Was Mulcair ready to run for the Tories? - Macleans.ca
 

Was Mulcair ready to run for the Tories?

In reaction to a recent Maclean’s story, the NDP leader says never. A new source says he didn’t dismiss the idea.


 
New Democratic Party (NDP) candidate Thomas Mulcair greets people at a community fair while campaigning in his riding of Outremont in Montreal, September 16, 2007. Quebec voters will go to the polls in three federal by-elections on September 17. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

New Democratic Party (NDP) candidate Thomas Mulcair greets people at a community fair while campaigning in his riding of Outremont in Montreal, September 16, 2007. Quebec voters will go to the polls in three federal by-elections on September 17. (Shaun Best/Reuters)

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, speaking to reporters today in Quebec City, stressed that he had no intention of ever running for the Conservatives. He was reacting to a Maclean’s story yesterday about negotiations he had in 2007 to act as an adviser on environmental issues to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, which sources say broke down over money.

Mulcair says he was first approached by Quebec Conservative MP Lawrence Cannon to join the Conservatives, but backed out of the negotiations once the Conservative government’s unwavering opposition on issues such as the Kyoto Protocol became apparent. Reached today, Cannon says he remembers meeting with Mulcair in Quebec City. But Mulcair never shut the door on running for the Conservatives, according to Cannon.

“Clearly, Mr. Mulcair was looking for a job opportunity, and discussions focused on becoming the president of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy,” Cannon, who today serves as Canada’s ambassador to France, wrote in an email. “[Mulcair] did not dismiss the idea of running for the Conservatives, and did indeed raise the issue of the Kyoto Protocol,” Cannon wrote.

Former Harper press secretary Dimitri Soudas said he’d negotiated with Mulcair in early 2007, and Mulcair balked at the government’s $180,00-a-year salary. Mulcair, Soudas claimed, wanted $300,000. Another source close to the government confirmed Soudas’s characterization of the negotiations between Mulcair and the Conservatives.

“The person who said that [about the $300,000] never took part in the discussions,” Mulcair said today, referring to Soudas. “I never met him. Never. Those figures are pulled out of the air by someone who didn’t take part in the discussions.”

Soudas maintains he and Mulcair spoke over the phone, not in person.


 

Was Mulcair ready to run for the Tories?

  1. Why are you carrying water for the Liberal Party?

    No mention that Soudas works for the Liberals now, and that his wife is a likely Liberal candidate, a candidate being shoved down the throats of a riding by Justin Trudeau.

    • This story may or may not be true (and I personally don’t care either way), but I don’t know how anyone can cite him as a source with a straight face. He’s widely known to be a deceptive and manipulative man with a motive to assassinate Mulcair’s character.

      Do the Liberals think this is going to make left leaning people flock back to them? Everyone knows that a lot of Liberals are center-right…

      • What most of people in denial of their guy(Thom) don’t realize is that all of the progressive rights in our society were bore out of liberal governments(charter, abortion, gay rights, gay marriage, a just society, and not NDP and if you think the liberal party are a center right party, you need your head checked, the dippers are always trying to pick up the scraps the liberal party leaves around for the dippers to Mooch off of. The dippers are and have always been a fringe party of protesters, they wear anonymous masks, the same masks that were used to make their point about C-51. The Dippers were the only party protesting C-51 giving oxygen to unknown entities to attack our institutions computer data systems, it seems none of the dippers spoke up in defense of our country being attack by these band of thugs, instead, on Twitter, the dipper supporters glorified the anonymous attacks. You can be assured that the anonymous attacks had ties with the NDP party or someone in that group supports them.

        • I’m not going to bother responding to most of the nutty stuff you’ve written, but I do want to point out that I said “a lot of Liberals are center-right”. That doesn’t mean that all or even most Liberals are center-right, but that a significant portion of the party is, as are those who sometimes vote for them (i.e. blue-Liberals or red-Tories). The Liberal Party has historically been a wide-ish tent of center-left and center-right factions/members.

          One other bit of history for you is that the Liberals were not directly responsible for a lot of what you’ve credited them with, the courts were (gay marriage, abortion rights, not to mention medical marihuana, etc.). I do appreciate that they wrote the document that those victories have been based on (the Charter), but that stuff isn’t actually in the Charter or and bill passed by a Liberal government.

          All of that being said, I’m not aligned with any party, though my hatred for the CPC is unequivocal. Both the LPC and NDP have policies that I like and both of them do things that piss me off. Such is life in Canadian politics.

        • You seem to have forgotten that the Liberals were responsible for the War Measures Act in 1970, and interning Canadians (of Japanese ethnic descent) in camps during the 2nd World War.

          The Liberals also eliminated the right to property which was included in Diefenbaker’s Bill of Rights.

  2. You have not established that Mulcair was actually asked or considering running for the Conservatives.

    “[Mulcair] did not dismiss the idea of running for the Conservatives and did indeed raise the issue of the Kyoto Protocol,”

    Mulcair “not dismissing” something would also be true if he never considered or was asked to consider it in the first place. This quote establishes that Mulcair raised the issue of the Kyoto Protocol, but does not establish that he was in discussion to join the Conservatives.

    Please clarify if you have evidence regarding this matter. At the moment, you appear to be using weasel words to suggest that Mulcair was doing something (considering a run for the Cons) that you have no reliable evidence for, which is unacceptable in Canadian journalism.

  3. Well done, Martin. yellow journalism at its best.
    You forgot to ask when Tom stopped beating his wife, however!
    The Liberals and Conservatives are desperate – and will work with their corporate media for this, and probably many future, drive-by sliming of Tom and the New Democrats.

    • You were very quiet while for two years or more they were all going after Trudeau. Welcome to scrutiny.

  4. Dmitri Soudas told CBC’s The House in May of 2014 that he would “rip up” or “breach any contract” if doing so would serve the political advantage of his partner Eve Adams (recent floor-crosser to Justin Trudeau’s Liberals).

    How does someone who has boasted of breaching contractual obligations for the sake of political advantage show up as even a semi-credible source in a Maclean’s article?

    PS: Do your Liberal sources consider it a scandal that Paul Martin’s appointee to the National Roundtable on the Economy and the Environment, Glen Murray, current Ontario Liberal MPP and Cabinet Minister, advised Stephen Harper on how to reduce GHG emissions in 2006?

    • We should then take you back several years when harper was a self declared Liberal before he moved from Ontario to Alberta. You are a nutbar for posting such garbage.

      • Could you be specific about what Stephen posted that is incorrect?

      • I may have missed something, but I don’t know what taking me back to the point at which Harper allegedly switched parties as he moved westward would have to do with Maclean’s acceptance of Soudas as a semi-credible source.

  5. This is a pathetic attempt to smear Mulcair with an old story.
    Obviously the Harperites wanted him- obviously he didn’t bite.
    This is a non-issue, from a dubious source.
    You’ll have to try harder with the attacks.

  6. This story has been proven to be false…..macleans take another huge hit to what was left of their credibility. It appears Martin Patriquin cannot be trusted and his ‘sources’ are bunk.

    • Ah, that’s too bad. I rather thought it was an inadvertent comment. I rather dislike this militant partisanship thing.

      • Erm, I meant compliment, not comment.

  7. A person who just may not be utterly bound to a party line? What a horror and shock! On the other hand, they might be smearing him with the intolerable proposition that Muclair may be an open minded politican not so limited by ideological blinkers. I’m starting to like this guy even more.