This scenario is up there with the five-way tie that the National League was facing less than a month ago — possible, but very unlikely.
The Liberals are dealing with the Throne Speech by proposing an amendment that the NDP cannot vote for — their Kyoto amendment is paired with a provision about the Afghanistan mission ending in 2009. In the past, Layton’s people have sided with the government on the basis that a withdrawal in 2009 isn’t good enough — he wants the troops home now, and won’t vote for half-measures.
Now, if Jack Layton were crafty and the Liberal whip were asleep at the switch, he could do this:
Say nothing. Wait for the amendment to come up for a vote. (Tomorrow?) Watch the Liberals and the Bloc vote for it. Watch the government rise to oppose it.
Then… do nothing. Watch the amendment pass, and the government fall.
Presto, instant election.
Instant commentary on the possibility, Mastercard style:
Forcing an election the public doesn’t want: a few seats.
Accidentally forcing an election you don’t want: priceless.
Other commentary here.
***
But I don’t think that Jack Layton is that devious.
9 responses so far ↓
Idealistic Pragmatist // October 17, 2007 at 6:58 pm
You could email him and see what he thinks. *grin*
Bleatmop // October 17, 2007 at 7:37 pm
“In the past, Layton’s people have sided with the government on the basis that a withdrawal in 2009 isn’t good enough”
I’m confused by this? Don’t you mean sided with the Liberals, not sided with the Government?
Ben // October 17, 2007 at 7:46 pm
No, I don’t — that’s what makes it so interesting.
The Liberals introduced a resolution stipulating that the Kandahar mission must end in 2009, and the NDP teamed up with the government to defeat it.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=9a0fa4e6-85bb-4664-811b-1370dc9f3deb&k=26370
Idealistic Pragmatist // October 17, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Okay, “teamed up” is a bit much, don’t you think? Or are you practicing your Liberal talking points? :-)
Ben // October 17, 2007 at 9:19 pm
“Voted together”, if you wish, then.
Mind you, it was the Liberals trying to do to the Dippers as Harper so often has done to them.
As I said above, though, if Layton really wanted to put the screws to them, he knows what he could do…
Update: Main point stands — the Liberals are counting on the NDP to vote the same way again.
Scott’s DiaTribes » Blog Archive » The backdoor election? // October 17, 2007 at 9:56 pm
[...] and the NDP really really want an election over this Throne Speech, the way to do so is spelled out here. If he were to do this (which I agree with the poster probably wouldn’t happen), it would [...]
burlivespipe // October 17, 2007 at 11:14 pm
However, they’d have to oppose Dion’s point on Kyoto… Sounds like a mexican standoff with voters left playing musical chairs with no seats that match.
Double-dare Jack to do it and we’ll see you on the hustings.
Ben // October 17, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Hey, I’m a Tory who wanted to see a 2007 election…
Ryan // October 18, 2007 at 2:22 am
Yeah, it’s funny, isn’t it? I’ll bet the liberals will spin it as the NDP not supporting Kyoto if they vote against the amendment, too.
Leave a Comment