Talk:Liberal Party of Canada: Difference between revisions

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Canada: Politics B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics: Political parties B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as High-importance).

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Michael Ignatieff has not resigned as Liberal leader today. He'll resign when the party has chosen his successor & not before. GoodDay (talk) 17:28, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

update please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.166 (talk) 19:08, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With what? It currently reads "Bob Rae was chosen interim leader on May 25, 2011." 117Avenue (talk) 19:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal Party has long had two internal liberal ideological factions:

• The classical liberal faction (i.e. John Turner, Paul Martin) that preferred less government-funded social welfare and preferred a more laissez-faire economic policy.
• The social liberal faction (i.e. Pierre Elliot Trudeau and Sheila Copps) that preferred substantial government-funded social welfare, and regulatory policies and state enterprise in the economy - such as Petro Canada and the National Energy Program of Trudeau.

--R-41 (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are references for the factions of classical liberalism and "reform liberalism" - referring to social liberalism that advocates social welfare: M. O. Dickerson, Thomas Flanagan, Brenda O'Neill. An Introduction to Government and Politics: A Conceptual Approach. Pp. 129.

I think we should be careful labelling LPC MPs as classical liberals, seeing as classical liberalism advocates a more radical sort of laissez-faire, more along US Libertarian lines.--Autospark (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, listing factions in the infobox makes it seem like there are two clearly distinct camps, which is not the case. Furthermore, It seems like an exploration of factions within Canadian Liberalism would be a better fit in the Liberalism in Canada article. Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Martin as Minister of Finance of the Liberal government in the 1990s pursued the deepest spending cuts in Canadian history at the time, privatized a number of previously state-owned enterprises - including Air Canada, focused on cutting taxes, and the Liberal government expanded free trade by adopting NAFTA. It has been generally recognized that there has been a split in the Liberal Party between liberals who support significant social welfare on the principle of social justice - these are social liberals such as Pierre Elliot Trudeau and Sheila Copps; and another group that emphasizes limited government and fiscal responsibility such as John Turner and Paul Martin who can either be called classical liberal or neoliberal.--R-41 (talk) 04:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was pretty clear that the ideology and position fields were for the party presently. Because in the course of a party's history, one can move from the left to the right, and even back again. 117Avenue (talk) 04:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

R-41 definitely has a point, but I don't think it's appropriate to add competing factions in the ideology line of the infobox (it only serves to confuse unversed readers). The distinctions can definitely be made somewhere in the article. Liberalism is wide enough a concept to englobe both the neoliberals and the leftists, and that's the generalist term that should be used in the infobox, I think. By the way, it's incredibly misleading to put "Canadian" in the ideology section, even though it links to Liberalism in Canada, the way the link appears implies that the Liberals adhere to a 'Canadian' ideology. That's certainly how they see themselves, but that's a very partisan view. The whole thing could just be simplified to... Ideology : 'Liberalism in Canada|Liberalism'. My two cents — CharlieEchoTango — 04:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is important that the ideology section link to liberalism itself as well as liberalism in Canada. The ideology of liberalism itself is important to the party, it is linked to an international liberal organization, the Liberal International, so having a link to Liberalism is useful and necessary. Plus having the infobox say "Liberalism: Canadian" declares that it supports liberalism as well as the unique qualities of the Canadian variant of liberalism and links to them. It is very straightforward, I posted a similar infobox section on the Conservative Party of Canada article and that has so far been accepted.--R-41 (talk) 02:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think it's appropriate to put "Canadian" as is, people don't necessary follow links and print versions don't show what's behind the link, therefore it's kind of misleading. I get why Liberalism could be included. I tried "Liberalism
Liberalism in Canada", is that sensible? I'll do the same on CPC. Best, — CharlieEchoTango — 02:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It unnecessarily repeats the term "liberalism", "Liberalism: Canadian" says that it advocates liberalism, and particularly the Canadian variant of liberalism - and it takes up far less space in the infobox.--R-41 (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, I really don't think it's right, because no links appear in print versions, mirrors, etc; I also think the Liberalism link is redundant and the ideology of the LPC is well covered in Liberalism in Canada... I changed it to Liberalism (Liberalism in Canada|Canadian), which I think is at least more clear with the parentheses. Any third opinions? — CharlieEchoTango — 17:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do I know that the ideology of the party is liberal in the international sense, liberal as the Canadians know it, or even liberal at all? Do we have some neutral third party sources backing up these claims? 117Avenue (talk) 02:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does involve liberalism in the international sense because the Liberal Party of Canada is part of the Liberal International an international liberal organization of liberal parties.--R-41 (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got a source? The infobox is the only mention of Liberal International on the article, and the linked article is poorly sourced. 117Avenue (talk) 03:56, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that "Liberalism: Canadian" or "Liberalism (Canadian)", would work, it says they are liberal in the international sense, and the Canadian sense, for both readers of printed text, and those who follow links. 117Avenue (talk) 06:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't see the point in mentioning both; Liberalism in Canada is what the LPC identifies to and de facto implies some level of adherence to international liberalism, and the nuances are best defined in... wait for it... Liberalism in Canada. It's misleading to say the LPC follows an international definition of liberalism, which they don't necessarily do (in many countries liberalism is conservatism). I know I'm repeating myself, but I really don't see the point in linking both Liberalism in Canada and Liberalism. — CharlieEchoTango — 06:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We are talking about the ideology line in the infobox, and Ideology links to List of political ideologies. An international reader will expect a term from the list. As it is relatable, and identifiable, Liberalism in Canada goes into the specifics. 117Avenue (talk) 03:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The hyperlink for the ideology of the liberal party is to classical european liberalism, which is essentially the direct opposite of the parties idea. Should be edited to social liberalism and social democracy instead. march 15 2012

Maybe rather than listing factions as other users have said it would provide a misleading view of the party, it would be better to just list multiple ideologies, e.g. Liberalism (in Canada), Neo-Liberalism, Social Liberalism, Classical Liberalism. Wikipedia articles for political parties styled like this more accurately represent the collection of ideologies that compose a large-tent party.

