News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.6K     0 
B

blixa442

Guest
I wonder what Paul Martin will make of this endorsement.


Harper a 'separatist,' Hargrove charges
Jan. 18, 2006. 09:44 AM
CANADIAN PRESS


STRATHROY, Ont. - Labour leader Buzz Hargrove says Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's attitude toward the provinces is essentially a separatist approach.

"If you devolve all the powers to the provinces, what do you have left? His view of the country is a separatist view," Hargrove said as he campaigned alongside Paul Martin.

He said Quebec voters should choose the Bloc Quebecois over the Conservatives.

"Anything to stop the Tories."

The Tories are showing unexpected strength in Quebec in recent polls.

Hargrove, head of the Canadian Auto Workers union, has endorsed the Liberals, a switch from the traditional union support for the NDP.

He said he's not happy with the way NDP Leader Jack Layton has run his campaign.

"Jack has made a couple of decisions in this campaign that didn't sit with me very well but he has a right to do that. He's the leader of the party," Hargrove said.

He said Layton has spent too much time criticizing Martin's government, "as if undermining Liberals was going to strengthen the NDP."

"I think that was a short-term view of the values of Canada."

Hargrove was with Martin in a southwestern Ontario restaurant as the Liberal leader wooed NDP votes.

With polls suggesting a Tory lead just days before Monday's election, Martin said it's time for progressive voters to unite to stop the Tories.

He said Harper's agenda is out of step with Canadian values.
 
Since he's already endorsed the NDP is some areas of the country and the Liberals in others and now the Bloc.... maybe next week it'll be the conservatives just to confuse everybody even more.
 
If Buzz Lightyear is now working directly for Martin, and Martin realizes he's toast in Quebec, it makes sense for Buzz to try and rally the union vote behind the Bloc in order to block the Tories and help his new master.
 
Buzz is upset that Layton is trying to move the NDP more to the centre and breaking ranks with the parties' traditional strong ties to organized labour - and thus is punishing them with these criticisms of Layton and the NDP. (Ironically he appears to also be punishing the Liberals with his continued moronic comments but that is another matter.) I mean who do you think is really more politically aligned with him? Buzz was on CBC the other morning stumping to raise corporate taxes in order to increase spending. Consider whose platform that is more similar to (how many times during the last speech did Layton break out the anti-capitalist populism about handouts to the banks and oil companies). The NDP will always be the most Labour oriented party, but Buzz wants to keep them in his pocket. To Jack’s credit I think he sees that some kind of second coming of Tony Blair/Lorne Calvert (sask NDP are more center left and not so overtly pro-union, unlike the national and BC parties) is the only way the NDP would ever wield any real power – that is the trouble with being on the fringe, in that by the time you reform yourself enough to have any elected power you no longer stand for any the core ideas you started with (see the old Alliance).
In general, I find it quite disconcerting that the head of an unelected (from a non CAW perspective anyway) organization is able to influence our politics as much as he does. He was at the NDP "special budget" meeting when the NDP decided to support he liberals in a coalition-lite and many union members are taking an active role in campaigns of specific candidates (ie Peggy Nash in my riding). It would seem unfathomable if Gord Nixon of the Royal Bank was out telling us what to think and who to vote for and then even sending out bank tellers to put up signs for candidates. Why is organized labour any different? They are entitled to their opinion, but given their v. narrow focus (improve work/life of members) why do we afford them this much airspace on the decision making of the entire country?
 
I'm all for tactical voting, but seeing an NDPer endorsing Liberals and then telling people to vote BQ is pretty funny.
 
Same story...different source. Somewhat different persepctive.

www.cbc.ca/story/canadavo...atist.html

Bloc opposition better than Tory government: Hargrove
Last Updated Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:33:39 EST
CBC News
The Conservative leader is essentially a separatist and Quebecers ought to vote for the Bloc because anything is better than a Tory government, labour leader Buzz Hargrove said on Wednesday.

Hargrove, president of the Canadian Auto Workers, made the comments at a campaign stop in Strathroy, Ont., where he was endorsing Liberal Leader Paul Martin.

But while speaking to reporters after Martin's speech, Hargrove said having a strong Bloc Québécois caucus in opposition would be better for national unity than a Conservative caucus in power.

"If you devolve all the powers to the provinces, what do you have left?" Hargrove said.

Stephen Harper's "view of the country is a separatist view," he added.

Harper and the Conservatives have been surging in polls taken in Quebec, and Hargrove urged voters there to "stop Stephen Harper in any way they can."

