Canadian Dopers: Looks like another government is coming

Great Debates
61

The Globe and Mail has a great list of “Ten Ways Harper Could Prevent The Coalition.” It’s interesting to go tyhrough the list and see if any would work:

1. Request that Her Majesty dismiss the Governor-General, then appoint a Conservative who will call an election.

Legality: There’s no clear rule against it and would be precedented by the 1975 Australian situation.

Evil Quotient: 8. Gaming the system to the extreme. Our system wasn’t meant to allow this in this situation.

Would it Work?: Probably not; while the Conservatives might be able to win an election called by Michaelle Jean, if they fired her to get one called they’d lose a huge amount of public support.

2. Keep delaying the confidence motion indefinitely.

Legality: Strictly legal, but the G-G could step in and put a stop to it.

Evil Quotient: 7. At least he wouldn’t be firing the G-G but it would make a mockery of his government and democracy.

Would it Work?: It’d delay things, but not stop them, and give the Liberals, NDP and separatists a lot of moral weight.

3. Buy off opposition MPs with Senate appointments.

Legality: Not 100% clear, but probably cannot be done.

Evil Quotient: 5.

Would it Work?: Even if it’s legally possible, which I doubt, it’s unlikely you can buy seven or eight of them with a job appointment that, while plum, would make them hated by their own party.

4. Concede a loss of confidence and voluntarily reduce his own powers, and go back to the House to look for his own coalition.

Legality: Nothing wrong with it.

Evil Quotient: 0. It’s the most statesmanlike thing he could do.

Would It Work?: Not with this crew. Harper’s too proud to be a caretaker and Dion and Layton have already sold their principles for power. None of the three is man enough to resolve the situation.

5. Prorogue Parliament and hope things are better in January, or whenever.

Legality: This appears to be legal, although the Governor-General could just as legally refuse it.

Evil Quotient: From 6 to 9, depending how long the proroguation runs.

Would it Work: It’s a Hail Mary that could work spectacularly or destroy the Conservative Party depending on how long it runs. Probably not, but there’s a chance if they just prorogue until January the coalition will lose its steam, especially as the prospect of Dion as PM sets in. Likely not, but you never know. If they go longer, there will be a public demand for them to be ousted solely for proroguing.

6. Throw Jim Flaherty under the bus and apologize, asking the Opposition what concessions they want.

Legality: Obviously legal.

Evil Quotient: 2.

Would it Work: As of right now, likely not. Even if Harper could bring himself to do it, the Liberals and NDP, at least for now, are willing to sell their country up the river for the right to run it for a little while, and there’s no reason to think Harper wouldn’t try to cripple them later. Might have worked last week, likely too late now.

7. Request an election.

Legality: No problem.

Evil Quotient: 0. Asking Canadians what they want is the point of democracy. However, he gets a 6 for calling an unnecessary election in September.

Would it Work?: Probably not, but the proper decision of the Governor-General isn’t 100% clear; this is a pretty weird situation. So there’s an off chance she could be convinced. The Opposition would argue very strenuously against it, since an election may heavily favour the Conservatives (at least outside Quebec.) You’d have to ask her.
8. Convince MPs to cross the floor.

Legality: Depends how to you it. Offering them actual tangible benefits, like money or whatnot, is illegal. Convincing them not to enter into coalition with the Bloc, however, is legal.

Evil Quotient: 0 if done legally. Add 1 for every $50,000 in bribes.

Would it Work?: Likely not. You’d have to convince, by my count, 8 MPs to be safe. They won’t be found in the NDP caucus, which according to eyewitness reports I received just last night were out getting shitfaced with happiness at an Ottawa eatery over the prospect of selling out to the Bloc. There may be doubtful Liberals, but ten percent of their caucus seems a little unrealistic, especially when it’s moving this fast.

9. Form a Preemptive Coalition With the Bloc By Promising Them More Swag

Legality: Perfectly legal for the Conservatives, but Duceppe would have to break an existing agreement.

Evil Quotient: 10. They’d be even bigger Quislings than the Liberals and NDP.

Would it Work?: At least for now, but would result in a near-certain Liberal victory in the next election.

10. Stephen Harper resigns, and is replaced by a Conservative perceived by the Liberals and NDP as moderate.

Legality: No problem.

Evil Quotient: Depends who steps in.

Would it Work?: Harper will never, ever do this. Even if he did, it’s probably too late.

62

Yes matt a leader that lacks the confidence of his own party - super.

63

Unless the Governor-General decides to call an election. Or neither.

I’m not arguing the legalities, Matt. It’s perfectly legal for this coalition to take power.

64

I agree with this. I think the conservatives had potential to look very good during this session of parliament. Instead, Harper tried to use the crisis as an excuse to screw the other parties. Could someone please explain to me how eliminating public funding for political parties could help with the current financial problems? How would eliminating the right to strike by the public service help with the problems with the Automotive or forestry industries?

If Harper had made a speech that essentially looked like Sam Stone’s post #31, and come up with some reasonable ideas to help the economy, we would not be in this situation at all.

Instead, his overwhelming arrogance basically left the Liberals with the choice of “roll over and die” or fight. Is it any surprise that they chose to fight?

