Canadian Politics: What a difference a month makes!

Great Debates
21

That’s my point. It’s really not clear.

Regrettably, the one policy Stephen Harper has clearly come out for is that he opposes gay marriage - a loser’s position, one that has absolutely zero chance of winning out. I cannot stress this enough; the likelihood that gay marriage will be a full reality in Canada is absolutely one hundred percent. It is a done deal. Harper has placed his party on what is absolutely, totally, unquestionably guaranteed to be the wrong side of the issue. It is a political gaffe of stupefying proportions. The tide of history and opinion absolutely will make gay marriage a reality in Canada; it is as certain as the Sun rising in the east. He was a bloody fool to stomp his feet on the other side of that fence.

But the Conservatives can recover from that error… if they would just allow themselves to be a true opposition party for a few years, as opposed to their usual ongoing efforts to reverse the result of the last election.

If the Conservatives were smart they never would have even attempted the last nonconfidence vote; had it passed they likely would have bene punished at the polls. Their smart move now is to play a proper Opposition role and wait for the Liberals to break their promise to hold an election after the Gomery report, which is virtually certain. When the Liberals come out with some lame-ass excuse for not holding the election they promised, one of two things will happen;

  1. (The likely scenario) The NDP, so filled with pride that they’re sort of kind of part of a government if you squint your eyes and look at them sideways, will also come up with some lame rationalization for the broken promise. Both the Liberals and NDP will look bad. Or,

  2. (Very unlikely) Either the NDP, or a sufficient combination of irate backbenchers, will turn on the Liberals for breaking the election promise, the government will fall in disgrace, and the Conservatives will be in a position to pick up the most pieces.

Assuming #1 holds true, the Conservatives would be smart NOT to attempt another nonconfidence vote. Just let the busted election promise sit there like a fart at a dinner party. If the Conservatives play the next 3 years cool and reserved, Paul Martin will hand them many votes through sheer ineptitude. The Conservatives need to stake out a clear platform that includes constructive planks, not the idiot anti-gay-marriage stance that amounts to trying to hold back a hurricane.

22

You’ve made this prediction numerous times now, and I really think you’re wrong. Frankly, I’m not at all sure why you think that Martin won’t call the election. First off, he’s made the commitment numerous times in public. It will be complete suicide if he doesn’t call an election. It would make Bush Sr’s “Read my lips” line look like a model of honesty and integrity. I just don’t think there’s any feasible way for Martin to avoid calling an election without committing political suicide at the same time. Second, assuming that we’ve already heard the worst, the Gomery report isn’t going to hurt the Liberals. The allegations are by this time all old news. The report comes down, the Liberals announce that they’re acting on all the recommendations it makes, yadda yadda. This doesn’t hurt them in the polls one bit, and it may well help (especially if the Tories do another half dozen stupid things between now and the new year, which seems like a good bet). It seems to me entirely plausible to suppose that the Liberals will be able to actually pick up some seats. Maybe not a majority, but at least to the point that they can handily win any vote with the support of any single opposition party. If the Liberals stand to pick up a few seats, why the heck wouldn’t they want an election? Especially when the alternative requires obliterating any remaining integrity?

Really, I think that calling an election when promised is such a no-brainer I can’t fathom why you think Martin would renege on it.

23

I agree with you here, Gorsnak, and actually I’d like it if RickJay told us why exactly he’s so certain (he doesn’t just think, he’s certain) that Martin will not hold an election after Gomery’s report. Everyone expects Martin to call an election in the first months of 2006, so if he doesn’t do it, he’ll look like (and be) a liar, and given that he’s trying to dissociate himself from the Liberals’ scandals, that wouldn’t be a good thing. And I also think that the other parties wouldn’t allow it. The NDP has only promised to support the government on confidence votes until the budget gets the royal sanction, and they already don’t refrain from criticizing it, so I’m pretty sure they won’t let Martin renege on this promise. As for the Conservatives and Bloc, they certainly won’t. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if there were actually even a few Liberals who would vote against the government on a confidence vote if Martin decided to keep the power.

