Political crisis in Canada?

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
21

It doesn’t matter what CANADIANS think, obviously. What matters is whether the Opposition would allow it to pass, which of course they never would.

Eliminating or changing the public financing law is a good idea in principle; the current system is the worst of both possible worlds, giving free money to political parties based on thier performance in the LAST election. Parties should either receive no financing at all or, if they meet certain minimum requirements, should all receieve exactly the same amount. Why should the NDP get less money than the Liberals? Such a system always gives a structural advantage to the winner the last time out, which isn’t democratic.

However, doing it this way at this time is OBVIOUSLY purely for the short term gain of the Conservative Party, not for any reason of fiscal prudence or fairness, for which reason it’s profoundly unethical, and the Opposition parties would be absolutely insane not to vote it down.

That said, I suspect, as others have mentioned, that this will disappear from the agenda.

Nah. The Liberals and NDP would be crippled in the short term, but they’d get the money back before too long. The debts they’ve incurred aren’t THAT big - our elections aren’t the spend-a-thons you see in the USA. Hire one of Obama’s fundraising advisors and they’d be in the black in a year. If the parties were more seriously harmed than I expect, there’d be a reshuffle in Opposition and you’d likely see a new Opposition party emerge from a fusion of parties.

But what the Conservatives are proposing is still unethical and wrong, and they should still vote it down if it’s put to a vote.

Of course, what happens then? A Liberal-NDP coalition would be a hilarious disaster, led by either a pompous jerk with absolutely no executive experience of any sort, or the worst premier in the history of Ontario, relying on the scum-sucking BQ to prop it up. An election might result in a massive voter backlash, resulting in a Conservative majority. This is really not what Canada needs right now, and if the Tories don’t pull this off the table and actually cause one of these things to happen I’ll be furious.
…
As for the alleged lack of economic stimulus, I’m curious as to what anyone thinks can be done. Lord knows this government has already jacked up spending in a very short span of time. We’ve been running a stimulus package for two damned years.

22

Yup. Apparantly he’s pulling back on this portion at least, but now:

ETA:

So if (BIG if) this goes through - is this democratic? With our parliiamentary system, officially it seems to be, but the way the parties play the electorate, I’d argue they are more about the leader than the party. People would be upset - “Hey, we voted in Harper, not Dion/Layton”

I’m no political scientist, but it seems to me, if you think about it, the electorate sorta kinda voted in a potential Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition just as much as a Conservative minority…

23

And the latest bulletin. It looks like the negotiations have worked – so far at least.

24

IF the Opposition actually brings down the government WITHOUT the funding bill, then they’ll be in the wrong - if they wanted their economic plans to be the ones to carry the day they should have won the election. Frankly, taking down the government over what isn’t even a budget bill because you think they aren’t spending enough, just weeks after the LAST election, is absurd.

The idea of a government including a separatist party is horrible. Here’s hoping if this happens, Jean has the guts to do what’s right and order them to fight an election over it. I don’t want another one, but it’s simply not right for the Liberals and NDP to form a “government” either with the BQ, or otherwise with a third of the seats in the House and fewer than the Conservatives.

25

A coalition government won’t include the Bloc, who have refused to join Cabinet. They say they’ll approach a coalition the same way they approach any other government: voting for or against each issue as it arises.

If the Liberals and the NDP can propose an economic plan that holds the confidence of the House, that means they did win the election. Canadians elected a parliament with a certain composition. If the government does not care to propose an economic plan that can hold the confidence of the House that Canadians elected, then they are not entitled to govern; if a differently composed government can hold the confidence of that House, then that government is entitled to govern. That’s a pretty basic principle of Westminster-system democracy.

26

The BQ cannot do anything about separation. As they are, they are simply a regionally based provincial-rights party. That can certainly be part of a federal coalition government (but then again Duceppe doesn’t want to be part of a coalition government).

And anyway, I’m sure it has happened in some countries that parties that could be described as “separatist” have been part of the federal government. Maybe in countries like India, or Belgium. So it wouldn’t even be unprecedented.

27

Yeah - what he said, much better than me.

However, you have to admit, they sure do play it up as a bit of a presidential campaign (with at least 3 contenders).

28

This is correct. In Canada, we are not used to coalition governments, but in parliamentary systems, it is not always the party with the largest number of seats in the House that gets to form the government. If the Liberals and NDP can form a government that is able to get the confidence of the House, they won, even if they have 114 seats to the Conservatives’ 145.

Then again, I still don’t expect a coalition government to actually happen.

29

One wonders for how long, though, all three parties will vote in lockstep. You can say the separatists won’t be in Cabinet, but the mathematics is such that all three parties must vote together on every issue of confidence. The continued existence of a Liberal-NDP coalition is dependent, practically speaking, on it being a Liberal-NDP-Bloq coalition in all but name.

It’s going to be an interesting Monday if for no other reason than every party has reason to fear the result of a non-confidence vote.

30

I for one, once again applaud Mr. Harper for some more excellent political maneuvering. Trying to push through a bill that would cripple the opposition and buy them a couple years to move ahead with their own agenda without worrying about the spectre of real opposition took brass balls and I respect that.

As to the constant criticism that Harper has been acting like a bully during his time in office, I say, so what? The Conservatives recognize that there’s no one out there right now who can beat them, so they have, in effect, been operating the government like a majority would, pushing through their policies regardless of the opposition. Being able to successfully manage this tactic for three years makes Harper’s government highly effective, IMO. Dropping this particular element from the budget means he finally found the opposition breaking point – do what you want to the country, but don’t you DARE touch our money! It also means he can use that information against them in the future.

