this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
60 points (95.5% liked)

Canada

11715 readers
571 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
otter@piefed.ca
mp3@piefed.ca
60
NDP MP Lori Idlout crossing floor to Liberals (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 2 days ago by sbv@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

lol

top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I'm broadly of the view that MPs really should seek to represent their electorate first, so, if she believes this is the best way to represent her electorate and that's her motivation, fine. But, it's not great for the health of Canadian democracy overall to move closer to a two-party system.

I would really like to see the NDP have a federal resurgence. It's going to have to come through new messaging that can cut through and connect with voters. It will be tough to make that happen while fear of the US is the main emotional driver pushing non-Maple-MAGA Canadians to huddle together under the banner of the Liberals. That could well take years, but on the other side of it there will be opportunity if the groundwork is done right while the party is on the outside.

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Her 38,000 people are served by doing what they voted for. They clearly wanted a balance of power for the liberals otherwise they would have voted liberal.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A lot of Canadians are feeling cost of living woes. I think that's how the Conservatives did so well last election. It's mind boggling that the NDP hasn't been able to represent that to the electorate and purpose solutions that catch voters attention - but I guess that tells us something about the NDP.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I agree. The NDP has been missing the mark on that. Not to say it hasn't been part of the messaging from their MPs, but it really hasn't been something cohesive and credible. Once the party has a new leader, they've really got to get their strategy pinned down for how to reconnect with the people and they've gotta go after it with a cohesive voice so they're a party voters will trust and want to vote for when the time comes.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 1 points 1 day ago

I think we honestly need to push for a more representative voting method, so the people are better represented. I'm not sure how we get there, but I think it's better for the majority than collapsing into two parties, which FPTP tends to do.

[–] CurbCuts@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

With Carney pulling the Liberal party further right and PP steering the Conservative party off a cliff it makes sence for some conservatives to cross. But with no Liberas moving to NDP, Green, or Bloc and now an NDP leaving it feels shity. I heard the she did it to get more support for indigenous issues but what guarantees would this afford her?Β 

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

if she believes this is the best way to represent her electorate and that’s her motivation, fine

I'd have liked to see a town hall meeting or other community consultation at the very least. Absent that, I can't help but think it's motivated by self-interest

[–] yardy_sardley@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

*Supports Avi Lewis*

*Joins Liberals*

At least with the Conservative floor crossers, you can see how they would get the idea of Carney maybe helping advance their ultimate goals. But this does not make sense to me. The way Carney is governing is pretty much at odds with Avi Lewis-type policy.

[–] bayleaf@piefed.ca 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My thoughts exactly. Apparently she had just endorsed Avi Lewis last week. Unless I missed a major development in the last week, it seems this decision wasn't based on policy. Either that or her support for Avi Lewis wasn't genuine.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Being the one crucial vote is a hell of a lot of leverage.

You can't apply it all the time but still, that's a hell of a lot of power. And if anyone has the mandate to push a handful of things farther to the left, it'd the NDP convert.

(I'm assuming the two basically safe Liberal seats fall Liberal and PQ wins Terebonne (sp?))

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Okay, but this comes with multiple issues:

With the federal Liberals moving to the right of where Justin Trudeau's Liberals were, and the increasingly right-wing rhetoric of the Conservatives with the party trying to appease and imitate Republicans down South, the erosion of the NDP like this further consolidates the system to a two-party one similar to that in the US.

In the federal Democratic Party down in the US you have a progressive wing of the democrats. How much have they been able to accomplish within the party? How much have they been able to accomplish in the party since Republicans took control of the White House, House, and Senate?

Idlout crossing the floor to the Liberals accomplishes nothing other than empower the Liberals and a two-party system in Canada. The Liberals have some more progressive people such as Erskine-Smith, but within the party what has been accomplished to move the Liberals to the left with him around?

You can move the Liberals left by opposing them, especially working with the Bloc Quebecois, Elizabeth May, and maybe Erskine-Smith on the rare occasion. Hell, on some issues, the NDP can likely work with the Conservatives, such as reforming the Labour Market Impact Assessment.

Working with the Liberals simply gives voters the impression that Carney's policies and issues "can't be that bad" because someone crossed the floor from the NDP. It also gives Carney the ability to apply direct pressure on her to fall in line.

The NDP was able to get dental care for low-income Canadians through outside pressure under Singh for all his flaws. There is no need to apply pressure from within the party when doing so from outside has proven to be effective and comes with less vulnerabilities.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca -5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the erosion of the NDP like this

The erosion was the vote collapse, not this.

In the federal Democratic Party down in the US you have a progressive wing of the democrats. How much have they been able to accomplish within the party?

Out of power? Fuck all. You might as well as what the harder right part of Poilievre's flank has accomplished.

Before that? Basically universal healthcare.

You can move the Liberals left by opposing them

And risk everything against an ascendant populist right? This feels close to "I'm fine no matter how the election goes, fuck the vulnerable and others who have to deal with the generational consequences, we need to say and a message!"

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Progressive Democrats at no point accomplished universal health care. Obamacare was simply a "meet-in-the-middle" situation if you could call it that, which has slowly been dismantled by Trump's Republicans. If Biden's Democrats had some progressive fight rather than being overrun by right-wing corporate Democrats and managed to pass actual universal health care, Trump would have never had a second term, full stop.