The government’s still hanging by a thin thread, don’t forget it.

24

Martin will hold an election if there’s a good chance that he’ll win it, and try to weasel out of it if it’s obvious the Liberals would lose.

Since the Liberals will win it, they’ll hold it. I’m firmly convinced now that the Conservatives have no shot at winning a federal election in the near future. So the Liberals have nothing to worry about. I would not at all be surprised to see them pick up seats in the next election.

25

By January 2006, the majority of the Liberal voting base will have forgotten about it or won’t care anymore. The Liberals will perceive themselves then as being the party that will be blamed for calling an early election. Parties blamed for early elections don’t have a long track record of success. Indeed, a spring 2006 election, if called, might result in the Liberals losing more votes to that perception than anything else.

You’re assuming that the opinions of June 2005 will be the same in Winter 2006. They’re not; by that point, I predict, very confidently, that the Liberals will feel (with justification) that swing voters will have stopped caring about Gomery. In fact, I bet if you polled 100 random Ontarians right now, you would be shocked how many have forgotten about the promised election or don’t care or wouldn’t care if it was called off.

Come 2006, Martin will declare that instead of an election, he has appointed a blue ribbon task force - possibly chaired by Belinda Stronach, but that could change betwene now and then - will tackle the recommendations in the Gomery report, and really, we’re serious this time, we’re gonna change!

26

Sorry, don’t buy it. First off, the commitment will be hard to forget when it’s the #1 topic every Question Period. And if you think the Conservatives are likely to pass up criticism over such a blatant broken promise, you’re out of your mind. Even if it’s against their interests to bring attention to it (i.e., if they’re likely to lose seats), they’ll talk of nothing else. If you believe otherwise, you don’t understand the Conservatives.

Second, if there’s any chance at all of the Liberals picking up even a few seats, they’ll do it. Do you honestly think Martin enjoys having such tiny margins on confidence votes? I guarantee you he would love to be able to cruise through a vote so long as at least the NDP were on board, instead of needing the NDP plus all but one of the growing pool of independents.

Third, not calling an election would be a huge, huge, huge risk. It would play out something like this:

-30 day time frame draws to a close with no writ dropped, noise levels from Tories and BQ crescendo. Martin called liar by Harper in QP. Tories run national ads showing Martin promising to call election.

-Confidence vote forced. If the government loses it, they must go to the polls with the various opposition parties having a ready-made “Martin: You Can’t Trust a Word He Says” campaign slogan. We’ll see campaign ads featuring Martin’s promise so often you’ll hear him promising to call an election in your sleep. Conceivably they might even still pick up seats in such an election, but they are absolutely guaranteed to do worse than an election they call themselves.

Now here’s the issue. The Liberals aren’t going to have Cadman’s vote. Or Kilgour’s. That right there sinks them unless some Tories are on their deathbeds. They might not have the NDP. And even if they do, they need ALL of the NDP to even come close, and I’m guessing there’ll be some western NDP MPs under massive pressure from constituents to bring the government down, and all it would take is one. Ontario isn’t the whole country, you know. What Ontarians do or do not care about isn’t the only thing that matters in this calculation.

In short, why would Martin take the very substantial risk of being forced into an election where he has handed his enemies such potent ammunition against him when he can call an election where he can say “See, look, I promised I’d do this, and I have. You can trust me.” Especially if the polls look as good as or better than they do now.

27

Do you think you Canadians will ever scrap this British parliamentary custom where the government in power gets to schedule the next election?

28

BrainGlutton, dropping the Brit. system would be horrible. Do you understand that Canadians don’t have to suffer a tenth the election campaigning that Americans are put through every four years?

29

But we *should. Canada could stand a little more political debate than we get now.

As it is, the government in power has too many ways to protect its incumbency. The ability to time an election is a very powerful tool. Our short campaign cycles keep the spotlight on government to a minimum, and this isn’t a good thing.