I don’t see the opposition parties following through on the non-confidence vote because they don’t have an effective leader anywhere in any of the parties (certainly not Dion) and they certainly don’t have a plan, beyond impotently pissing and moaning about the Conservatives while standing on the sidelines and doing nothing about it.

31

That is, of course, your opinion, and I must respect that. However, I do not share that opinion at all.

The people of Canada did not give Harper a majority, despite his opportunistic election call a year ahead of his fixed election date. I have absolutely no respect for anyone who cannot even try to find consensus within a minority parliament. I can only hope he’ll have a bag of frozen peas on those brass balls sometime very soon.

32

We have a Prime Minister who is playing the game of federal politics very well; why are you all getting your panties so twisted?

You know who he’s starting to remind me of? Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Except without the Western Canada crushing policies.

33

A fairly basic part of “the game of politics” is retaining the confidence of the House.
It’s the worst kind of government by spin: when a greater statesperson might have been trying to actually do something regarding the current economic crisis, he’s trying to rewrite the public understanding of the very basis of our legislature to his blinkered ends. It’s puerile.

I think what I object to most right now is how he’s posturing as though the other parties are somehow being mean by voting against measures, as they have every right to do, upon which he has made no attempt whatever to compromise as one does in a minority parliament, and how he’s twisting basic parliamentary and constitutional principles to make it sound like his failure to retain the confidence of the House is some sort of a coup d’État rather than the way a Westminster system parliament works.

34

We have a Prime Minister who is trying to destroy – literally destroy – all political opposition he has in this country. That’s not playing politics, that’s blatantly undemocratic(not that that’s anything knew from Stephen “Democratic Deficit” Harper).

Furthermore, let’s take your interpretation of these events: Canada is facing its worst economic crisis in at least a decade. What does Stephen Harper do? Exploit the crisis to play political games. This is what you want from your Prime Minister? A man who takes advantage of crises to advance his own interests, against the interests of the country?

And as to playing the game well, the Conservatives are in a panic right now to put off any confidence motions. Harper’s just made the Liberals and NDP realize that a coalition would not be the worst thing ever. Playing the game well? This move has backfired spectacularly.

35

He’s overplayed his cards here. He might still come out ahead, but to say he’s playing politics well is not in evidence. It’s like he’s gone out on his first turn of Risk and conquered as many territories as he can leaving him down to 1 army. Now it’s “wait, the rest of you get a turn? Shit.”

36

You may feel Harper isn’t trying to crush Western Canada, but that’s because it wouldn’t be in his best interest right now. Remember that in the past Albertans have been disappointed by Harper not giving them as big a place they thought they deserved in his Cabinet, and making moves to try to woo votes from Ontario and Quebec. Harper is trying to keep the power he has and gain more, and if Western Canada gets in his way, he won’t have any moral objection against “crushing” it.

This said, even though it seems this move by Harper blew up in his face, I still think he’s a wonderful political animal. He isn’t afraid to take risks to try to advance his interests, and yes, sometimes the risks you take don’t turn exactly the way you’d have liked. Now he’s postponed by a week the votes on the confidence motions, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he found a way to turn this to his advantage.

37

Any politician worth his salt will always maneuver to his own greatest advantage. The majority governments this country has had in the past made no attempts whatsoever to “retain the confidence of the House” because it didn’t matter. Harper continues to push his weight around as though he is a majority because the opposition doesn’t have the juice to stop him and that is simply a case of recognizing the situation and taking advantage of it. It isn’t a case of trying to rewrite the system so much as using the system to his benefit. Now that he has seen that party greed for funding is the hill on which the opposition will dig in their heels, he can further manipulate the process to his own ends. Meanwhile, the opposition parties have demonstrated that they have no interest in the democratic system and want to steal the leadership of this nation without going through another election that they already know they can’t win. In the long run, I see Harper coming out of all this looking far better than the Liberals or NDP.

As to the criticisms of the currently proposed budget, let’s look at it from another perspective. It is balanced, which does not sink the country further into debt, but holds out the prospect of running a deficit if the need eventually arises. It does nothing to damage the oil and gas sector which is the one part of the economy that is still going strong, even with sinking oil prices. There’s no bail-out money in there for struggling corporations? Perhaps they looked at how the bailouts are going south of the border and decided that wasn’t such a good idea.

When all is said and done, I’d rather have the guy with the Masters of Economics running the show during times of economic crisis than whatever the opposition can currently muster. :slight_smile:

38

Of course it mattered. It always matters. It’s just a lot easier when you have a majority.

And now they’re pushing back.

This is how the Westminster system works, man. Brush up on your social studies.

39

“Steal”? Leaving aside the fact that nine hundred thousand more Canadians voted for the Liberals and NDP than voted for the Conservatives, Canadians chose to elect a minority Parliament, and that means that the Conservatives must maintain the confidence of the House or relinquish government.

The Conservatives are not doing what Canadians told them to do: they are not maintaining the confidence of the House. If they choose not to compromise and seek the confidence of at least one other party (which heaven knows they had an easy enough time of in the previous Parliament), they cannot govern.

This isn’t my idea, you know, this is 215 years of constitutional history.

40

Unless you’re using “literally” the way dumb people do, in the opposite sense of what the word means, this is absurd. He’s trying to actually DESTROY all opposition in the country? Is he going to have Jack Layton shot, Michael Ignatieff imprisoned, and burn down the Toronto Star’s heaquarters? Is he going to have Danny Williams thrown into the sea? Come on, now. It’s opportunistic and cynical, but let’s not be stupid about this.

In any case, he’s overplayed his hand. The opposition cannot allow the funding cuts to pass. They’re being pig-headed about the “Stimulus” concept, but they rightly should fight the funding issue unless it is replaced by a fairer system.