However, some of you have said yourselves that the Liberals have pursued some of the deepest public sector cuts as well as privatizations - which is center right to right-wing fiscal policy. Considering these are all more recent than the days of Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau, I also think it is misleading to describe them as a center-left party based on that alone. The current Liberals might like to paint themselves as center-left but in general they seem to practice center-right politics. I think "center to center-right" or "big tent/center-left to center-right" would more accurately describe the party. Left-Libertarian (talk) 15:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this section really needed in this article? Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 02:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The section probably belongs in a general article on Canadian politics somewhere, but I fail to see how it's directly relevant to the LPC. CharlieEchoTango (talk) 02:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

many recent commentators have used the realignment model for it explains the dramatic changes in national politics that relegated the Liberals to third place. Rjensen (talk) 02:59, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. The section also discusses other parties, it seems like it would be better suited in Politics of Canada. The mention of how Canadian politics might be realigning could be mentioned but a multi-paragraph section that is poorly written doesn't seem right in the article. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would, in my opinion, be very hard to understand the LPC without knowing about the other major parties. They are all part of a complex interacting system, as the political scientists say. For example, the parties always run against each other--they define themselves in terms of what they reject in the opponents. People uninterested in the larger picture can skip right over this short section. Rjensen (talk) 07:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well someone needs to re-write and source the section then because it's not wrote very well and most points are not cited. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 17:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article [1] states, when referring to the Ontario and federal Liberal parties, that “the two Liberal parties are organizationally distinct and membership in one does not carry with it membership in the other.” Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 19:00, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to know when this happened, so that the years could be added to Template:Liberal Party of Canada, like the other provinces. 117Avenue (talk) 04:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if i can find anything, as well the Manitoba Liberals also aren't associated with the federal party, according to think I used in the article. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 10:58, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal party is on the centre of the Canadian political spectrum not centre-centre-left!

Throughout its history its policies have fluctuated between centre-right and centre-left: Current party policy incorporates centre-right ideology; support for the monarchy, Senate, personal income tax cuts and centre-left policies such as; Kyoto protocol, medicare, millenium scholarship program et cetera.

To cal the Liberals centre-centre-left is either intentional bias or a misinterpretation of historical facts and current party policy. They Liberal party is a centrist party. Centrist parties generally by their very nature incorporate both centre-right and centre-left tendencies.

Regards,204.191.89.72 (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal party is on the centre of the Canadian political spectrum not centre-centre-left!

Throughout its history its policies have fluctuated between centre-right and centre-left: Current party policy incorporates centre-right ideology; support for the monarchy, Senate, personal income tax cuts and centre-left policies such as; Kyoto protocol, medicare, millenium scholarship program et cetera.

To cal the Liberals centre-centre-left is either intentional bias or a misinterpretation of historical facts and current party policy. The Liberal party is a centrist party. Centrist parties generally by their very nature incorporate both centre-right and centre-left tendencies.

Regards204.191.89.72 (talk) 01:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a hard one because they have been described as both left of centre and centralist over the years. I will have to agree with the IP on this one when it comes to real position as the Liberals are the centrist party in Canada. BUT.. th current wording in the lead is just fine and reflects the historical trends of the partyMoxy (talk) 01:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lance W. Roberts (15 August 2005). Recent social trends in Canada, 1960-2000. McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. pp. 428–. ISBN 978-0-7735-2955-7.

Stephen Clarkson (2005). The Big Red Machine: How the Liberal Party Dominates Canadian Politics. UBC Press. pp. 284–. ISBN 978-0-7748-5165-7.

