Apolitical Staples

Coyne’s wet dream.

I think the GG would not ignore the PM’s advice if, as it now seems likely, Harper decides to regard the Liberal/NDP votes against the budget as a de-facto loss of confidence by the House in his government.

Any other issue - crime bill, Kyoto, etc. - Coyne’s argument might stand. But, not on a money bill.

Why would Dion even contemplate GG Jean’s offer, were it to be made, anyway?

Look, it’s just Coyne’s fear campaign against the PM. He is still mad at the PM for abandoning the right so quickly. Personally, I think the quicker path back to the right is a Tory majority - why not help bring that on instead of trying to build up the liberal media in an attempt to scare off the PM from an election?

as it now seems likely, Harper decides to regard the Liberal/NDP votes against the budget as a de-facto loss of confidence by the House in his government.

Surely you mean de jure, since de facto the budget passed?

Coyne’s just joking. Is the GG really going to appoint a prime minister who has never faced Canadians in an election? I think a lot of people would choke on that. Anyway, in King-Byng, when the GG didn’t call an election, he was replacing the Liberals, who had 101 seats, with the Conservatives, who had 116. In this case, it would be the opposite.

Greg, there are still a number of budget related items on the parlimentary agenda, that are confidence motions. They’ll pass though… (I hold there will be no election until 2008 at the earliest)

Surely you mean de jure, since de facto the budget passed?

Since the Bloc wants to break up the country, one can claim that their votes cannot be counted in the total number of votes in favour of the budget.

While the “ways-and-means” motion passed, Harper can claim that he has actually failed to gain the confidence of a majority of federalist votes for his budget implementation bill and cannot continue.

Of course, one could argue why he did not call an election last year when the same thing happened, but who really cares anyway.

Harper wants an election. He will get one.

The Liberals and the Bloc are in a symbiotic relationship in the sense that it’s primarily the Bloc that’s preventing Harper from getting a majority.

Actually, the budget implementation act has to pass still, so there could still be a de facto loss of confidence. There are typically 2 or 3 votes (can someone confirm?) on the budget. Wuith the last Martin gov’t, the COnservatives had to abstain from the first vote, since th NDP and Bloc were voting against. Then on one of the follow-up votes, the Conservatives voted agreement on the main budgetm, but against the budget amendment that Martin and Layton came up with. Had Chuck Cadman voted against that amendment, or if Belinda had stayed a Conservative and voted against the amendment, then we would have a May/June election in 2005 instead of a Dec. 05-Jan./ 06 election.

The only thing I learned in philosophy class was nothing can be de facto unless it happens in fact. So, if the budget passes there can be no de facto non-confidence. Now, you could argue de jure, or in principle, but it won’t hold much water with the GG. She is only interested in whether the PM has the de facto confidence of the house, which he does.

Canadians voted for a Liberal party lead by Martin, not Dion.
Dion has only won the approval (3rd choice of the B team) of the LPC, not Canadians.
Therefore, IMO, the GG could not hand the reins to a person who has not faced Canadians as a leader, and would permit a general election.

I think the GG would not ignore the PM’s advice if, as it now seems likely, Harper decides to regard the Liberal/NDP votes against the budget as a de-facto loss of confidence by the House in his government.

What the hell are you talking about? (same goes for anyone else talking about a “de-facto” loss of confidence)

By definition, an Act of Parliament is de jure, and if the budget and other supply motions pass, then there has been no loss of confidence. Period.

Since the Bloc wants to break up the country, one can claim that their votes cannot be counted in the total number of votes in favour of the budget.

While the “ways-and-means” motion passed, Harper can claim that he has actually failed to gain the confidence of a majority of federalist votes for his budget implementation bill and cannot continue.

Harper can claim anything he wants, but the fact is that a loss of confidence is a loss of confidence, and the very definition thereof is certainly de jure. Lacking confidence in practice without an explicit motion is one thing, but it’s not grounds for an election. There is no constitutional requirement that a minority government be able to ram through its program without consulting other parties, and without an explicit loss of confidence, the GG would have not only the right but the obligation to refuse dissolution.

“His Trudeau federalism…”

I know you’re not speaking about Dion here because that’s the last thing he is.

Had the very same thought myself this morning.

Coyne is right that it is a possibility. There are more money bills coming up this spring. They are all confidence votes by definition. Lots of opportunities for an election call.