65

Re: 6. Throw Flaherty under the bus:

The person the opposition is pissed at is Harper, not Flaherty. Not a chance in hell Flaherty can be a sacrificial lamb here. The only possible way this sort of strategy works is if the Tory caucus collectively throws Harper himself under the bus. Likelihood: none whatsoever.

66

I was flabbergasted by Harper’s move as well. I’m no fan of his, but he is usually a little more effective at scheming. I’ve always percieved him, right or wrong, as having somewhat of a steady hand. I may not agree with him politically, but when he won again, I wasn’t overly concerned that he would drive the country to ruin. My gut tells me he figured he could sneak this through before Christmas, especially given the current chaos in the Liberal party. I doubt anyone could have predicted that a party run by a leader on his way out the door in five months would make this drastic and unprecedented power play. In fact, the rapidity with which this has transpired makes me very suspicious. I speculate contigencies were set up to form just such a coalition if Harper tried to pull a stunt in the new government.

While I feel we need to go to the polls, I am very much afraid that this idiotic clamouring by the L/N/B will alienate a good portion of the electorate… I’m staunchly left wing, but even I am getting to the “enough already” tipping point. Minority governments aren’t working right now, and we need some strong leadership. My personal preference would be to get rid of Harper, but I’d rather see him in a majority leadership position than deal with this sandbox pissing and constant electioneering. This reaction is wholly emotional - I don’t think Harper is at all good for Canada. And the fact that I’ve even thought this scares me… I’m worried another election will result in a firm majority for the conservatives. But, I’d just as soon not give license to Dion and Layton to pursue this coalition nonsense without an election. That the ostensible left wing in Canada is behind this move is awful, and will irreperably damage their reputation.

67

Missed the edit window…

The National Post has an interesting commentary on the situation entitled “A Three-Headed Monster is Born”:

Also, for the lols, the Globe and Mail has a cute political cartoon today:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/images/newspaper/20081202/cartoon-600.png

68

I don’t usually discuss politics, but I’m chiming in here to thank you for your remarks. I can’t believe the outright hostility to the Bloc Québécois being displayed here. Anyone’s entitled to agree or disagree with their policies, but the fact remains that this party received 1,379,991 votes in the last election (figure from Wikipedia). To read them being dismissed with such vitriol gives me the impression that the rest of the country is dismissing the opinions of over a million voters. Some of us (and I include myself in that) voted for them because we prefer Duceppe’s approach to social, environmental, and economic issues to Harper’s. The Bloc is hardly the one-trick pony it’s being painted to be.

69

How does popularity indicate anything besides popularity?

70

It’s how our system derives its legitimacy? Just a guess?

71

It doesn’t confer moral standing. Just because a party gets a lot of votes doesn’t mean their platform is ethical or constructive, just as a party NOT getting a lot of votes means they’re evil.

72

xnylder, I agree (as someone who did not vote for them). A Liberal-NDP coalition is pretty much my ideal for Canadian government, but I have to say I’m undecided about whether or not I’m happy with this move - I’m afraid it will decrease the left’s popularity in the long-term.

However, I am absolutely done with the argument that the problem with the coalition is the BQ. I really didn’t know how much anti-Quebec sentiment there was just sitting under the surface.

73

Morals, ethics, whatever. If you accept the Canadian version of democracy, you accept that votes for MPs confer legitimate political authority.

74

The argument in regard to the Bloc seemed to be that their separatist tendencies made them illegitimate; I believe that voter support adequately counters that argument.

Since when were we talking about the moral standing of the Bloc Québecois? Would you consider dialing down the rhetoric?

75

Why is it anti-Quebec to be opposed to the Bloc? Is it anti-Alberta to be opposed to the Conservatives? That’s their hard core base, after all. You don’t hate Alberta, do you?

Of course you don’t. I’d never assume you did. So why assume opposition to separatism, to a plan to break up my country, is in any way “anti-Quebec sentiment”? What, do they have unanimous support there?

76

Absolute rubbish. It isn’t anti-Quebec just to be anti-Bloc. Until the Bloc removes separatism as a plank from their party platform, most Canadians are at best going to be very skeptical of their loyalty to Canada and at worst view them as outright traitors.

77

Oh, I absolutely agree it’s not anti-Quebec to be anti-Bloc. I’m sorry if that’s how it came across - I’m not a Bloc supporter myself.

I do think that suggesting that the GG shouldn’t allow the Bloc to be part of the coalition indicates a a profound disrespect for the voters of Quebec. And, I may be wrong, but I sense a dislike for more than just the Bloc in some posts.

78

Then what are you arguing? You seem to be saying that it’s in some nebulous way wrong for the Parliament that Canadians elected to govern.

If Canadians hadn’t elected the Parliament that they did, none of this would be possible. If the Members of Parliament have democratic legitimacy, then so does the government that can hold their confidence.

Well put.

79

It really is quite amusing to see the same people who said, “if the Liberals don’t like the never-ending stream of confidence matters they should do something about it” screaming about how unfair it is that the Liberals have actually gone and done something about it.

80

Quite. I thought everyone wanted Parliament to cooperate, put aside their differences, compromise, and come up with an economic package that the majority in the house could support in order to deal with the present crisis.

The Prime Minister having proven unwilling to do any of this, it was up to the Opposition. Well, tant mieux.