The Liberals have been more centre-left recently and many leadership candidates ran on them becoming centre-left in 2006. Currently the ideology is cited, if you disagree find some sources that state they aren't centre-left and post them here. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 01:36, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your assessment - but the current ref in the lead refers to them as "Liberal party is a ‘coalition of the centre’". In fact states they need to be the centre party to attract voters from both sides. As I said its a hard one, but the current ref does not support the current wording.Moxy (talk) 02:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are similar arguments across articles about political parties and the issue is essentially not about what the ideology of the party is, but where that ideology belongs in the political spectrum. "Center-left" is a poorly defined concept. My approach would be to remove the description as unhelpful and unclear. TFD (talk) 22:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I second that, which means there's 4 against the "centre-left" ref, 1 for, and 1 undefined, which leads to the removal of that ref. As a side note, the sources clearly state about a "coalition of the centre", which means, all the centre, not just centre-left, which is also the historical place of the party. The discussion started a year ago, which is quite enough to express different views. In absence of any other meaningful elements, I will remove that reference.--lxndr (talk) 19:09, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I don't really care but you should have commented here before going and making the change. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 19:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing the vast majority of the information is not sourced, and some just seems like speculation, can we delete most of it? I've tried to find some of the information that is here but have not been able to. While it won't be very long I think all this section needs is the first few sentences which tell what provincial parties are associated with the federal party and then the list of leaders. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, although I do not think it is necessary to show the leaders. What about listing all the parties indicating whether they are affiliated or when they left? TFD (talk) 18:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the dates for all the parties. I thought of creating a chart for the affiliated parties, similar to the one on the NDPs page. Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 20:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has set the number of senators to nil. That follows the leader's statement that "As of this morning, only elected Members of the House of Commons will serve as members of the Liberal Caucus."[2] But while they will not caucus with MPs, they will caucus with other Liberal senators. That is the same system as the U.S. where Democratic and Republican representatives caucus separately from their counterparts in the senate. So I see no reason to say there are no Liberal senators, unless the Liberal senators abandon their party status and sit as independents, which so far they have indicated they will not do. TFD (talk) 01:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Political_parties_and_politicians_in_Canada. TDL (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This page is about the Liberal Part of Canada; these senators are no longer a part of it. They can caucus, but they can't caucus under the LPC, which by having a seat count on the LPC page suggests that. Similar to how supreme court justices may have similar views to a particular party, they do not count as part of that official party. This is like saying that the B.C. Liberals are the same as the federal Liberals; you just can't do it. Not only that, but whoever cited the National Post as their source did not include the correct title, but rather made up something else misleading to help support their point. The answer to the question "How many senators are there in the Liberal Caucus?" is zero, and the article clearly states that, as should the page on the LPC here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.17.129.214 (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference between the leader and the president of the Liberal Party of Canada? Thanks! --200.37.75.50 (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They are separate offices. The leader leads the party in parliament, while the president is an administrative office. TFD (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The whole "realignment model" section is dedicated to enunciating a theory about the party's decline, which seems rather outdated given that they just won a majority government. It seems to me that the parts of it dealing with post-2011 speculations about the LPC's future should be moved into the section dealing with the aftermath of the 2011 election, and the rest discarded.CaptainCanada (talk) 17:06, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, the section says that there have been realignments and then says the 2011 election may herald a new party system. It seems wrong though to say the Conservatives have replaced the Liberals as the natural governing party, but equally it seems that the Liberals can no longer be seen that way. The Harper government was the longest period the Liberals have been out of office since the 19th century, and their current vote may be the lowest where they won a majority. TFD (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have twice reverted an addition to the policies section [3] as I am not sure it is a policy per se. It seems a bit WP:POINTy as well. Perhaps others could weigh in. Dbrodbeck (talk) 15:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Liberal Party of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nafla.ca/images/clientupload/Liberal%20Party%20History.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/realitycheck/gray/20060613.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151127044738/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/green-shift-touted-as-both-saviour-and-damnation/article1061161/ to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/green-shift-touted-as-both-saviour-and-damnation/article1061161/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbc.ca/news/pdf/1069-cbc-results-dec4-final.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An unregistered editor is trying to add bars to indicate that this federal political party controls four provinicial governments. This will be confusing to readers as seven provinces have Liberal governments. What the graphic doesn't explain is that the Liberal parties in BC, Quebec and Ontario do not have organizational ties to the federal party. Without that explanation, which wouldn't fit in the graphic, it will confuse rather than inform. The article is about the federal party, so there is no need for stuff about provincial governments. Free to discuss, but let's leave it out unless there is a consensus here to add it. Ground Zero | t 22:00, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Federal parties in Canada are not fully integrated in provincial politics, with the exception of the NDP. The conservatives have no provincial affiliates; while the liberals don't have one in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec and the NWT. Canada is not like the US where the GOP and democrats run from the white house to every state legislature. -- Kndimov (talk) 19:06, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed as well. There's definitely room for it in the article, with proper explanation, but should be kept out of the infobox and probably the lead as well. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 08:22, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of avoiding a further edit war, not sure why this wasn't done earlier, beginning a new section to help form a consensus as to the political position.

Prior to recent edits, this article listed the subject as Centre to Centre-Left, with corresponding sources:

• David Rayside (2011). Faith, Politics, and Sexual Diversity in Canada and the United States. UBC Press. p. 22. ISBN 978-0-7748-2011-0.
• Richard Collin; Pamela L. Martin (2012). An Introduction to World Politics: Conflict and Consensus on a Small Planet. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-4422-1803-1.

Additionally, a cursory search of the subjects political position lists sources that describe it as being both a centrist party and as a centre-left party. Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no Liberal granted; however, I would argue that there is a substantial centre-right tradition with the modern Liberal Party of Canada that has been at the very least as influential as the centre-left tradition. In addition, I and many others, have found it very difficult to label many of Trudeau's policies (increasing the Conservative child tax benefit instead of just subsidising childcare spaces, the so-called middle class tax cut whose primary recipients do not fit most definitions of "middle class," or continued subsidies for the Tar Sands and ignoring the issue of tax avoidance) very "left-leaning".

This is also a party that introduced the largest cuts to the welfare state in Canadian history (even though they later increased healthcare funding) and later introduced the steepest corporate tax cuts in Canadian history (otherwise known as trickle-down economics). Might not "centrist but with centre-left and centre-right traditions or factions," be a wee bit more accurate? I think it's problematic to label the Liberals as a "left"-anything party. Remember, there are genuine progressives in the Liberal Party and particularly during minority parliaments, the Liberals have introduced progressive policies (old age pensions, Medicare, student loans, etc) but couldn't the same be said about the Progressive Conservative Party of yore (John Diefenbaker, Bill Davis, etc)? Were they "centre-left" too?

To reiterate, I believe that the Liberals would be better defined as either purely "centrist," or "centrist with internal centre-left and centre-right traditions, currents, factions, whatever".

Perhaps for the sake of simplicity "centre-right" to "centre-left" would be more accurate? It would capture the diversity of Liberal ideology throughout the late 20th and early 21st century.