Hargrove has broken with traditional union ranks by endorsing the Liberals in ridings where the New Democrats have no chance of winning.

Harper said Hargrove's comments were "shocking," and suggested Martin distance himself from them.

"I don't think any federalist leader should be urging people to vote for the Bloc," Harper said, while in Toronto.

Hargrove also took a swipe at NDP Leader Jack Layton, saying he has spent too much of his campaign time going after the Liberals rather than the Conservatives, "as if undermining Liberals was going to strengthen the NDP."

Layton, in Halifax, said Hargrove is out of touch with the vast majority of Canadians.

But while speaking to reporters after Martin's speech, Hargrove said having a strong Bloc Québécois caucus in opposition would be better for national unity than a Conservative caucus in power.

"If you devolve all the powers to the provinces, what do you have left?" Hargrove said.
Click to expand...

It might have been said out of emotion and trying to offer up some interesting rhetoric for the campaign, but there is almost a certain amount of truth to that. What would happen if Canada where to find itself in a situation where equalization payments were no longer being payed out and the gaps being regional well being further increased? Part of the philosophy behind Canada is that are people in all regions should have the same quality of life. I will be the first to say that money is not the deffinitive factor in determining quality of life, but how will the country as a whole fair if Alberta finds itself topping the ranks a wealthy oil province, while others languish behind and without the benefit of a strong federal government?

It is rather speculative (so is the nature of politics though), yet there is a bit of irony in that in this election a strong Bloc turnout could actually benefit natonal unity.
 
Liberals scramble after Hargrove calls Harper separatist
Martin forced to issue statement praising Tory leader's patriotism
Jan. 18, 2006. 12:55 PM
CANADIAN PRESS


LONDON, Ont. — The Liberals are in full damage control this afternoon after a high-profile campaign endorsement by the head of Canada’s largest private-sector labour union turned disastrous.
Canadian Auto Workers president Buzz Hargrove used a campaign stop in nearby Strathroy to call Conservative Leader Stephen Harper a separatist whose Alberta-born political principles place him outside mainstream Canadian values.

He seemed to agree with questioners that Quebecers vote for the Bloc Quebecois over the Conservatives.

Prime Minister Paul Martin issued a retraction on Hargrove’s behalf as soon as the comments hit the news wires, and was forced to praise Harper’s patriotism in an effort to quell the controversy.

“I have large differences with Stephen Harper but I have never doubted his patriotism,†Martin said at a news conference in London.

As for Alberta, the prime minister said “the values that we hold in this country go from coast to coast.â€

“The fact is, there are differences of opinion in this country. They don’t exist only in one province. They exist in other provinces as well.â€

Hargrove later issued a clarification, but only of his statements regarding Harper and Quebec.

Hargrove’s statement said he recognized Harper is a federalist, but said that the Tory leader’s idea of devolving power to the provinces would harm the federation.

Hargrove was much more blunt speaking to reporters in Strathroy.

“If you devolve all the powers to the provinces, what do you have left?†he said. “His view of the country is a separatist view.â€

Under repeated questioning from reporters about whether Quebecers should vote for the separatist Bloc Quebecois rather than a Conservative, Hargrove appeared to support the Bloc.

“I would urge them to stop Harper in any way they can,†he said of Quebec voters.

His comments on Alberta were even more provocative.

“Mr. Harper doesn’t have a sense of Canada and its communities,†the union leader said.

“His sense is about Alberta. The wealth of Alberta everybody recognizes is much greater than it is anywhere in Canada. Those principles that he is brought up with and believes in coming out of there don’t sit well with the rest of Canada.â€

In Toronto, Harper called Hargrove’s comments “shocking.â€

“Mr. Hargrove, who is one of Mr. Martin’s key campaign supporters, is now urging people to vote for the Bloc and I wonder what Mr. Martin thinks of that,†Harper said.

“I think Mr. Martin should distance himself from Mr. Hargrove’s comments. I don’t think any federalist leader should be urging people to vote for the Bloc.â€

Harper said Hargrove’s comments show a partisanship that puts the interests of the Liberals above those of the country.

Hargrove first began generating campaign headlines last month when, despite the long-held alliance between the labour movement and the left-wing New Democrats, he made a show of supporting Martin’s Liberals.

His diatribe this morning extended to NDP Leader Jack Layton, who he criticized for spending too much time attacking Martin’s government, “as if undermining Liberals was going to strengthen the NDP.â€

“I think that was a short-term view of the values of Canada.â€

Layton, campaigning in Halifax, responded by suggesting Hargrove is out of touch with the vast majority of Canadians.

