I have been invited to join one of these Facebook groups regarding the coalition possibility and seeing many of my friends joining one side or the other. For the record I am not on either side of this.
Such a scenario is part of our Westminster system. To be against the opposition parties forming a coalition is to be against the way we are governed. I don't see any need to change the system (well, same system but with electoral reform, but that is another story). I don't think that a Liberal-NDP coalition will provide good governance during this economic downturn but there are fully within their rights to defeat the government and try to form one of their own.
However, the Liberals and NDP have less combined seats than the Conservatives so without explicit support from the BQ it will be a very short-lived coaltion government. And they can't exactly bring a separatist party into the coalition. Another fact against the coalition is that the Liberals were firmly against a coalition in the last campaign. But the Conservatives didn't mention anything about reforming the funding of political parties either - hence the title of the post. I should also be pointed out the electorate soundly rejected the Stephane Dion led Liberal Party.
For these reasons the Governor-General could say no to the opposition parties and cause us to have another election. I wouldn't put money on it though. If the GG says yes to a opposition coalition it is not a "coup d'etat" or an afront to democracy. It is also not an afront to democracy to end the $1.95/vote/year subsidizing of political parties. What is unfolding right now is one of the features of our Parliamentary democracy, not a bug.
Since I don't think a Liberal-NDP coalition can last very long and the Liberals are already on record as saying such a coaltion would be bad for the Canadian economy my preference is for the GG to say no to the coaltion and have an immediate election. But I won't be marching in the streets if she disagrees with me. Especially since this whole mess is PM Harper's in the first place.
Comments (7)
Thank you for reminding us that there are, in fact, sane conservatives in this country. I was starting to wonder.
Posted by Idealistic Pragmatist | November 29, 2008 12:28 PM
Posted on November 29, 2008 12:28
Good post. I agree a coalition like this will be quite shaky and it is difficult to see it lasting long especially considering despite the similiarities, they do have differences and when your are all in opposition, it is much easier to be united than when governing. That being said, Harper got us in this mess with his stubborn attitude and confrontational approach. If he does survive, I hope this changes his tactics dramatically. Maybe something like this might be just what is needed to get Harper to drop his confrontational approach. I seriously doubt he wants to return to opposition, and I think the opposition will stick to their guns, so his only way out is to present an economic stimulus package and do it fast since the longer he waits the less likely the opposition will agree to anything. Also dumping Jim Flaherty as finance minister might be a good start to signal he is serious and firing Guy Giorno.
Posted by Miles Lunn | November 29, 2008 1:42 PM
Posted on November 29, 2008 13:42
Why should PM Harper back down? I don’t think that taxpayers should be paying for the activities of politial parties and neither do 61% of the people that responded to this poll http://www.cbc.ca/news/polls/political-subsidies.html .
Although the cut to political funding is a drop in the bucket when compared to overall government spending, it is symbolic. If people are expected to accept program cuts as a way of staying out of\, or minimizing the deficit, then this cut better be one of the first. Besides, there is no guarantee that the GG will grant the opposition their wish. She could still chose to dissolve parliament at the PM’s request then the oppostion will have to explain to Canadians that they brought the government down because they were going to lose their allowance.
Posted by Brett | November 29, 2008 3:55 PM
Posted on November 29, 2008 15:55
The government caved on the subsidy issue and the opposition yawned. It looks like it is goodbye. All may not be lost for the government though. If Harper offers to resign and they put up Jim Prentice as their new leader, maybe, just maybe the government could survive.
Posted by Greg | November 29, 2008 5:09 PM
Posted on November 29, 2008 17:09
How can you have a coalition government by parties that do not control at least a plurality of the seats in parliament? Unless the Bloc is explicitly included as a coalition partner, how can the GG legitimately pass power to the Liberal/NDP coalition? And does she have the discretion to refuse to sanction a coalition solely on the basis of the political aims of one of the partners? And thank you for striking a note of sanity in an “orchestra of scorched cats”.
Here’s to another election soon. Can’t get enough of those things.
Posted by Occam's Carbuncle | November 30, 2008 12:49 AM
Posted on November 30, 2008 00:49
I am with you OC, I think it will be very hard for the GG to approve of a coalition that does not have a pluarality.
Posted by Political Staples | November 30, 2008 9:36 AM
Posted on November 30, 2008 09:36
How can you have a coalition government by parties that do not control at least a plurality of the seats in parliament?
I think the most likely scenario is that the Liberals and NDP would have to agree to a formal coalition and then they’d have to bring the Bloc in with a minimum 2 year supply and confidence agreement. It’s doubtful that anything less than that would give the Governor General reason to accept that the opposition could form a stable government.
Posted by Robert McClelland | November 30, 2008 11:00 AM
Posted on November 30, 2008 11:00