Chris-Gilmore77 (talk) 15:35, 30 March 2017 (UTC) Richard Oliver Collin; Pamela L. Martin (2012). An Introduction to World Politics: Conflict and Consensus on a Small Planet. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 138–. ISBN 978-1-4422-1803-1......best to read about the basics.--Moxy (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Centre-Left makes the most sense.207.164.255.137 (talk) 16:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think centre to centre-left is the best descriptor. Note that a party can still be considered centrist if it has a balance of right and left-leaning policies. It is pretty common knowledge that the Liberals campaign to the left and tend to govern to the centre, so I think that should be the basis for their classification here. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 18:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, the common saying is they campaign on the left and govern on the right. Historically, the Liberals are a centrist party, even if their current incarnation is more on the left. -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trudeau's liberals are more left-wing. Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin were centre-left.38.112.3.42 (talk) 22:18, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing "left-wing" about the policies of Trudeau, i'd call him a centrist at best. Liberalism, unlike what some think, is not a left-wing ideology. Social democracy is to the left of liberalism and they can rarely get past centre-left! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

liberal party campaign left of center but govern from the centre.^[1] That said Canada is a centrist country.^[1]...as far-right and to a lesser extent far-left politics have never been a prominent force in Canadian society.^[2].....--Moxy (talk) 04:54, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal Party of the 1960s-70s might might have been Center to Center-Left, but the modern Liberals are a Center-Right neo-liberal Party with really nothing about them that indicates they're left of center. I say call them "center", "center-right", "center to center-right", or even "center-left to center-right" but indicating that the party as a whole and especially its leadership to be left of center is false and misleading. The Liberals over the past few decades (at the very least the leadership of the party) have shifted away from social liberalism and Keynesianism into a more neo-liberal force, following the trend of most mainstream political parties around the world as Friedman's neo-liberal economics prevailed over the Keynesian consensus with the Thatcher-Reagan revolution of the 1980s. They have pursued some of the most brutal cuts to public services and willingly or enthusiastically privatized government services, while passing draconian legislation like Bill C-51, selling arms to Saudi Arabia, and spending public tax dollars on corporate subsidies. Left-Libertarian (talk) 15:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great guess work.....but in fact radical Centrist is a term that has come back into use since Justin has taking over the party. Nowhere does anyone ever say center right.--Moxy (talk) 18:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The party is centre-right, they are adamant about upholding capitalism and pander to gain conservative voters. And yes they pander to the left too, but they are certainly radically centre and economically right,fake socially left. So I say centre-right. HoobaJooba3000 (talk) 22:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalism is the reason for climate change and the liberals have no plan to get rid of capitalism. They are right wing, might be considered left by brainwashed canadians but if they support capitalism and the imperialist expansion that happens because of it, they are certainly right wing. HoobaJooba3000 (talk) 21:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Every party in Canada is right wing ffs. HoobaJooba3000 (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Couuld not be more wrong....read a book....not social media.-^[1]}}",^{[2][3][4] [5][6][7][3][2][8][9][10][11]}-Moxy- 23:00, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Liberal Party of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120805144043/http://www.liberal.ca/newsroom/news-release/liberal-party-of-canada-welcomes-liberal-international-to-2009-convention/ to http://www.liberal.ca/newsroom/news-release/liberal-party-of-canada-welcomes-liberal-international-to-2009-convention/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214202931/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=c50b0f26-e061-46d1-a559-e4f63bdd7f69&k=1732 to http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=c50b0f26-e061-46d1-a559-e4f63bdd7f69&k=1732
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214185615/http://www.canada.com/theprovince/story.html?id=4cad73a9-ca29-4e0e-8fd4-ebff99025cff to http://www.canada.com/theprovince/story.html?id=4cad73a9-ca29-4e0e-8fd4-ebff99025cff

