How the NDP could win the next Canadian federal election

Conservative, Liberal, and Bloc support for North American Union Agenda provides NDP grassroots activists with Golden opportunity

by Janet Smith

	Stephen Lewis is the best hope to defeat the spectre of a U.S. Bush administration sought take over of Canada under the elite-driven "NAU" scheme, and to rejuvenate Canada as a socially inspired society, inspired by the New Democratic Party's vital founding values. .

It seems far fetched for now anyways, but with the right moves, the New Democratic Party(NDP) could win the next federal election. These right moves consist of NDP grassroots activists that support the legacy of Tommy Douglas, and to rally against the North American Union (NAU) agenda.

You might ask, "WHAT?" is the NAU as an NDPer or Canadian in general The article "Canada's political parties stake their position on North American Union" LINK, in association with other research from nationalists like Mel Hurtig, and groups from Vive Le Canada and the Council of Canadians, confirms that parliamentary political party leadership, inclusive of Jack Layton's Office, already KNOWS about the NAU.

Mr. Layton could easily ensure victory in the next election by formally presenting in the House of Commons, emphatic statements which point out the NAU as a threat to our very Canadian nationhood, to our sense freedom and independence as Canadians, who aim to pursue our national destiny.

Tommy Douglas, a principal founder of the NDP back in 1961, and voted as the "Greatest Canadian" in a CBC poll, championed the cause of national sovereignty in the early 1970's, along with David Lewis, (the father of Stephen Lewis), in the formation of the Committee for an Independent Canada (CIC). The objective of this Committee was to champion an "independent socialist Canada", from the spectre of assimilation into then President Richard Nixon's right wing America.

However, having won a leadership confidence vote in fall 2006, Mr. Layton has instead, relegated the NDP into fighting such topic areas as 'bank fees'. That is an important area, but it pales in importance when compared to the whole contemplated destruction of Canada, along with all the social policy advancements which Tommy Douglas, and other NDP founders sought to champion. These areas include the defence of the one-tier universal public healthcare systems from effective destruction by two-tiered privatization incursions; labour rights and union advancements which are substantively higher in Canada, than in the U.S.; and many other social policy areas.

Jack Layton and the current NDP leadership appears to colluding with the anti-labour and overall reactionary agenda of the NAU.

The result is that instead of NDP leadership taking advantage of drawing attention to the sell out of Canada under elite collusion among the Harper Conservatives, Dion Liberals, and the Bloc, NDP leadership under Mr. Jack Layton is staying silent. In the process, NDP is now fighting for its political survival as the recognized socially progressive "left wing" political party alternative in Canada, in the face of the surging Green Party of Canada (GPC). Current opinion polls with relatively low margins of error suggest that the NDP is now practically tied with the Green Party of Canada.

Now, why would the NDP leadership choose to not make great national political party gains by renouncing the NAU, by exposing this far-right Agenda, and instead choose a political course that results in prospective political demise, relative to the GPC? It is apparent that reliable sources having confirmed the NDP's leadership awareness of the NAU, have apparently chosen to take the same apparent path, as did Mr. Broadbent in the late 1980's.

	Ed Broadbent, former leader of the NDP. .

Indeed, the NDP under Ed Broadbent in the late 1980's enjoyed 50% support in opinion polls. This was a time in which Mr. Broadbent was viewed by Canadians to have impeccable integrity, compared then to Progressive Conservative Party leader and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, and then Liberal leader John Turner. But just when the NDP was on their way to forming a government, or at least becoming the Official Opposition, something politically bizarre happened. Ed Broadbent took a patronage position that Prime Minister Mulroney offered him.

Mr. Broadbent had previously criticized the Mulroney government for making such offerings to others, in his patronage riddled corrupt government. The NDP has been in decline, since Ed Broadbent essentially allowed himself to be "bought out", by the very cynical political interests he had criticized.

In other words, it appears that history is repeating itself in today's NDP. If NDP leadership knows about the NAU, and have sought NOT to expose the NAU agenda, in a matter which would propel the NDP to a prospective majority government -- an opportunity that had presented itself to the NDP once before in the late 1980's -- then that leadership has chosen to once again to sell out, to possible personal materialistic ambitions.

