Warren Kinsella's chat with Alfred Apps - Macleans.ca
 

Warren Kinsella’s chat with Alfred Apps


 

CBC’s Evan Solomon has just reported about Warren Kinsella having sworn an affidavit in which Kinsella says Alfred Apps, the Liberal party president, told him last month about “many conversations at a high level” between Liberals and New Democrats on the possibility of their parties merging.

As it happens, I interviewed Apps on this general subject last week and last night exchanged emails with him after CBC reported that secret merger talks have taken place between the parties. My story on Apps’s views will be published in the issue of Maclean’s that comes out on Thursday.

But I thought the main thrust of what he told me about the nature of any conversations about a merger might be useful now to those following this story. “There has often been idle banter between Libs and NDP,” Apps said in an email, ” and between Libs and Progressive Conservatives, but I have no knowledge of any serious or genuine discussions.”

He added that he has never talked about the merger concept with Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff or his staff. Of course, Apps does not say he’s never heard the unite-the-left idea kicked around. “When approached on this question informally,” he said, “I have always rejected the idea.”


 

Warren Kinsella’s chat with Alfred Apps

  1. I can't believe it's the getaway driver himself – THIS IS TOO PERFECT … I can't go on it's almost painful to watch what is happening to the Liberal Party here. I take back all the nasty insults I have given to them as they have more than enough problems of their own to have me adding fuel to any fire. Poor Iggy this is like watching a train wreck in slow motion! I never thought I would see the day! Although when I left the party I was upset with it, but not enough to watch this tragiocomedy … like some sort of weird Greek Play I half expect Iggy and Bobby R to come out tonight and wear masks with one sad face and the other angry while throwing spears at Kineslla and Alfred …

    • Every time I read one of your messages, I laugh and wonder if you touch yourself while you type out these fantasies. Especially pleased you've brought the whole Greek thing into it.

      And yes, it's exciting to me too.

      • Not sure why there is this trend on here to discredit posters who happen to criticize the liberal and/or leftist agenda.

        • You're already discrediting yourself by using scare-tactic phrases like "leftist agenda".

          • Yes, how dare I!

        • I think it has a lot to do with runon sentences. And in this particular case, he even includes punctuation, but it still reads as runon sentences. You have to admit, his writing style does have a sort of breathless excitement bordering on orgasmic.

          Of course, that's how we know that psiclone is Wayne, and we love him for it.

          • Lots of people don't write professional prose on here, yet they all don't get targeted by left-wingers on here. Like I said, it seems to be a trend. Spot someone who they see as a threat, and try to discredit them, not their views.

          • Jenn – still think the Liberals are one big happy family? Or is this opening your eyes up a little.

            The Chretienites in particular could write a book on the school of hard knocks.

            They play for keeps and have long, long memories.

          • I knew before I got involved that there would be some tension in the ranks, Jarrid.

            But I haven't really seen it–not as Chretien vs. Martin/Ignatieff vs. Rae, anyway. There are differences of opinion, naturally, but it really (and I mean really) isn't breaking down that way, that I can see. It's quite amusing, actually.

            And yes, it is one big happy REALISTIC family. You get along with all your siblings all the time?

          • uh, that would be run-on not runon. You silly bunt.

          • Silly bunt? Love it.

            It would be run-on, except that doesn't run on, does it? Only runon runs on. Silly English.

          • You mean "bint". Not bunt.

            :-) lol

      • then tell me something – why do you read them? masochistic tendencies or fear that I am right

    • Perhaps he was out of the country during these negotiations?

  2. Non-denial denials. What may have happened is that Iggy himself authorized these conversations. I think what's going on is an attempt to get the NDP to just fold into the Liberals, which, if Layton is desperate enough, might happen. This may all be an elaborate negotiation strategy.

  3. Clearly Kinsella is going down and bringing whatever he can with it.
    I demand comment from Ed Broadbent and Roy Romanow . Go to it MSM.

    • I guess nobody should be really surprised that Kinsella is involved in something underminded and nasty in politics.

      • something underminded and nasty

        Not to mention underhanded.

        • I knew I was having a brain lock on that word. Thanks!

          • Oh dear. Now Joe Clark is named by John Mraz as involved in merger talk. Now theres a winner.
            We need a name for these washed out politicos.

          • Coalition of Losers

    • Why don't Romanow, Clark, Kinsella, Broadbent, Chretien go away? They held the reins of power. They had their day. Now they want to torch the people that followed them. These people don't know how to let go of power.

      • sorry, Kinsella never held the reigns , he just shoveled the sh%t. that all he's good for.

  4. So, it's Apps' word against Kinsella's. I know who I believe and it ain't a bitter, former Liberal war-room "strategist".

  5. It's just Warren Kinsella self-promoting again, doing his best to seem relevant and "connected" when everyone knows he isn't. When will people learn that this guy works for one party and one party only: The Warren Kinsella Party.

  6. same here – I want to hear from Chretien again and then Broadbent !!!!

  7. I am actually drooling as I type this. The thought of the Liberal party imploding is just too good to contemplate. They are the authors of their own demise.

    For four years they have contributed nothing to the political dialogue of this country other than trying to talk about sleaze. They have done nothing to help bring policies forward that would better the country.

    For them it is all about power and how to get it legitimately or illegitimately it matters not.

    This merger thing has gone viral and the whole point is to force Ignatieff out. I question whether finishing off whatever brand name is left is such a smart thing to do.

    The Conservatives are watching this thing. They probably have their trolls in the basement drafting ads etc which will go after both the Libs and the NDP and their hidden agenda.