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Liberal Party of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070514003713/http://www.canadianencyclopedia.ca/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0000604 to http://www.canadianencyclopedia.ca/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0000604
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706184537/http://25461.vws.magma.ca/admin/articles/torstar-24-03-2003c.html to http://25461.vws.magma.ca/admin/articles/torstar-24-03-2003c.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111121230611/http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=95c9d866-89ac-46fa-83ba-d1bc0fab6195&k=18732 to http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=95c9d866-89ac-46fa-83ba-d1bc0fab6195&k=18732
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214195821/http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=2b17feac-a048-45c9-9a14-93669dd7c06e to http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=2b17feac-a048-45c9-9a14-93669dd7c06e
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111004094827/http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W08-T278.pdf to http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W08-T278.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111016121527/http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T369E.pdf to http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T369E.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111016113948/http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T380E.pdf to http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-S09-T380E.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When was the LPC founded? The infobox says 1867 (with the formation of the Dominion of Canada), but the body says "a united Liberal Party combining both English and French Canadian members was formed in 1861." Both 1867 and 1861 can be found across Wikipedia; for example, List_of_federal_political_parties_in_Canada says 1861. So which is it? — Kawnhr (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Liberal Party of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151016201454/http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=299174991 to http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=299174991
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111126082138/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/the-lesson-from-canada-on-cutting-deficits/article2243702/singlepage/ to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/the-lesson-from-canada-on-cutting-deficits/article2243702/singlepage/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151117033156/http://www.ubcpress.ca/books/pdf/chapters/2007/multiculturalismandthecanadianconstitution.pdf to http://www.ubcpress.ca/books/pdf/chapters/2007/multiculturalismandthecanadianconstitution.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151117032743/http://www.ubcpress.ca/books/pdf/chapters/2015/PatriationAndItsConsequences.pdf to http://www.ubcpress.ca/books/pdf/chapters/2015/PatriationAndItsConsequences.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121130424/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/7107/canadians_place_rae_as_best_liberal_leader/ to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/7107/canadians_place_rae_as_best_liberal_leader/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121143357/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/7050/rae_seen_as_best_future_liberal_pm_in_canada/ to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/7050/rae_seen_as_best_future_liberal_pm_in_canada/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404113516/http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/4nov2006background.pdf to http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/4nov2006background.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://www.thestar.com/wheels/article/125513
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214195835/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=b593fd8c-22bd-4805-97d8-a66dee44e5de to http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=b593fd8c-22bd-4805-97d8-a66dee44e5de
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/article708340.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120413205249/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/article726402.ece to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/article726402.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121153238/http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/archived-pdf/2008.12.07_FederalScene.pdf to http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/archived-pdf/2008.12.07_FederalScene.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121101830/http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/archived-pdf/2008.12.13_FederalScene.pdf to http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/archived-pdf/2008.12.13_FederalScene.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110126185559/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/article968692.ece to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/article968692.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121181708/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/37078/parties_virtually_tied_as_election_nears_in_canada/ to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/37078/parties_virtually_tied_as_election_nears_in_canada/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130314151902/http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/features/viewpoints/story.html?id=0e1cf966-d164-43b2-873a-76b828a82999 to http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/features/viewpoints/story.html?id=0e1cf966-d164-43b2-873a-76b828a82999
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110412213210/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/layton-shows-strain-as-polls-suggest-hes-the-odd-man-out/article1978060/ to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/layton-shows-strain-as-polls-suggest-hes-the-odd-man-out/article1978060/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404131833/http://www.nanosresearch.com/election2011/20110426-LeadershipE.pdf to http://www.nanosresearch.com/election2011/20110426-LeadershipE.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130314152122/http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=c09c79f6-38bd-4026-9019-4fe20f1dcf42 to http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=c09c79f6-38bd-4026-9019-4fe20f1dcf42
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160103144519/http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=4502 to http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=4502

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is intellectually dishonest to suggest that the Liberal Party of Canada is centre to centre-left.

Affirmative action and positive discrimination against white males The Liberal Party of Canada believes in positive discrimination against sexes, races and genders to meet quotas. Moreover, the positive discrimination is not applied proportionally. E.g. female representation in cabinet exceeds the actual percentage of females elected to Parliament. E.g. non-white representation exceeds actual percentage of non-white population in Canada. These are in line with NeoMarxist thinking (i.e. far left). This is not centrist.

$10M to terrorist Khadr The Supreme Court of Canada found that the government was under no compulsion to compensate terrorist Omar Khadr, yet the Liberal led government paid him $10 million. This is not centrist.

Pronounciation of Khadr's name PM Trudeau pronounces non-Anglo names with a Quebecois or Anglo accent, except Omar Khadr, who's name he pronounces in Khadr's native dialect. This suggests deference to a particular culture, otherwise native dialects would be mimicked for other persons of non-Canadian background. This is in line with NeoMarxist (far left) ideology. This is not centrist.

Similarities to Antifa The Liberal Party of Canada's rhetoric and policy positions are very similar to Marxist-anarchist group Antifa. This is a far-left group.

Taxing small businesses and speaking negatively about the wealthy The Liberal Party of Canada's policies and rhetoric concerning "wealthy Canadians" is textbook far left. The New Democratic Party of Canada would commonly use issues of class to allege injustice in Canadian society. The Liberal Party's use of these tactics should be described as left to far left. This is not centrist.

Views on ISIS and military force The Liberal Party of Canada withdrew military capabilities in the fight against ISIS. PM Trudeau declared that "if you kill your enemy, they win." This is consistent with left to far-left thinking, and cannot be described as centrist. Trudeau compared returning ISIS fighters to Italian and Greek immigrants from the 20th century. Far left.

Views on indigenous Canadians and reconciliation Despite the existence of treaties and repeated compensation in the hundreds of millions of dollars (or billions in aggregate) of Canadian government payments to indigenous groups, in the form of reparations, the Liberal Party of Canada insists that further aggressive reconciliation is required. The rhetoric and policies are openly hostile toward native Anglo, Quebec and other European Canadians. Moreover, the Liberal Party of Canada insists upon stating during public speeches that they "recognize the elders past and present" etc., similar to what leftist Australians say, despite the existence and legitimacy of the Canadian Crown's government and ownership of these lands. These issues have been addressed in Canadian jurisprudence related to the Constitution, yet the Liberal Party of Canada is advocating further aggressive legislative action. This is not centrist, but left to far left. Not centrist.

Recently, PM Trudeau promised further reforms to the justice system in view of a trial in which aboriginal Canadians were poorly represented in the jury. The question of whether a jury must be diverse based on ethnicity, etc., is a settled matter at Canadian law. The classical liberal position is that Canadians should be judged by their peers, and this should not be divided based on skin colour, etc. The Liberals are buying into identity politics that places value in a person's race, gender, orientation, etc. ahead of their common citizenship. This is far left identity politics. Ironically, it is the same sort of identity politics President Trump was accused of using when criticising an American justice's decision making capacity because of the judge's Mexican ancestry. Not centrist.

Views on "white male privilege" The Liberal Party is pushing a NeoMarxist myth of "white privilege," a far left position. Not centrist.

