Green Party of Canada - Likely the Political Wildcard in the Next Election

I do think you are right about both the Conservatives' and the NDP's desire to keep the Greens out of the debate, although frankly letting Elizabeth May appear - and challenging her as Dion's "puppet" (and him as "unable to be credible on the environment given his track record without her") might well work better for Prime Minister Harper than all the press coverage that will ensue by keeping her off the stage.

If there's an election this fall, then the "entente verte" might well work in the Liberals' favour. If it goes into 2008 - or all the way to election day on 19 October 2009 - the Government will have had the time to put together a record of its own action on the environmental file which will eat into any benefits (not to mention that it will be very old news by then). Indeed, by that point Green candidates might well be disowning their leader in ridings they think are winnable - and where bleeding to the Liberals won't help them.

Overall: probably no MPs after the next election, will draw better than fourth in a dozen or so ridings, will draw better than third in possibly three ridings, will skewer the NDP's chances by drawing Layton off into fighting off erosion to the Greens, may give the Conservatives more potential in a couple of seats due to vote splitting and won't give the Liberals the boost Dion was hoping for when he did his deal with Ms. May (the maximum impact from that had to be coupled with a spring, 2007 election - one Dion and his confrères on the Opposition benches didn't have the stomach - or monies - for).

I am told that Dion's deal with May for the Liberals to avoid contesting the next election in May's chosen riding of Central Nova was not vetted with the Liberal caucus. This apparently took the caucus completely off guard. It will also result in the Liberals not contesting every riding in the country, something that the Conservatives and NDP will be sure to point out.

I would agee with the take that the Greens will be playing the spoiler, just not too sure how it will playout yet. It really depends on where thier support originated from and the fact that they are strongest in Quebec and Ontario may mean its from primarily previously Liberal voters.

If thats the case the question is will a protest vote(if thats what it is) manifest itself into real votes in the voting booth come election night.

As far as the Dion/May collusion goes, it may work out for them but I hope its seen for what it is which is just one more back room sleazy political deal that many Canadians are getting disallusioned with.

If May was being honest about supporting the greenest party out there when she made the deal, it would have been the NDP, she picked Dion because it served her purposes politically. Period.....

Ms May should not be in the upcoming political debates, whenever they occur, simply because the party has no electoral credibility, no voice in parliament - this criteria has been good enough for everyone else until the 'special privileges' Ms May came along.

Why other political parties should accommodate Ms May's often stated wish to take part in the debate, simply because she's 'green' - both in party lines and experience - I can't say. In my opinion they should not.

I for one would not find the debates 'much more fun' as Ms May stated would be the case if she were allowed to participate - I hear more than enough from Ms May as it is.

As for the rather seamy side deal with Mr Dion - not a credit to either - but more reprehensible for Mr Dion, who quite calculatedly cut off one, so far, legitimate Liberal candidate who planned to run in the next election to score cheap points on the environmental issue. Not exactly an act of high principle - nor even well thought out. The fact that he took this decision pretty well unitalerally points even more to his 'one man show' way of carrying out his business of office - I know, we're only supposed to criticize Mr Harper for this particular failing - but have any of you listened to Mr Dion lately - now he will 'honour' the Accord deals with NS, NF&LB? I thought that was exactly what Mr Harper was doing, when he offered these provinces a choice to remain with the old Accord, or enter into a new fiscal arrangement with the federal government.

With proportional financing in place, Canadian tax payers are entitled to hear the views of ALL parties who receiving funding in the next election; and this, of course, includes the Greens who more than qualified for such funding in both recent elections.

But I think something more is at stake. I think Canadians want to hear fully considered solutions to our environmental crisis-- not knee-jerk policies coming from leaders who formerly dismissed these "so-call green-house gases." Without Elizabeth May's inclusion in these debates, I am afraid Canadians will simply hear more rhetoric and finger-pointing. But with her participation, each national party has an opportunity to refine their understanding and forge environmental action that is both intelligent and aggressive enough to make a difference.

Eliz. May looks like an environmental extremist and while Canadians want to see improvements in the environment they are not prepared to sacrifice their standard of living and more importantly their jobs. It is true she may, in some ridings, be the spoiler but she will be a spoiler among Liberal and NDP voters. Guess who comes up the middle. Strategic voting can work as we saw in the disastrous election of an NDP government in Ontario. However, the Ontario people learned the hard way that trying to manipulate an election to prevent someone from getting elected is a sure way to get what you may not want. So it will be interesting to see if the Greens can elect an MP this time around. However, to get elected May will have to talk about something other than the environment to convince voters she knows something about the more important issues such as the economy. She is a strident lady who can't keep her mouth closed and I suspect over a campaign most Canadians will tire of her. However, I do agree with Nik's assessment.