The Bloc might be interested in a coalition, if only to double cross Dion. Dion would be a fool to accept the GG’s offer without a written agreement from the NDP and Bloc. This would be perceived as dirty pool by many voters and definitely firm up Conservative support. Dion would need solid, long term support to make a go of it.

I think Kyoto is just the type of issue that could make it happen. However, I think Dion would rather go into an election and make big time concessions and an alliance with the Green Party than be in government depending on the NDP and Bloc for support. The Green Party enhances the Liberal brand, whereas the other two parties don’t.

Under 12 months the GG’s may or may not take the position that the people spoke so make the best of it.

Beyond 12 months the people get consulted again. I just don’t see her hearing any serious opinions to the contrary.

“Steve M” has it correct for Coyne’s motivation: “He is still mad at the PM for abandoning the right so quickly”. So he has turned vindictive.

As for forming a government if asked by the GG, Dion would promise anything, put anything in writing, form coalitions with the devil, just to get back into power. “Unprotected” is not a good state for the Liberal Party … withness the RCMP thingy, the Lafleur thingy, etc. Liberals will do * anything * to get back in power.

The process for doing that, and the likelihood of it happening per Coyne’s scenario, eludes me, though.

Did the GG do that with Harper when Martin fell? nooooo,

Did the GG do that with Harper when Martin fell? nooooo,

Good point. It seems like quite as stretch. On the other hand, Harper had no natural coalition partners either.

For Dion to be able to convince the GG he could sustain a government, he would need the support of both the NDP and the Bloc. While technically she would have the power to make him PM, she would have to be brain-dead to agree to a government that would depend on support of a party commited to breaking up Canada.

The King-Byng comparison is not valid. King was Prime Minister but had fewer seats than the Conservatives, so technically the Conservatives should have formed the government, but GG Byng allowed King to continue. When he lost a confidence vote, Byng had no choice, because of the time frame and the fact that that the Conservatives had the greater number of seats, but to ask Meighen to form the government.

I have no doubt the NDP would go along, just look at the deal they made with Paul Martin for confirmation of that.

Gee, after watching the actions of Anne McGrath, Brad Levigne and Joy MacPhail on the strategy panels of MDL since the last election, one would have to think that the above statement is way off on the grounds that it appears the NDP are not looking to make any type of deal with Dion’s Liberals. Not to mention, the dippers are down in the polls, so there is no doubt the Coyne scenerio is implausible like you said.

I think yyc hit the nail on the head. The longer the government lasts, the less likely the the GG will refuse a dissolution.

Before Dion can convince the GG he commands the confidence of parliament, he must demonstrate he has the confidence of his own party. The recent actions of Comuzzi, Cotler, and Wappel would indicate that he does not have such confidence.

Even though the polls may be favourable, I think Harper has more to gain by waiting than going now.

I think this government has the potential to become the longest lived minority parliament in Canadian history. This would be a big feather in Harper’s cap. I am not yet predicting this, but I think the potential is there.

Minority parliaments require cooperation - if Harper can last long enough, the public will think him a consensus builder. Meanwhile Dion will be calling him divisive and a bully. It hardly seems fair.

There will be no Harper-Jean affair. The first confidence vote the government loses will trigger an election.

I think this government has the potential to become the longest lived minority parliament in Canadian history. This would be a big feather in Harper’s cap. I am not yet predicting this, but I think the potential is there.

Longer than King’s two four-year minorities in the 20s? I doubt it.

Has the potential, but it won’t. Harper’s fixed-date election has passed (though it hasn’t rec’d royal assent yet) with an intended kill date of late Sept. 2009. If Parliament lasts that long, that’s when we’ll go next.

The GG’s prerogative would apply if the Liberals were able to claim to proceed with a mandate for a government program endorsed by the electorate. But it was Martin, not Dion, who led the Liberals in the last election. And the Liberals have publicly renounced certain portions of their last election platform.

It’s an interesting academic question, but were the GG to ask Dion to form a gov’t, that gov’ts only mandate would be from the GG, not from the People, and that would cause some pretty big problems, IMHO.

Governments do not have “mandates” (from who? 36% of the electorate? How can a bit more than a third of voters confer some mandate to govern?) - Harper governs at the pleasure of the GG for as long as he can maintain confidence of the House.

In other words, governments do not have mandates from the people, and if Dion formed some sort of alliance with the NDP, his coalition would be based on parties who won nearly 50% of the vote in the last election. How’s that for a “mandate”?

JG: That indeed is a “dreamy” mandate