Selective withholding of funding on ideological grounds Funds have been withheld under this party's government to groups, e.g. those that hold Christian views relating to aborting babies. Funding however has not been withheld from individuals and organizations who owing to other religious belief systems, e.g. non Christian, but against abortions, have common ideology. The differentiating factor is that these organizations are classified as "minorities" and "victims" fitting in with the far left "victimhood" paternalism theory. This cannot be considered classically liberal or centrist, otherwise the same withholding of funds would apply universally, such that any group, white, non-white, Christian, non-Christian would be defunded, not only Christians.

Ignorance of women's rights or white and Christian persecution abroad Whilst the Liberal Party believes it is fair game on whites and males and Christians in Canada, they ignore discrimination and violence against males, whites and Christians abroad, e.g. Middle East and South Africa. Further, while women's rights have been entrenched in Canadian law for a century, women continue to be victimized abroad in truly anti-feminist culture. The Liberals take a moral relevatistic view on this. This is very far left, not centrist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaronRobie (talk • contribs) 15:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No sources for any of this --IDW5605 (talk) 00:50, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You make a compelling case. Trudeau has intentionally moved the party away from the political centre towards a more left-wing approach. Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin (who both balanced the budget) were more centre-left leaders. 38.112.3.42 (talk) 22:15, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the party's ideologies are listed as Liberalism and social liberalism. This is no longer a classically liberal party, so Liberalism may be inappropriate. Certainly, the following ideologies should be added:

• marijuana legalization (This was a central campaign issue and due to be implemented mid-2018)
• social justice (The Liberal Party uses the term "social justice" a lot in their speeches for decades)
• feminism (PM Trudeau says he is a feminist and it is wrong not to be)
• progressivism (The Liberal Party has described itself as "progressive" for deacades)
• postnationalism (PM Trudeau said "Canada is the first postnational country") — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaronRobie (talk • contribs) 15:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing this to talk page to gather consensus.

I'm ok with including this prose as it helps clarify the Liberal Party's position on the Canadian political spectrum. As previous consensus agreed to, the party is know to sit at the Centre to Centre-Left of the spectrum. Stating that it's position is to the left of the Conservative Party and to the right of the NDP help to clarify the context and position of the Liberal Party on the Canadian political spectrum.

What we're probaby aiming for is something like this:

"The party espouses the principles of liberalism and generally sits at the centre to centre-left of the Canadian political spectrum, with the Conservative Party of Canada positioned to the left of the party and the New Democratic Party position to the right."

Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't need background knowledge on the other parties to know where the party stands. This is the liberal party page not the list of Canadian federal parties. We shouldn't be comparing. I agree with you that it should also say centre to centre-left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaliSurferDude99 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will make the change and a center left.... but the rest of the party political positions you added are on the wrong side.-Moxy (talk) 01:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The edits that I made were completely justified and the person who reverted it didn't give a reason. I've already explained why it's right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaliSurferDude99 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree..... the anomaly that is Canada of have a centrist ideology is something that's fascinating political scientist. --Moxy (talk) 00:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The given source in the article claiming the party is "centre" is from 2013. 5 years may not seem like a lot, but a lot can change during that time in politics (WP:AGE MATTERS). In fact, the graph that the author in the source uses as evidence is from 2004. WP:EXCEPTIONAL also says there should be "multiple high-quality sources" on political claims and I haven't been able to find any other sources claiming the Liberals are centre. I can find many more sources that say the Liberals are centre-left. Any ideas? Hope to come to consensus! IsabelleFlake (talk) 06:46, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, but the term refers to parties like the NDP. See for example "Only a third of the EU is governed by the centre-left". The term is meant to distinguish them from Communists and post-Communist "Left" parties. But it is not necessary since there are no parties federally to the left of the NDP. TFD (talk) 06:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is 7 sources in the article...whats he problem? It can be confusing to outsiders as liberal party campaign left of center but govern from the centre.^[1] As for Justin like his father Radical center is a term back in use^[2][3] --Moxy (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first source for center-left says the Liberal Party "positions itself in the ideological centre."[4] Not a good source for center-left so I moved it. TFD (talk) 01:51, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^{[4][5][6][7][8][9]}

To call the Liberal Party of Canada "Center-Left" or "Center to Center-Left" is either misleading, or outdated information. The party of Lester Pearson and Pierre E. Trudeau in the 1960s & 70s worked (sometimes with the NDP) to set up the modern welfare state and supported Keynesianism and a mixed economy. It would be more accurate to say the party has *historically* been Center to Center-Left, as today's Liberal Party is really more of a Center party or even Center to Center-Right, resembling liberal Parties in Europe such as Emmanuel Macron's party. Often churning out fiscally conservative budgets (e.g. healthcare funding), supporting privatizations and P3s, Harper's Bill C-51, an arms deal with Saudi Arabia, executing 'Back to Work' legislation on Canadian Postal Workers, subsidizing private corporations, increasing our military spending upon Trump's request, and adding sweeping police powers to marijuana legalization. Whatever policies the Liberal Party has that might make it seem left-leaning, there are certainly many right-wing policies to compensate. Left-Libertarian (talk) 19:56, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps best to read over Centrist.--Moxy (talk) 21:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This reminds me, y'all need to use Canadian English when editing this page. Just had to fix the correct spelling of centre in the lede. -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the Wikipedia Page on centrism, before and after you suggested I do so. What I'm saying is that although it is my personal opinion that they are more center to center-right, I will not argue for that until I can find a source. However, pretty much all citations of the Liberal Party being center-left are referring mostly to the party's position in the 1960s and 1970s, so I think it is highly misleading to assert that the present day party is more left than it is right. After all, they have broken many of their most progressive election promises. I'm not denying that the Liberal Party is centrist, I'm denying that it is center-left. Left-Libertarian (talk) 05:51, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is Canada' is dominated by two Centrist parties that are generally both left leaning on an international scale. Within Canada's political scale we defend the 2 big parties as one on the left and one on the right......but place the Liberals dead Square in the center of the Canadian political Spectrum overall when including other parties like the NDP. The Liberal party is a broad-specturm centrist party, unifying a broad swath of centre-left and centre-right interests. In numerous policy areas, they express both standard right wing and left wing policies simultaneously. They've historically campaign on the left but govern from the center and are never associated with the right side on a political scale. They are associated with the right side on some political ideology (that conservatives feel they steal from them) but not on the right on any political scale. Canada is one of those weird places where Centrist partries actually does well because all parties need 2 quart immigrant and diverse groups of voters to win. Amanda Bittner; Royce Koop (1 March 2013). Parties, Elections, and the Future of Canadian Politics. UBC Press. pp. 300–. ISBN 978-0-7748-2411-8. --Moxy (talk) 16:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy: Should we consider labelling the People's Party of Canada as "far-right"? I don't believe that the liberals and conservatives are that much far a part on the politcal spectrum than the conservatives and people's party. "Centre-left to centre" is really far away from "centre-right to right-wing" (liberals and conservatives) and Bernier's party is a lot more right-wing than the conservatives, so I think we should have the people's party as far-right. IsabelleFlake (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed in the past,