I totally agree. The environment is the real issue. Canadians are waking up and realizing that all other issues can only survive in a world that will sustain life.

What good is the Green Party! With all this crap and junk coming in from the Evil Empire (Hong Kong/China) Why are they not commenting, they should be outraged like the rest of Canada. More crap coming in from Toys R Us and our politicians at all 3 levels sit there with their finger up their butts. Come on May have to be on Top of things.

Politics is a blood sport and, like the gladiators, you either politically win or you politically die-----a mighty compelling reason to fight hard and dirty when in the ring. We are idiots if for a moment we credit political actors going into an election with high ethical and moral standards for the common good. Politicians want to be elected to power and they will sieze every opportunity the law allows and possibly more. Once there, they can don the mantle of the upright ethical crusader for the common good and try to polish their assumed halos for public consumption. I know political memories are very short but does one remember the GfK market research TRUST report in the first week of this month, August 2007 and based on 16,000 interviews in 18 countries? To quote......."Doctors are the most trusted professionals in Europe and the United States while politicians command universal distrust." Nothing new unless Canadian politicians are cut of a more ethical cloth---Ho Ho.

Yes, I believe Elizabeth May, as leader of a creditable CANADA WIDE political party, should take part in the televised debate-----today that is public information that we are entitled to hear.Public broadcasters should respect the electors' right to know regardless of what the leaders of the other political parties do wish or do not wish. IT IS THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW.

I believe the Greens provide a safe electoral parking lot for the mainline voter when they are disaffected with their usual party. Perhaps this is why the Green numbers have risen through the last couple of elections----there are "swing" voters and maybe a new breed, the "safe parking" voter. I think it would be imprudent to assume the rise in Green fortunes is entirely due to their platform but rather they are indebted to the last two minority governments. For the NDP the Greens are a definite threat----if in a riding, the Greens are up, then, likely, the NDP will be down on the see-saw-----just too many parties running.

Once there are more than two parties, the third party, plus the others, can be spoilers. I believe it should be law that to be declared elected, a candidate must receive 50% plus 1 vote even when this means a second election within two weeks for the front runners who receive more than 10% of the vote in the first round. It is a clear, simple and fair system with the results ALWAYS IN THE HANDS OF THE VOTER and easily seen and understood.

More good commentary, Nik,. I agree.
Of course, May should be allowed in the debates. She is spokeperson for a large group across the country They should have a voice in political system, just like any other large group. If what they have to say resonates with many Canadians then we will give them an opportunity to enter the political process. (get a seat)
Those of us who are in a mainline, traditional (sometimes majority) party should not deny others an equal opportunity. Are we so lacking in conviction in our own beliefs or so lacking in our ability to communicate those convictions to most Canadians? I have faith in the intelligence of the Canadian people. If the Greens or any small party has a valid point(or points) they will accept them. If not, then they don't get any seats and are politically shut out. Every large group, if its national, should have a voice in parliament. Only those who most Cadanians accept will ever have political power. We are supposed to live in a democracy.
It must be awful to be so insecure as to be so afraid of the political ideas of others, especially if they only represent a small portion of the population.

I don't think there will be any support on the Greens part with any other. Greens are diametrically opposed economically to the NDP.which is what defines the NDP. May is very fiscally conservative. And this thing with Dion re not running against her is just an anomoly. Its main purpose is to get a rep in parliament. Tho, I think she may have great difficulty in that riding. There are two others where she would have a much easier time I guess it shows her bravery and integrity. Once if and when she gets a seat, the relationship with Dion will rapidly disappear.
If Layton or Harper oppose having May take part in the debates it will be added to their list of weaknesses.

Hello Nik,

Absolutely!

Liz May has already been quite outspoken at her dismay re the Environment and about S. Harper's lack of comittment. I think that if she wants to make a serious impact on the electorate, that she must continue to dispell her attacks on the Harper gov/t, just as Arnold, and Al Gore did. They saw this new gov/t as lacking rigidity with their policies, and committment to at least try to meet the Kyoto targets. As for Bill Gates, he felt that Canada should be way up there, and offered S.Harper a monetary contribution when he met with him in Ottawa to generate the fight to diminishing HIV/Aids from spreading.

I expect, and without reservation, that we shall see Liz May in the "House" where she belongs! Liz May can take-on S.Harper, and Jack Layton on an intellectual level, any time, and on any subject. So can S. Dion. Those are the two sharpest intellecual minds that we have on our podium. It's time that we have bright people up there, and that we try to catch-up to them intellectually.

