Jen Gerson,
writing in The Line, says ...
-----------
The NDP understands that it can't support the Liberals now, right?
I'm starting to consider the possibility that Jagmeet Singh is bad at politics.
I found myself pondering one question after Wednesday's bombshell announcement that NDP leader Jagmeet Singh was pulling his party out of the Confidence and Supply Agreement that has kept the current government afloat since 2022.
That is: Jagmeet Singh understands that this means he cannot continue to keep the current government afloat, right?
Right?
Because his campaign-style video released on Twitter/X seemed pretty unequivocal.
He said that the NDP had "Ripped up" the supply and confidence agreement. As a swell of generic movie soundtrack music begins to play over grainy stock video, Singh declares: "Justin Trudeau has proven again and again that he will always cave to corporate greed. The Liberals have let people down. They don't deserve another chance."
All of which might give the unwitting viewer the distinct impression that Mr. Singh believes that a battle — like an electoral battle — is imminent. And that the Liberals don't deserve another chance to, say, govern the country.
Words like "ripping up" the CASA also might give Canadians the real and palpable sense that the NDP will not continue to support the government in, say, a confidence vote, which would precipitate an election call.
These would be reasonable interpretations, based on the words that came out of Jagmeet Singh's actual mouth. Because words have meaning. We live in a society, man. And the notion that collections of mouth noises can, and do, convey shared meaning among masses of people who speak the same language is, in fact, a fairly fundamental assumption of human civilization.
And yet, in the media announcement accompanying this dizzying news, Singh noted: "the NDP is ready for an election, and voting non-confidence will be on the table with each and every confidence measure." In comments to the media during a press conference on Thursday, Singh stuck to that message: we’ll consider the votes as they come, and won’t commit to anything. Not to propping Trudeau up, and not to bringing him down.
Well, sure. Okay. But. To say that voting non-confidence is "on the table" for each measure suggests that the converse can also be true: that
not voting non-confidence must also be "on the table" in each successive measure.
And then we got wind of an email circulated to NDP staff that read: "We will approach every vote on its own merit."
M’kay, wait.
Hold up.
Choosing to cast your alms on each measure on its own merit — including on confidence motions — like, ladies and gentlemen of the NDP, I regret to inform you that that is effectively the status quo. That's literally the understanding by which the current Parliament continues to abide.
Singh could always sign a supply agreement that commits to support government motions, even on a case-by-case basis, but there's nothing that binds any party to such an agreement beyond personal honour. And as we saw on Wednesday, CASA can, and always could be, ignored or disregarded by either party at any time.
The only thing the CASA is, or ever was, good for was to ensure the Liberals a stable government by securing an agreement from the NDP to vote in tandem with the Liberals on confidence motions. So if the NDP is "ripping up" a gentlemens’ agreement and yet still saying it will support confidence motions as it sees fit, well, nothing has materially changed.
Except for the fact that I'm starting to consider the possibility that Jagmeet Singh is bad at politics.
I mean, think about this.
We at
The Line have long pointed out that CASA was a bad deal for the NDP. It earned the party only a few piecemeal spending concessions like two-treatment Pharmacare and a half-baked dental program. It's the Liberals who will, and have, taken full credit for both.
Meanwhile, Singh has lost all credibility as a government critic. What blows he can level at the Liberals are fatally undermined by the fact that he's supported them for years. If the Liberals are complacent in enabling corporate greed, then Singh is demonstrably an enabler of a government that is "too weak, too selfish and too beholden to corporate interest to fight for people"?
I realize that nobody in Liberal-land is going to take this advice seriously, but I'm going to offer it anyway. On its current trajectory, Canada is heading toward a two-party system. Either the Liberals are going to eat the NDP, or the NDP is going to eat the Liberals. Until Wednesday, I put my money on the latter. Now, I'm not so sure.
If the Liberals maintain any existential instinct at all, they'd call Singh's bluff. Drop the writ on a party that's demonstrably unprepared to fight the battle it's proclaimed. Eat the left, and survive to fight on another day. The meal is right there for the taking.
Singh’s big announcement about "ripping up" CASA —
meep meep — gains him absolutely nothing. What additional leverage can he expect to acquire in a post-CASA parliament that he didn't already possess?
Perhaps Wednesday's announcement was merely a gambit to soothe internal problems, or distance himself from the Liberals. Okay, fine. This might be a viable strategy if it buys Singh a few months to trash Trudeau and raise funds off the effort while frantically trying to wash off the stinky stain of hypocrisy.
But what's going to happen when the Liberals face their next confidence motion, presumably as soon as the Conservatives can arrange one? What happens at the next one, and the next one after that?
What credibility can Singh possibly hope to maintain if he votes for the Liberals, again? How in the world is the NDP seriously going to claim to have ripped up CASA while effectively acting as if it is in a CASA? The NDP cannot credibly distance itself from the sitting government while spending the next year propping up said government again and again and again in successive confidence motions. Especially after such a brazen display of pulling out of the deal.
No. They’re going to have to pull the trigger, and soon. Obviously. Clearly.
Singh sees this.
Right?
----------
Right?
www.ctvnews.ca