30

The vast majority of Canadians don’t care about Question Period.

Conservative criticism over the Liberals stealing HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS directly from their pockets wore off in a month or two. That’s even the title of the thread.

I am not entirely convinced that’s the case. An Independent in an election is an endangered species; with the right prompting (e.g. bribes) they can be convinced to avoid an election, since an election usually means unemployment.

Then Sam Stone said:

I see no logic behind this claim. You know, not everything is a great idea just because the Americans do it.

After all, what is the re-election rate for Representatives and Senators in Congress, with fixed elections and long campaign periods? 93%?

31

Might all be moot. The Globe and Mail is reporting that the Tories are going to try to defeat C-48, and they might have the numbers to do it if O’Brien votes with them. I wonder if they realize how much they’ll piss people off by precipitating a summer election just to prevent a final vote on C-38.

32

C-48 or C-38?

33

C-48 is another budget bill. I think the idea would be to tip the government over, putting the obvious passage of C-38 off until Parliament returns from the election and the bill can be “re-made”.

Honestly you’d think Harper would push to have C-38 voted on before the next election. Then he could take the loss; remove that albatross and move on to bigger things like finance, health care and foreign policy.

34

Firstly, why do you think that only campaign speeches put the spotlight on the government?

Secondly, moving to a fixed election schedule would require fundamental changes in how Canadian government works - what purpose does a non-confidence vote serve if it doesn’t precipitate an election?

35

I have to disagree with this point here. Most Canadians are convinced that we are doomed for another Minority government and are pretty dubious to theparties as they stand today.

The Independants that sit in the house today have a very good chance of re election in their ridings, in fact there may be a few more added to the pile if the rhetoric heats up during an election campaign.

To be honest those MPs who became idependents when they defected from their parties come off as more honourable and trustworthy than those who crossed the floor (Yes Ms Stonnach I’m looking at you). Voters tend to like people who can stand up for a principle and make the tougher choice.

As far as Martin reneging his election promiss he’d have to be four times the doofus some take him for to commit such a political suicide.

He’ll keep the promise and use that as part of his campaign. If the report comes out negative he’ll campaign under “See we aren’t afraid of the truth, only we can fix this”

36

The story I read had the Tories trying to defeat C-48 (NDP amendment to the budget) so that C-38 (gay marriage) wouldn’t come up for a vote. They know they can’t beat C-38, so their only play would be to defeat the government over the budget. Not sure the Bloc will play along with that little game, though.

37

The story

38

The Bloc will continue voting against both budget bills, they’ve already said that they don’t believe the budget is in Québec’s best interests. If it makes the gay marriage bill die, that’s too bad, but they won’t change their strategy just to keep it alive.

39

No, but the opposition parties will no doubt remind them of Martin’s promise if and when he decides to renege on his promise.

Yes, since the Gomery commission moved to Montreal, Ontarians have apparently been hearing less about it. Here, there’s still some talk about it, but now that the audiences are over, other concerns will soon take precedence. However, once Gomery releases his report, I believe it will once again be front-page news in all the country.

Well, Kilgour has been voting against the government, O’Brien is apparently doing it now, and Cadman could very well start doing the same, since he knows that if he wants to be re-elected, he will be anyway. I can’t say about Parrish, but I don’t think she’s afraid of bringing down the government if there’s reason.

40

Oh, I’m sure the Bloc will vote against the budget amendment. I’m just not sure they’ll all bother showing up. It doesn’t make much sense to me otherwise - why insist on a Liberal promise to bring C-38 to a vote before supporting the extended session if you’re just going to bring down the government? If that’s what they’re after, better to just support the extended session, in case the Liberals refuse to meet your condition. Unless, unless the Bloc is being so devious as to make the Liberals promise to bring C-38 to a vote for the sole purpose of giving O’Brien and the Tories extra incentive to try to bring down the government. Duceppe doesn’t strike me as being that duplicitous, though.

But I could easily be wrong.