Words that need speaking:

While not completely factual there are many words here that have needed speaking by a leader of a national party for 3.5 years. I'm glad to see someone saying them!

http://www.liberal.ca/en/michael-ignatieff/speeches/16309_canadian-club-of-ottawa-canadas-place-in-a-changing-world

http://www.liberal.ca/en/michael-ignatieff/speeches/16363_speech-to-the-toronto-board-of-trade

My personal favourite line is this and I think summs it all up pretty well:

"President Obama is putting six times more per capita into clean energy and research than Stephen Harper. We’re investing less in renewables than the State of Alaska.

When it comes to clean energy, Stephen Harper isn’t just behind Barack Obama. He’s behind Sarah Palin."

Ouch... but true.

Last I leave you with one of the best speeches on climate change I've ever read and that includes the ones I've written in the past. Its Pres. Obama's address to the UN high level meeting on climate change this morning.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Stop+catastrophe+Obama+climate+change+speech/2019706/story.html

Cheers,

WHO'S COALITION?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harpers-reluctant-coalition/article1290594/

So the PM has been raging about the liberals and their 'coalition' friends ruining democracy (even though coalition governments are perfect valid under the constitution).

Regardless, as the liberals pulled their support for the tories there were assumpitons:

1) That the the government would fall because now that the liberals have changed tRack (due to failed EI consultations and generally bad government) there were no opposition parties willing to support the government. Jack and the NDP as well as to a lesser degree the Bloc have trumpeted their lack of support for the government since day one.

- In reality the NDP and the Bloc have thrown their support towards Harper's tories making it clear that their 'principled' stand against the government over the past few years was only because they were sure the liberals wouldn't cause an election. This is about as principled as Italy's switch to the alllies after they had already lost WWII. Good on ya Jack way to lead.

2) That Harper would never get into bed with any proposals from the NDP or Bloc to keep his government afloat given his poll numbers, and would make lots of noise about the spectre of a liberal/ndp/bloc coalition simliar to last year.

- In reality Ignatieff has made clear that he will not be courting another coalition and never really liked the one Dion assembled. Further, the only thing preventing an election is the cooperation between the Tories, the ndp and teh bloc. So, wait, sorry, the tories are accusing the liberals of secretly negotiating a coalition while the Conservatives and Mr. Harper are flagrantly in cahoots with the ndp and the bloc? Who's secretly developing a coaltion with "socialists and seperatists"? Not the liberals... not the greens... but yes... THE TORIES!


Sad sad sad.

HERE WE GO AGAIN... MAYBE...

The liberals have said they will no longer prop up the conservatives. We could be in our fourth election in five years (granted no one much noticed the process or results of the last one).

I'm not sure I or any other Canadian really wants another election campaign at the moment. However, Ignatieff's comments give me some hope that an election this fall might be actually fought over what type of country we want:

“Our job as liberals is to give Canadians a choice,” he [Ignatieff] said. “We can choose a small Canada – a diminished, mean add petty country. That's Stephen Harper's Canada.”

Or, he said, Liberals can choose “a big Canada” that is intelligent, environmentally conscious and worldly.

“We can do better,” he said. “We can be the smartest, healthiest, greenest, hardest-working, most open-minded country there is – but only if we choose to be.”

Now i'm not sure the current Liberal crop are the people who can build a Canada like this, but I KNOW Harper and the conservatives are not.

This might be an interesting one to watch.

Cheers,