    • The collapse of one of the two leading political parties in Canada cannot be a good thing. It wasn't a good thing for Canada when it happened to the Conservatives in the 80s — it wouldn't be good if t happened to the Liberals now.

      That said, the PC split into two, then three factions. There's no indication of a pending splinter party calving off from the Liberals. indeed, the rumour, which is bunk, indicates another party merging with it … quite different.

    • Oh for God's sake! What happened to you? You believe Warren Kinsella over your own common sense?

    • Drooling?

      Yuck. Not sure that was the image you should want to portray.

  8. Warren Kinsella's already-tenuous grasp on reality seems to be slipping. Who goes and swears an affidavit about hearing a rumour?

    • Exactly…what would prompt him to do something like this…true or not?

      My guess, for what little it's worth…Kinsella's departure from Team Ignatieff was not as amicable as has been portrayed, and he now realizes he's backed the wrong horse. Kinsella knows full well that dirty laundry should not get aired in public, but he seems to be on a one way trip to the laundromat.

    • Yes, this is truly bizarre behaviour.

  9. Liberals swearing affidavits about the content of private conversations with other Liberals.

    Sure gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling inside about the inner workings of the party doesn't it?

    One big happy family!

  10. That's probably closest to the truth. There were probably a few remarks in passing with less consequence and far less passion than the MacLeans comments board.

  11. I agree with others who are saying that is a way of smoking Ignatieff out and undermining his leadership. It appears to be having that effect but it can't go on for too long or it'll start affecting the brand.

    It is patently obvious that the Chretien/Rae faction are doing a full-court political press on the Martin/Ignatieff faction and are overwhelming them at this point.

    My call: the Martinites will eventually cry uncle unless Harper decides to put an end to this Liberal internecine war.

    • It is patently obvious that the Chretien/Rae faction are doing a full-court political press on the Martin/Ignatieff faction and are overwhelming them at this point.

      I think you might be forgetting Wells' rule of Canadian Politics #2.

  12. What goes around comes around. karma

  13. The biggest tragedy for Apps: there is a sworn affidavit asserting that he engaged in conversation with a certain Liberal operative who may or may not have a name but certainly has lawyers aplenty who won't be shy to express, at best, displeasure that said operative's name may be associated (with malice aforethought) with anything less than glowing praise.

  14. Chantal Hebert over on here french blog, is all over this story. She's also saying the talk is leaning more to a formal merger of the parties than a coalition. She seems to be favoring the Warren Kinsella interpretation rather than the Alfred Apps interpretation.

    My goodness the Chicago Black Hawks are on the verge of ending a 50 year Stanley Cup drought and Canadians politics is on the verge of a historic political watershed.

    I've decided to go back to the game, but it's a surprisingly tough decision seeing what's shaking down.

    This is truly an amazing political story.

    Amazing!

    • Wells' rule #1.

    • Yes, well, do the people in these talks truly have the power to merge these parties? A lot of it may be wishful thinking.

    • "Think of is this"..

      **Takes L and leaves thread**

  15. James Carville eased out of this business because he realized a basic fact – he had become a media personality, such that his presence impacted the optics of a campaign. Karl Rove wisely did likewise (although he probably should have quit after the 2004 win). Kinsella should have either followed their example or, if he planned on continuing in his old role, he should have avoided self-promotion. Instead of going out gracefully, Kinsella has managed to earn himself a well-deserved spot next to "Liberal stalwart" Ray Heard in Bourque's rumour-mongering columns. I'm pretty sure that is the political equivalent of being turned into glue.

  16. Joe Clark for leader!!!!

  17. Maybe it's a big fake out like when the Tories "accidentally" released that memo about being more scared of Ignatieff than Rae. Maybe the paid(?) conservative commenters have been told to talk up the idea of a coalition because they are frightened of it?

    • Mike T…….this must be scaring the hell out of you today. Ignatieff is on his way out. If he isn't he should be.

      We ain't talking coalition baby. We are talking merger. Those are two seperate issues as Reid tried to hammer home today on P&P.

      I know I'm not a paid Conservative commentator but I probaby have seen a lot more life than you have. I speak from experience.

      • But this is exaclty what a commenter paid by the conservative party to plant ridiculous falsehoods would say…

        I can read what you're "sayin' baby" just can't figure out if you're lying or stupid.

  18. Yawn.

  19. So they ( Kinsella, at least) say one of the conditions was that the NDP renounce Socialism – ?- I am not being sarcastic, but how exactly would the NDP go about renouncing socialism?

    • I love the idea of a two-party state, especially with one leader being so weak

      • Maybe the Bloc will join renouncing separatism (I don't if that's is a an 'ism' but you know what I mean). Maybe we can even have one party state?

    • They'd have adopt socialism first.

      Or you would have to learn what it means.

  20. Obviously some in the Liberal Party want to dethrone Ignatieff. It seems the sensible thing to do. In all this time Ignatieff has not been able to familarize himself with Canada. Consequently he has no firm beliefs about anything.

    • Popular/effective or not, I think every new leader should be given at least one opportunity at the polls. Mr. Harper was given several cracks at the electorate before he finally acheived the desired result the CPC wanted.
      I just think it would be fair to give Mr. Ignatieff the benefit of one election before having a leadership convention. He may well surprise his detractors and deliver an increase in Liberal seats.
      Personally, I expect he could easily excede 77 seats.

  21. games games and more games.
    we need a New Green Liberal Democratic Party that starts fresh and WE elect a leader and determine the policies.
    That my fellow citizens should put an end to all the Tom Foolery.