If Ms May has so much influence in decapitating another party, she could perhaps start with the 'block"?

Cheers,

I wish you would keep up with the topics Nik you behind again, The Evil Empire is in trouble again and now the Canadian Food Inspection Branch is looking at Chickens from China, China/Hong Kong want to export Chickens to Canada, no god dam way. The problem is the Politicians, it is David Emerson and the Chretien Liberals for this Chinese mess, keep the bastards out.

The chances of the Green and Elizabeth May in Parliament are the same as Dion being Prime Minister, between Slim and None, or 99 to 1 odds!

I like this Harper idea to start Parliament Oct 16, 2007, What do think? I know the Liberals do not like it, Dion will have nothing to do and will have to start over. But who cares about the Liberals anyhow, they brought us 13 years of mismanagement, corruption and Jean Chretien! I wonder what Blossom thinks, he is a Red and White Liberal.

Hello Nik,

It's not about what I think about this not so new minority gov/t. postponing to reopen the sessions in Parliament as previously scheduled for September 17th, and delaying a possible Throne Speech for another month.

John Baird's nullification of the Environmental plan denotes that they are not ready to answer questions and have no intent on respecting the law of this land. To continue to discredit the Liberals for so called 'enaction' for the last 13 yrs, whereby after electing a second Minister of the Invironment and have already lost two years, and are headed for a 3rd yrs of inaction of this file is infuriating the electorate further. They still do not have a plan to address this Country's issues.

Today, on 940AM Sirius, M. Dion said that he would wait to hear the Throne Speech on Afghanistan, and although he is not calling to pull out immediately as the NDP, wants to have a 'debate' with all parties about Canadians concerns about the mission out there; which Norine MacDonald, President of the Senlis Council admitted was a failure out there, and that we have not delivered what this new gov/t had promised to the Afghans. If S. Harper is calling 2009 the limit term out there, without further discussions, it is because of the pressures he has had. Peter PacKay's mediocre attempts at explaining what was going on with this new gov/t today, were feeble, and prove once more that they have no plan! He minced his words, and it was confusing to listen to him tyring to interpret his boss' message!

The Speech from the Throne is always a challenge to a call for a vote of non-confidence, just as is the budget. Both the NDP and the 'block' wouldn't have much to gain with bringing down this not so new gov/t, however, if M. Dion is capable of getting his views known out there, and he is becoming more outspoken, I believe that the Liberals will earn the support of a majority of Canadians.

This is another strategy from S.Harper to try to get a "majority gov/t", and he wants this at all costs. That means that we, Canadians, would be paying the cost of another election, and if the Harper gov/t remained in a minority, once again, this Country would still be on the wrong course.

The mood of our Country is changing, and with Qc always in an indicisive mood with regards to our own Provincial parties, could create further problems for the rest of Canada.
Thomas Mulcair, NDP, unless I am wrong, will win the riding in Outremont. He is very strong as a former Environment Minister, which had been his own portfolio, and was adamant about discrediting the Harper gov/t. So the NDP will vote to bring down this new gov/t at the first chance, and with the 'bloc's' vote about bringing down S.Harper and ending immediately the Aghanstan mission, which is wrong. Canadians are not against this peace-keeping mission, but the lack of support comes from not defining the mission and its goals, and huge sums of monies which have not reached the Afghans for their fundamental basic survival. There has to be an overview and designated benchmarks.
The Afghans must learn agriculture and turn that poppy crop for medicinal purposes that could sustain this hole planet.

The only thing that stands between the Conservatives and the Liberals, is that a bulley is seen as leader, and a man of vision who hasen't managed to get quite good, and strong publicity and who isen't well known yet, is still struggling to do so. However, once his policies are understood, the voters will be able to discern whom they prefer. One is starting to feel that M. Dion is starting to get all medias attention, and the Press asking is asking more pertinent questions, and this is how we shall perceive the difference between the present leader, and one who answers to all Canadians.

All I can respond to the one who asked this question is that during this extra period of time it is giving the Harper gov/t to come up, hopefully with new plans, while S. Dion has already brought forward a multitude of alternatives for all Provinces, and is meeting with them to help them grow.

How does it rub with Canadians that our Corporations are being sold to foreign investment, whereby, we do not benefit from the same laws that foreign investors benefit in Canada, and we do not in their Countries?

Thirty years ago +, when all Head Offices started leaving the Province of Qc we saw what happened. This was an internal problem, and we lost by doing so.