Here are sources that have been included in this article in the past describing the Liberal party as centre and centre-left.

• David Rayside (2011). Faith, Politics, and Sexual Diversity in Canada and the United States. UBC Press. p. 22. ISBN 978-0-7748-2011-0.
• Richard Collin; Pamela L. Martin (2012). An Introduction to World Politics: Conflict and Consensus on a Small Planet. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-4422-1803-1.

Additionally, a cursory search of the subjects political position lists sources that describe it as being both a centrist party and as a centre-left party.

• Ivison, John (May 3, 2018). "John Ivison: Left-of-centre Liberals leave Singh's NDP struggling for relevance". National Post.

• Furey, Anthony (March 25, 2016). "The Liberals just shifted the centre further left". Toronto Sun.

• Den Tandt, Michael (February 18, 2016). "TMove centre-left a Liberal gamble for Trudeau". Sudbury Star.

• Chwalisz, Claudia (October 23, 2015). "Canada hasn't lurched to the left - it's returned to the centre". New Statesman.

• Heer, Jeet (October 22, 2015). "Why Is Canada's Liberal Party So Dominant?". The New Republic.

The party is generally seen as being a centerist, progressive party. Positioned to the left of the Conservative Party and to the Right of the NDP. Centre to Centre-Left is the best way to describe the subject.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. No Funny Nickname: Does discussing in the past make it ineligible to be changed today? Political spectrums can change very often. IsabelleFlake (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy By *American* standards, one could argue that Canada is dominated by two centrist parties. But if you look at the (not so distant) history of the Conservative Party, it was a merger between the center-right Progressive Conservative Party and the right-wing Reform/Alliance party, and is even on Wikipedia (and almost every source one could find) listed as center-right to right-wing, and produced debatably our most right-wing prime minister in history. By international standards, this is a lot harder to figure out unless one was well versed in non-Western politics, but by European standards, the Liberals would probably be considered slightly to the right if anything (as most European liberal parties are). You say they are never associated with the right side of the political scale, but what about Jean Chretien and Paul Martin, our third second most recent Liberal prime ministers? If someone can actually make a solid arguement that they are more left than right I would be thrilled to hear it. You've also said that they incorporate center left and center right elements, but they campaign left and govern in the center. Does merely pandering to the left at election time to siphon votes away from the NDP, Greens, and Bloc only to break many of their promises and govern a lot more like conservatives than they would like to admit qualify them the merit of a center-left party? No, it really doesn't. Is Hitler a socialist because he said so to take votes away from the actual socialist parties (SPD, KPD) and then throws all the actual socialists in concentration camps destined to wear the red triangle patch on their jumpsuit for the rest of their days? No it doesn't. I'm not comparing the Liberals to Hitler, but the analogy is still the same, what parties say around election time is often just hollow pandering, this is a well known fact of politics. You also have commented more than once and had not addressed any of the points I previously made about how they have governed since the election where they campaigned to the left. I mean no offence, but are you even from Canada? I'm failing to see the point of this talk page if your opinions are set in stone and will either ignore or deny any criticism of the wiki page itself.

@MrNoFunnyNickname It is well known amongst Canadians who actually read the news that the National Post and especially the Toronto Sun have a conservative or right-wing bias. I would say the Sun's journalistic value is questionable but whatever. I've never heard of The New Republic, but this is from 2015 around the election time, before the Liberals broke most of their 'progressive' promises. As for the others, did you even read your own sources?

New Statesman: "In a context where the Stephen Harper government has consistently moved the country to the right over the course of a decade, the only direction of travel for the opposition getting into power would be to move left… towards the centre."

Sudbury Star: "Shifting into neutral on pipelines" is one of the points they make that apparently designate it as center-left, but if you look into the Trans-Mountain Pipeline dispute you will see that they are still very much pro-pipeline. This article is also referring to the election.