For several days, Martin — his campaign badly lagging behind the Conservatives, polls suggest — has been aggressively attacking Layton in an attempt to woo or frighten NDP voters into the Liberal fold.

Even after Hargrove’s comments, Martin was still sticking with the controversial union leader.

“Buzz Hargrove plays a very important role in this country,†Martin told reporters.

“When Buzz Hargrove comes here with some of his other union leaders and essentially says to the pogressive forces — to NDP voters — . . . `I believe that all of these (Liberal) people should be elected,’ that is a very powerful statement.â€
 
Meh, its a non issue really for the Liberals. Another good example of how this campaign has really failed to focus on issues, policy and how they affect people and instead resort to a rather sad display or politiking and rhetoric. Martin was screwed no matter what he said (although it would have been great to watch this election degrade even more had Martin also called Harper a seperatist).
 
I disagree Antiloop. What this pathetic story demonstrates, once again, is that Martin will ally with anyone (even well known loose cannons like Buzz), will say anything, will adopt any pet project and agenda, in order to keep his slippery grasp on power. When he loses, it will be because he's failed to show any leadership or vision. After 17 months of a Martin gov't and 6 weeks of a campaign, do any of us know what Martin's priorities are if he's re-elected? I don't.
 
Ill agree that Martin ran a crappy campaign and that the lose will come as a result of his own faults. But I fail to see how Martins lack of leadership is any less pathetic than Harper offering up all these tax cuts and tax credits and senate reform and provincial autonomy and lots of other ideas without noting the underlying fact that many of these agendas are hold overs from Reform/Alliance days and that the biggest beneficiary of all his promise will be the wealthy or westerners.

Martin is lame. Harper is pro-westerner with little interest in the rest of Canada. Layton is silly looking. And Duceppe is a seperatist who hates the rest of Canada. It all points to what I said before that this is a rather good example of how shallow the discourse has been throughout the entire campaign by all parties. A person raised a question that was worth serious discussion and consideration. Yet within hours it has turned into a school yard pissing contest devoid of any intelligent conversation. Thats the real pathetic part about this election.
 
Why does Buzz Lightgrove doubt that undermining the Liberals will strengthen the NDP? Given that the centre ground vote-trading that always decides elections ( in this case Liberal voters drifting to the Conservatives ) has been going on for the past 3 weeks, and has perhaps run its course, it makes sense for the NDP to now make a direct appeal to remaining Liberals to switch to them. The corpse is ripe for picking over.
 
Antiloop, I'm surprised that you have a problem with Harper's plans for greater provincial autonomy. You are a Bloc supporter, aren't you? Maybe only outright succession would suffice?
 
I think Buzz is ever-more off his rocker now that he realizes his retirement years as "Senator Buzz" are looking less likely by the day.

The Liberal coffin is already shut. This shouldn't affect things too much. However, I still think that Ontario will surprise people a bit on election night. Liberal support won't collapse in this province and may be stronger than pollsters are currently predicting. Still, it won't be enough to prevent a P.M. Harper.

Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with labour unions endorsing candidates. Board of trade's do, some companies do, think-tanks do, newspapers do, conference boards do, lobby organizations do, etc. The membership can obviously vote for who they want, but an organization stating who they feel is "best for their membership" seems completely legit to me.
 
I'm surprised that you have a problem with Harper's plans for greater provincial autonomy. You are a Bloc supporter, aren't you? Maybe only outright succession would suffice?
Click to expand...

The issue I have with Harpers plan for autonomy is that I havent actually seen much of plan. There has been lots of talk about the idea of autonomy and talk about fiscal imbalances but that is really about all. Does it mean simply reducing the amount of money rich provinces pay into equalization payments? Or does it mean more? There have no specifics by which to judge the plan which is my first issue.

The second is that Harper has in the past stated that the idea of Unilingual regions in Canada may be a better idea than keeping Billingualism. Its not that I would necessarily outright dismiss the idea, but when you throw in his comments about wanting to give Quebec a seperate voice in international affairs.

If you start to add all of these initiatives up, how is his position much different than the demands the Bloc and seperatists have been trying to raise? And how does this promote Canadian unity when his positions effectively weaken the strength of the federation? And instead of saying he is for a united Canada and talking about getting Quebec to sign the Charter of Rights, why not say what your plan will ultimately lead too? And again, I would question whether any of these proposals will actually benefit Quebec at all and if pandering to long standing issues in the province is not just a good way to mask what often seems to be a very pro-west platform and party.

I dont have a problem with the idea of autonomy in principle. I do have a problem when it is not discussed in a fully open and honest way.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top