I have listened to S. Dion, and he is interested in promoting his three pillar approach, and if we listen to the US, Uk, France, and other Democratic Countries, there are world issues that must be addressed, and not just playing coy politics to gain a Country's leadership.
If we want to step up to the plate, and keep our place in the markets of the world, we had better align ourselves with those who can get us there!

I do not care for the Greens - The Evil Empire (China/Hong Kong) up to old tricks again, another recall of toys wednesday and the Red Army, The Evil Empire Defender into dirty tricks at the Pentagon. Why do even allow Chinese into Canada in the first place, Get rid of their Embassy and Consult Offices across the country we do not need them period, I spoke a Chinese woman from outside Shanghai the other day at my daughter's school, she did not know China was a Communist country, Boy are these people brain washed and loyal to The Evil Empire motherland. Get the Spies out now, Call an Election get rid of Dion once and for all (Liberals)

Well there be an Election after Oct 16,2007 I say the odds are 8 to 1 there will be, What about you Blossom the Premier Appointed in Quebec.

Stepping right along with the topics of the day, while Nik is busy at the Sun. I never liked Trudeau, Mulroney,Chretien and now Dion. I wonder why, because there is always problems when you have Prime Ministers from the Province of Quebec, lets review, APEC in Vanouver. HRDC, Gun Registry, Mismanagement and Corruption, Incompetant Civil Servants hired. Did I miss anything Blossom! It is never ending with these guys get to power from that dysfunctional Province, and Bombardier gets more hand out than any Corporation in Canada, next time you need money go to the Power Corporation and get it from Chretien's relatives, that brought the Evil Empire (Chins/Hong Kong) to Canada

If the election had taken place in the Spring or early Summer then I would have agreed that the Green party stood to make considerable ground. This may even be the case if there is an election this Fall, except, perhaps to a lesser extent.

However, I think that Harper is working hard to diffuse this as a potentially explosive issue for them as can be seen from the recent APEC Summit. You may not agree that the ’aspirational goal’ of “slowing, stopping and eventually reversing” greenhouse gas emissions contains anything concrete. But, as far as Harper is concerned it may very well help in “slowing, stopping and eventually reversing” public opinion of his efforts on global warming.

I think the issue in the next election will be, if Harper has any say in defining it, not what is being promised in this area but leadership in this area. He will point to the APEC summit as an example of his ability to “get things done”, on a global basis. This, of course will be in conjunction with a chorus of Dion and the Liberals having not done anything ... . He will attempt to connect the Green Party with the Liberals and given that the Green Party on other issues may be closer to the Conservatives than the Liberals, actually capture votes that would have otherwise gone to the Greens.

In the Spring I suggested that Dion should announced right at the beginning of an election campaign that if the Liberals were to form the next government he would ask Ms. May to be Minister of Environment (March 25, 2007, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpAXoguZ8JY; and, April 17, 2007, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNjBscet900). I still think this is the right thing to do and would help the Green’s fortunes as well as the Liberals of course. All things considered I think that would be a good thing.

The longer we wait for an election the better chance he has of “slowing, stopping and eventually reversing” public opinion of his efforts on global warming and thus of reducing the Green`s fortunes at the polls.

Lloyd MacIlquham

Nik, I love you, but I have to disagree with you. Credibility, not the environment, will be THE issue when we return to the polls, federally. Both Dion and May - when she comes more squarely into the spotlight - will have real problems vis-a-vis credibility. Given the Grits' own track record - on Kyoto - and Dion's about-face on the efficacy of a carbon tax, no one who doesn't already lean towards the Liberals will buy what he's selling.

As for Ms. May, I simply cannot believe that many Canadians will like what they see when they finally take a long, hard look at her. The folks on the left who love her because of her environmental efforts in the past, and her green stance today, will - like Judy Rebick - back far away from her when they realize just how conservative she is socially. Her embrace of her religion, and her questioning of abortion will cost her all the points she earned for her environmental position. Social conservatives won't embrace her or her party - they consider Greens watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside).

Nik, we both know no one will believe Stephen Harper is any more green than Dion, and I cannot believe that he will pretend to be. Like Mulroney in 1988 - on Free Trade - Harper will place himself in opposition to all the other parties, who will split the Green vote. He'll insist that a vote for the Grits, Greens or NDP (or the Bloc in Quebec) is a vote for job losses and higher taxes. He'll say that with a Tory government, Canadians will have an environmental effort which won't bankrupt the country.

[updated Thu Jun 26 21:36:41 EDT 2008]