I keep on hearing from the Liberals and the media that the NDP and Conservatives have struck a deal on environmental legislation.
The fact is, however, that I see nary a trace of any such deal. Let's look at the facts the Globe and Mail article gives:
The first fact that they give is that "..both [the NDP and Conservatives] frequently accused the Liberals of delaying tactics." I don't see how this fact adds up to some kind of deal. It's well known that the Liberals don't want to pass any environmental legislation so that they can use the issue in the election (yes, the environment can wait for a silly election, in their view). How does both parties pointing this out mean a deal?
The second fact that is given is that NDP environment critic Nathan Cullen's "...aides clearly have a relationship with Mr. Baird's aides." Well, if you are trying to get a piece of legislation passed and you don't have a majority, does it not make sense to be working with other parties? It's called Minority Parliament, people!
The Globe article mentions timelines as well. Funny thing is, they don't mention that Cullen's motion to try to have the Clean Air Act finished as soon as possible was defeated 11 to 1. Wow, it really sounds like the NDP and Conservatives are really in cahoots here.
So, I don't see a deal here just yet. Maybe there may be a deal, but that deal would have to meet the NDP demands. Layton and the NDP are not stupid enough to make a sub-par deal, not in this political climate. And considering that the NDP has voted against the Conservatives in every non-confidence motion, I don't see the NDP all of a sudden cozying up to the Conservatives.
But it is a minority parliament. Others can cut deals. For instance, the Bloc is sagging in the polls as of late and may want to neutralize the environment issue so that the other parties would not have a desire to have an election over it...