CNN's Lou Dobbs confirms the NAU agenda, was signed by Paul Martin's Liberal government without any national debate either in Canada or the United States. The Paul Martin government by supporting the NAU in collaboration with U.S. President George W. Bush, endorsed the take-over of Canada, under the guise of the fighting the so-called "War on Terror".

The NAU agenda is being launched under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) Agreement originally endorsed by the Paul Martin Liberal government, in combination with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). The SPP-NAU is now further endorsed politically by the Stephen Harper Conservative minority government, and the Bloc Québécois, that is linked to Quebec francophone Big Business interests that support their campaign treasury. The SPP-NAU agenda is also reportedly endorsed according to Mr. Hurtig, Vive Le Canada, the Council of Canadians and other reliable resources, by Canadian Big Business interests, through their representative elite-driven Business organizations, with their links to U.S. transnational corporate interests.

The NAU, is a project to replace the democratic "inconvenience" of the House of Commons and other parliamentary institutions, with a formally institutionalized shadow government of business and military elites. These elites are driven by their goals of creating their idealized "New World Order" driven by the priorities of the pursuit of commercial greed, irrespective of social and environmental costs, and military conquest expeditions, like the Iraq War, and in order to thereby secure more "prosperity" for elites.

To avoid facing political oblivion, grassroots NDP activists who seek to fulfill the national destiny of Canada that Tommy Douglas championed must appreciate the stark reality of their situation BEFORE the next election, and the total destruction of the vital objectives of the NDP established in 1961.

The NDP grassroots, must not allow the current NDP leadership to sacrifice NDP goals to form government, to be now destroyed once again by the recurrence of politically bizarre selfish opportunism. That is not the political legacy of Tommy Douglas, David Lewis, and others.

Grassroots NDPers must either convince the current NDP political leadership of the folly of their ways, OR they must very quickly find a rejuvenated leadership, which is loyal to the NDP grassroots and the fulfillment of the Canadian Dream. The NDP grassroots need to "seize the moment". The NDP needs a NEW course, which is inspired by the need to defeat the SPP-NAU agenda.

	Traitors among Us is a book for further reading on this subject.

The NDP needs a rejuvenated leadership that shares the unswerving integrity of Tommy Douglas who stood up to the private healthcare multinational lobbyist as Saskatchewan Premier in the 1940's. That new leadership must also have with the charisma of Bob White, the learned insights of York University's Professor James Laxer, and also the activist sensibilities of Judy Rebick, Peter Kormos and others.

Perhaps that leader could be Stephen Lewis, as a former UN Special Envoy on AIDS, who has shown the kind of passion about social awareness on issues, which is comparatively lacking by Jack Layton and his clique. A Stephen Lewis led NDP, with the backing of NDPers from Laxer to Rebick to Kormos, campaigning against the NAU agenda, would have the widespread respect and admiration of Canadians. As a result, a Stephen Lewis led NDP would have a great chance to easily defeat Mr. Harper's far right Conservatives mischievously dubbed as "Tories" (please note that Mr. Harper's U.S. annexation agenda is the exact opposite of the agenda of Canadian Tories from Sir John A. Macdonald to John Diefenbaker who championed the independence of Canada); the hypocritical Liberals, and the equally hypocritical Bloc Québécois. That type of resurgence would likely only occur if Mr. Layton chose to voluntary resign, and Mr. Lewis was "drafted" as the interim political leader, until a new NDP leadership convention.

The choice between political oblivion under an NAU appeasement strategy, and re-kindling a spirit of political integrity and activism, is up to NDP activists to make, as Canadians face the prospects of another federal election. Will the NDP learn to protect itself from being sold out as happened once before, or will their membership allow themselves to be seduced by the apparent political venality and personal ambitions of the questionable current course of today's NDP?

Prime Minister Stephen Lewis... Hmmm... Doesn't that have a great ring to it?

Make comments about this article in The Canadian Blog.