You fight an ascendant populist right not by merging with people who have also moved right, but by standing your ground in your values. Saying that the NDP is sticking a middle finger to the vulnerable is completely rich seeing how vulnerable indigenous populations already are only to have a Carney government stick the middle finger to them by saying "yeah, once again we'll fail to address the systemic issues that face you, and on top of that, we'll bypass your treaty rights to do what we want".

The Carney government has made healthcare vulnerable by not fighting the Alberta government when it comes to violating the Canada Health Act, has made union workers vulnerable by forcing arbitration on flight attendants striking against unpaid overtime, made Canadians as a whole vulnerable to U.S. foreign policy by falling in line with the U.S. with the official statement on the Iran war rather than following through with calling out violations of international law as the prime minister highlighted in his own speech at Davos, made the working class as a whole vulnerable by appointing a "Minister of AI" and being the first prime minister in over a century to not appoint a dedicated Minister of Labour, the list goes on.

The NDP has been vocal and unwavering in all of these things. To claim that supporting the NDP and being against a floor crossing to the party that has done all the above somehow sticks a middle finger to the vulnerable is a flat out lie.

[–] Blisterexe@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Agree, but I want to note that PQ is a provincial party, I think you're thinking of BQ.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 2 points 1 day ago

You are 100% correct!

[–] a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Being the one crucial vote is a hell of a lot of leverage.

Yeah, by being the tiebreakers the NDP was in a position of power. But not anymore, with this floor crossing. So I don’t understand this. The NDP could have still helped Carney out where they felt it appropriate

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 0 points 1 day ago

Voters would not forgive a party, especially on the Left flank for putting us in an election right now, especially when the Conservatives look strong.

But a member of the Liberal party...

[–] MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

In both cases she's supporting the person with the most power

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago

Clearly, Carney is basically the NDP.

Okay, I'm joking. But IIRC that was the reaction with the Conservative floor crossers. The reaction to this one seems like barely contained salt.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd usually stick a quote from the article in the body, but really, there's nothing to say.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The prime minister now needs two more Liberal MPs to reach 172 seats, which would give him a thin majority in the House of Commons.Β 

There are three upcoming byelections that could get Carney to that spot β€” depending on what voters decide.

This would have been my pick of the lot.

[–] Blisterexe@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Two of those seats were liberal, and the liberals are now polling ahead of where they were in election season. So a majority is functionally guaranteed.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

I try not to think of guarantees in politics, especially these days, but yes there’s a high likelihood of a majority.

[–] Godort@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago (4 children)

As disappointed as I am to see what little remains of the NDP further erode towards a 2 party system, I completely understand why she would switch.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Rebuilding the NDP starts with setting direction via the leadership election. I think both frontrunners offer visions that would prove popular with a significant portion of Canadians. For now it's Carney's vision that dominates the conversation and it's proving popular in the absence of a better one, while keeping whatever the fuck PP's selling on the shelf.

[–] MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Why do say that? Did they Jennica Atwin her?

[–] SamuelRJankis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Given the history of people who cross getting relected I wouldn't be surprised if some of those Conservatives show up on the board of companies associated to Carney.

For Idlout her unique geographic(Nunavut) position and with the current Artic/Military spending she could see some seat winning funds going to her riding.

And this is also proves my response a few days ago regarding the NDP.

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Holy cow the debate was brutal. Its like 5 of the worst candidates they could find. I was actually excited when Jagmeet stepped down, now I feel like nobody with a brain wants to join them.

[–] a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

The French debate was even worse, apparently

[–] Mavvik@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What sort of candidate were you hoping for?

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

A pro labor type with a brain, who doesn't resort to low brow talking points like government run grocery stores and greedflation. I liked Mulcair a lot, though mainly after he left politics, back when elbowgate was the dumbest things the NDP said.

[–] Mavvik@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

What was it about Mulcair that you like? He always seemed very Liberal to me and never proposed policy that seemed very pro labour (e.g. balance the budget in one year). I can tell you aren't a fan of Avi Lewis, but all the candidates are more pro labour than Mulcair and IMO have proposed better policy than him.

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Unbelievable.

Yeah, the prime minister who tried pushing a bill that would bypass treaty rights for the sake of "nation-building" projects is the right person to side with for the benefit of a territory comprised mainly of indigenous people.

Any respect I've had for her is gone, the logic is lacking, and all she's done with this is act as a pawn for Liberals to try to appear favourable to indigenous people or have the veneer of being such despite their anti-indigenous policies.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Meh, disappointing.

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If I voted for such a floor-crosser, I'd feel so betrayed

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I understand the feeling. It's a feature of our system, so it's legit, but I'd still be grumpy.

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago

Legal, yes. Ethical?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is bullshit. If an MP wants to switch parties, they should hold a by-election.

What pork is Carney giving her? Senate appointment?

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Why? Parties aren't part of our system.

They won to be an MP, being in a club doesn't change that.

[–] numeral_paver555@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago

Apparently most voters didn't vote for the sake of the person. Half of the voters don't even know the name of the local candidate: https://narrativeresearch.ca/only-half-of-canadians-know-the-names-of-the-candidates-in-their-riding-and-voting-is-generally-based-on-loyalty-to-a-party-or-topical-policies-and-issues/

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

NICE! Nearly a slam dunk for a majority now

[–] MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just depends on the outcome of the byelections

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Two are needed, two are safe seats, the Liberals have a double digit poll lead.