by the East. In the West it’s Conservative vs NDP.
Dang welcome to Trump’s Canada I guess. Scary times boys
How would a Conservative government be equivalent to Trump’s Canada? I don’t really understand the alarmism. This government was already on it’s last days, and there’s always going to be a point in time where things must get worse to get better. Waiting 10 months to expect a different result other than a Conservative majority is just copium, and Trudeau had the option of not calling a snap election in 2021 too.
I think Pierre will be easily bought out and let Trump have his way. Fresh water will be piped to the states during his tenure, and he will try to gaslight us into thinking it’s a good deal, that’s my prediction
All governments everywhere frame their decisions in a way that is akin to gaslighting. If the majority of Canadians disapprove of Pierre’s actions, or we lose the trade war with the US in a meaningful way that deteriorates our standard of living, then they will lose the next election. It’s that simple.
People blame Trudeau now for all of their ills, as though that he has the power to magically make the economy go up and down with a snap of his fingers. The Liberals made investments in key sectors all the time, including housing starts, climate change and social justice, many of which are never going to be meaningfully acknowledged by people that debate politics online. Pierre is ultimately subject to the same political pressures.
I agree with you mostly except I’m pretty afraid of Trump and I fear irreversible damage in the next 4 years. If Trump wasn’t in office I wouldn’t be overly concerned about a CPC majority
or we lose the trade war with the US in a meaningful way that deteriorates our standard of living, then they will lose the next election. It’s
Except that it will take decades to recover from that (if we ever do).
How would a Conservative government be equivalent to Trump’s Canada?
Because Poilievre is acting just like Trump: Sowing division and mistrust, attacking vulnerable groups, courting extremists, attacking the process of government, displaying willful ignorance of government and the law, reducing complex issues to simple (and wrong) chants, and more.
The Conservatives have set their sights on the first target - trans people - so if they get a majority, watch them strip basic human rights from members of the trans community. After that will probably be abortion; but not banning it of course, just removing any guarantee of access to safe, legal abortions.
“Maybe when Canada is fed up with the Cons, they’ll vote us in!”
Shortsighted buffoons
The only shortsighted buffoons I see are the Liberals who have thoroughly failed to meaningfully improve their voters’ lives and address any of the many social crises that are impacting us.
The only shortsighted buffoons I see are the NDP who have thoroughly failed to meaningfully improve their voters’ lives and address any of the many social crises that are impacting us.
The only shortsighted buffoons I see are the Conservatives who have thoroughly failed to meaningfully improve their voters’ lives and address any of the many social crises that are impacting us.
Works with every party.
Sure it does, if you have no idea how the government functions.
Drop the whataboutism. Hold yourself to a higher standard.
All political parties are a blight on democracy. Case in point, party whips.
Singh et al learned absolutely nothing from the Harper era
We’re doomed. Probably.Yup, and gov is in vacation until Jan 27th, so when they wil go back to work, Trump in its first week may have already destroyed a couple of things here and there in our economy
Actually, that’s a good thing. Parliament blow up before he arrives. The government itself will continue to operate.
Thanks, I thought they were coming back early January and was worried.
I guess it’s PP time…
Yeah, WTF is he thinking? At least wait until October after we’ve had a chance to put out the Trump fire a bit.
Hopefully it’s a bluff to get Trudeau to resign, but that’s not really the typical NDP MO.
WTF is he thinking?
For better or worse, he’s probably reached the point where he thinks they need to cut all remaining ties to the Liberals, and not be seen as propping them up, formally or otherwise.
With the Conservatives 20 points ahead in polls, it’s definitely for worse.
And that’s worth a PP government? IMO he’s lost the plot if that’s his entire line of thinking.
I’m torn on this.
On the one hand, I agree that a PP government is a terrible thing.
On the other hand, it’s hardly the NDP’s job to prop up another political party.
You want a two-party system, then. That’s pretty much the only way for parties to never work strategically.
Well, no.
I want a system that’s actually designed to support multiple parties. Westminster ain’t it.
Former British colonies are still suffering from the effects of first-past-the-post.
Somebody’s always propping up another party if you’re Germany or Norway or Spain, though, or you don’t have a government. That’s what I mean. We have something like 2.5 parties, so we’re not used to it, but it’s how it’s “supposed” to work.
No. That’s not what they’re saying at all.
The NDP is not in government. Trudeau did not form a coalition, he decided to form a single-party cabinet in a hung parliament. This is how this always plays out.If he wanted stability, he could have formed a coalition.
Formal coalition vs. informal support is a distinction without a difference, though.
WTF is he thinking?
“The Bloc will let me do some performative grand standing. I hope.”
I hope so too but it doesn’t really seem like a smart move since it’d make their threats seem empty (though actually going through with this isn’t smart either…)
Well, memories tend to be short in politics, and even then it’s only credibility-damaging if it gets called. If it was the conservatives I’d pretty much just assume it’s a bluff.
Get ready for one of the ugliest campaigns in living memory.
Please don’t do it Mr Singh.
Just to remind everyone: Layton pulled this same stunt, toppling Martin’s government.
The result was the loss of a number of progressive initiatives Martin’s people were working on, the election of fucking Stephen Harper and the most conservative Canadian political landscape since Borden. Science was suppressed, lslamophobia went from being a dogwhistle to a bullhorn, we narrowly avoided economic catastrophy. Harper even fucked with the Census in an attempt to remake Canada.
A lot of dippers really idolized Layton, but honestly he was a shameless opportunist and I don’t forgive him for giving us almost a decade of Harper.
And Singh is pulling the same fucking stunt.
Just to remind everyone: Layton pulled this same stunt, toppling Martin’s government.
Refusing to support a sitting government mired in scandal isn’t a stunt—it’s taking a stand. Calling an election wasn’t just the right thing to do; it was unavoidable after the Office of the Auditor General laid bare the extent of corruption. This wasn’t a minor misstep—it was a government blatantly diverting public funds to secure its own re-election. Propping up such a government would have been a betrayal of public trust.
Pinning the blame on Layton because the only viable alternative brokerage party to form government was the Conservative Party is absurd. That’s not on him; it’s on the corrupt Liberal party establishment of the time for destroying their own credibility. A lot of voters are only used to the reformed Liberal Party under Trudeau, but there was a point in time where the Liberal party apparatus was very different.
Let’s be clear: the fault lies with those who abused their power, not with those who refused to stand by and enable it. Misrepresenting this as opportunism is a deliberate distortion of the facts, designed to deflect attention from the real issue—a government that deserved to fall. Just admit you’re pro-corruption and move on.
Poilievre is winning a majority no matter what, I’d rather get it out of the way sooner instead of sitting through another year of ineffective Liberal virtue signalling.
Removed by mod
Just saw that he is eligible for pension on Jan 24th… Do with what you want with that info
The pension is a red herring tossed around by morons. If he didn’t get the pension, he’d get a return of his contributions and just invest it in index funds. People make it sound like a $40k/year pension will make or break his retirement plans lmao.
Parliament doesn’t sit until Jan 26. You still have to get input from NDP HQ and the caucus before you go around voting non-confidence. Freeland resigned a day before parliament was about to adjourn and y’all make it sound like it needed to be a gut reaction.
He’s rich. The pension is meaningless.
One thing that I find interesting.
Singh says he will introduce a vote of non-confidence. Is it possible that he’ll delay it for a little bit, to support (or negotiate with) the Liberals for longer than anything Poilievre would have planned.
In other words, could it be to push the CPC onto their back foot for a bit?