My point is, election pandering to secure votes by making promises they had no intention of keeping (e.g. electoral reform, public infrastructure spending (not that public-private partnership bullshit)) doesn't make them a left-leaning party, it makes them a dishonest one. Left-Libertarian (talk) 08:11, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, while I agree that it is a good descriptor to say that the Liberal Party sits to the left of the Conservative Party and to the right of the New Democratic Party, wikipedia currently lists the Tories as center-right to right-wing and the NDP as center-left to left-wing. If we are just talking about the spectrum of politics in Canada, a liberal democracy with a regulated capitalist economy. But implying that the Liberals lean left on this scale also implies that the Liberals are closer to the NDP than they are to the Conservatives, another point which I would highly contest. While this might be true regarding social issues, the assumption does not hold when applied to economic issues. The Liberals may make occasional tweaks to the existing economic paradigm - as many of you have said yourself could be either a center-left or a center-right policy, there definitely is some clear blue water between that and the NDP platform of trying to build a social democracy in Canada. Left-Libertarian (talk) 11:04, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@IsabelleFlake: Absolutely not and apologies, my comment was meant in good faith, I was simply pointing out this topic had been discussed previously in the interest of not repeating previous points and rather to discuss new sources and points for this topic.

I have not seen any new points or sources brought up to change previous user consensus. Most arguments made have been made based on Pov non-sourced arguments & opinions.

e.g.: "pandering to secure votes by making promises they had no intention of keeping...doesn't make them a left-leaning party, it makes them a dishonest one"

I would suggest that the current wording "generally sits at the centre to centre-left of the Canadian political spectrum" is entirely appropriate and accurate.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since this discussion occurs over numerous different articles, I have raised the issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)/Archive 27#Political position TFD (talk) 20:36, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Left-Libertarian: This article from January 2019 is filled with examples of the Liberal Party swinging toward the right over the years. Geddes, John (January 11, 2019). "This is what's wrong with Canada's Left". Macleans. In particular:

• "Canadian Liberals historically tried to straddle the centre. The deficit-cutting that largely defined Chrétien’s government, for instance, couldn’t be seen as left-wing, and Chrétien himself was no hipster."
• "The Liberal party at its most successful—when it splits the difference between the Conservatives on the right and the NDP on the left—casts itself as the natural vehicle for that distinctively Canadian, and frankly un-American, middle ground."
• "All this has tended to tug Canadian parties toward the middle. For Liberals, that often meant capturing a solid share of the centre-right. Chrétien and Paul Martin, his finance minister, not only balanced the books, they followed up by broadly cutting taxes."
• "A senior Liberal strategist, speaking on condition he not be named, said the key to Trudeau holding the burbs in 2019 won’t have much to do with the polarizing debates around, say, feminism or Indigenous issues. He pointed instead to the Prime Minister’s successful defence of Canadian free trade with the U.S.—which polls show is widely admired—along with measures like a modest middle-bracket tax cut and a big boost in the Canada Child Benefit. “All those things are what we’ve spent 90 per cent of our time on,” he said."

According to the Ralph Goodale article, Goodale is no longer deputy leader. GoodDay (talk) 03:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn’t there be “Blue Grits”(Jean Chrétien) “Red Grits”(Lester B. Pearson) in internal factions ? Like it is for Conservative party Black roses124 (talk) 01:35, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Historically inside the Liberal Party, factions have not nearly been as deep as inside the Conservative Party. The factions that have played a part inside the Liberal Party had been primarily driven by individual leaders & aspirants, such as Trudeau vs. Turner, Chretien vs. Martin. Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 13:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would probably be a good idea to mention Blue Grits somewhere in the page, though, even if not in the infobox. — Kawnhr (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I just thought that Wikipedia should be treating the political parties of Canada with some consistency Black roses124 (talk) 17:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A number of recent edits were recently reverted by Moxy with the edit summary Restore Article 2 before Mass change reinstate links to make it easier for our readers to verify the information WP:GBOOKS. I couldn't see what possible application WP:GBOOKS could have here, so I restored the edits and was reverted again with the edit summary Restore again..... bring shut changes to talk. Could you please clarify what relevance WP:GBOOKS has here, Moxy? I don't understand the reversions. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 02:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The bigger question is why are you removed only certain sources from the info box. Those familiar with the article realize that this is a point of contention and is why they are there. This is also a pattern we've seen in the past leading to a change because of no verification. Needless to say it's not a good thing for our readers..... nor are we looking for a reference style change. After being reverted by multiple editors you should assume there's a problem with the edit .Moxy- 02:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Moxy: What change was there in reference style? And what does this have to do with WP:GBOOKS?

The only references removed from the infobox were of information that was explicitly referenced in the lead. As noted in my edit summary, this was pursuant to WP:INFOBOXREF which states:

References are acceptable in some cases, but generally not needed in infoboxes if the content is repeated (and cited) elsewhere ... If the material requires a reference (see WP:MINREF for guidelines) and the information does not also appear in the body of the article, the reference should be included in the infobox. However, editors should first consider including the fact in the body of the article.

The sources used in the lead are nearly identical to those used in the infobox, as is the phrase they are being used to support, namely:

The party ... generally sits at the centre^[1][2][3] to centre-left^[3][4] of the Canadian political spectrum, with their rival the Conservative Party positioned to the right and the New Democratic Party, who at times aligned itself with the Liberals during minority governments, positioned to their left.^[1][5][6]

Why would WP:INFOBOXREF not apply here?

After being reverted by multiple editors you should assume there's a problem with the edit. You're the only editor who made a related reversion. Mcnasty1point0 made a narrow reversion of a change to the headquarters field of the infobox. It was in no way related to your blanket reversion, as best as I can tell. Of what relevance is that here? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 02:27, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm perplexed as to what exactly you're trying to do, concerning Canadian political parties. GoodDay (talk) 02:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to clarify the rationale behind any of my edits to this article, if the edit summaries were insufficient. Did you have particular concerns with respect to my edits to this article? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 02:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]