Potential Coalition Government for Canada?
There is a phrase that I want banned: Canadian politics is boring. Canadian politics is no more boring than any other state's; like all political ecosystems it is by turns tedious and alarming. The key difference between American politics (which usually wins the competition of interest), and Canadian politics, or American politics and Finnish politics even, is money. Power too is pretty significant - when you're the world's lone hyperpower, people are bound to be fascinated by your political goings on. But money is the big difference between the American political scene, and everyone else's. Every part of their political process, from the budgets at stake, to the media conglomerates that play a big part in determining the national agenda, has more digits before the decimal in play. Even Britain, France and India, with their sophisticated and powerful media, can't quite match the Americans. (Ching-ching?)
Canadian politics in comparison, is and always will be, small beans. There isn't as much money in covering politics national and local, so we haven't the same media machinery, devoted to documenting the minutia of political life. So we can't put on quite the same kind of show. But Canadian politics is vitally important to the lives of Canadians and by that alone, if not because of the shenanigans, hijinks and bruhahas, it is in fact very, very interesting. Truthfully, Canadian politics is only boring if you aren't at all interested in politics. And if you aren't interested, well, tough luck, because we aren't trying quite as hard to get your attention.
I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. All this talk of people being alienated from the political process, and leaders not reaching out to the people, not being interesting enough, or charismatic enough, troubles me, to be honest. Don't we have some responsibility to get ourselves interested in decisions that affect every part of our daily lives? I don't need a charismatic leader to tell me that the makeup of the government of Canada is important to me personally. That the decisions they make will affect my movements through the country and the rest of the world; the kind of food that I eat and how it's labeled and packaged; the quality of air that I breathe; the type of social support available to me should I lose my job, or my health fail.
As much as politicians and bureaucrats have a responsibility to make space in the political process, we too have a responsibility to figure out how and why politics matter to us. It's not up to party leaders to package it for us, to make it palatable, or flashy enough to reach through the miasma of consumption and excess, to remind us that oh yeah, maybe we should vote! I'm not, talking about disenfranchised voters; those of us who face structural barriers to participation in the political process (and there are some in every country). No, I'm talking about the people who have had every opportunity to exercise their right to vote, to do more even, but haven't, because it's not interesting.
It's driving me crazy that in this time of crisis (yes crisis, on multiple fronts), adult Canadians of sound mind and body are overwhelmingly expressing a wish for government to be less obtrusive. To be quiet and go about its business without bothering people. Politics should be less partisan and politicians should concentrate on the important things, like keeping Canadians employed and their wallets full. What people can't seem to answer is how they're supposed to do politics without politics. How exactly can people with unresolvable ideological differences to put aside their differences in opinion about how the country should be governed, to just govern the country? And yeah, you can take all this to mean that I don't think 'post-partisanship' is a pile of something. No, it's steaming mountain of bull. Political code for the appearance of high-mindedness, that actually conceals back room partisan dealings.
Before this most recent election, I said that public opinion to the contrary, this one was important. With the Conservatives now barely keeping their heads above water, and the Liberals, Bloc and NDP preparing to form a coalition, I think I've been proven right. *g* Canada may soon have its first coalition government since the First World War, the united Right is showing strain, and the fragmented Left is considering alliance. The vilified Stephan Dion is now being touted as the next Prime Minister of Canada. A shocking upset that shouldn't be a shock to people who have been paying attention to the pressure cooker the House has become. Harper has spent his time in government running roughshod over media elites, opposition politicians and even his own party. The recent move to end public funding to political parties is only the latest salvo, in a sustained cold war with the Left.
As complacent as Canadians have become since Harper first became PM, his government has never been rock solid. His ability to govern as though he had a majority, despite the Conservatives consistently taking only a minority of seats, has been the result of a fragmented and confused opposition, made up of the NDP, who've never really held power, the Bloc, who don't exactly want it, and a Liberal party ravaged by two decades of bloody infighting. But now, thanks to Flaherty's laughable economic report, the move to end public financing of political parties and eliminate the right of public employess to strike, the Conservatives have handed their opposition the greatest gift of all: issues around which all three parties can form a consensus that will serve as the foundation of a broader agenda. Harper has been saying for years that the Left should unite (for various reasons that I won't get into), but now he's managed to get them united in precisely the worst possible way for him, and at the worst possible time.
Hilariously, the Conservatives are trying the mesmerize the Canadian public into supporting them with blatant lies about our political system. Are you ready to debunk some myths? Let's go.
- the Conservative spin doctors say that Harper won the last election.
Stephen Harper won a seat in Parliament, which gives him the right to join his colleagues in the House. The Conservatives altogether won enough seats to attempt to win the confidence of the House, and form a government. They didn't 'win' the election, or the right to govern, because that's not how the parliamentary system works. They can govern only so long as they have the confidence of the house, which they have now lost. Stephen Harper is not the President of Canada. He's the Prime Minister, the first among equals, and he and the entire government can be replaced without another election.
- the Conservatives say that the potential coalition would be unelected.
We don't elect governments in Canada. We elect members of parliament. Those members belong to political parties, who can form governments when they have the confidence of the House. Confidence can be read as either being a majority of seats, or the other parties refraining from shooting down very important motions. Sometime during the last go-round, Harper declared that every vote would be a confidence vote. He did this because he knew that the opposition wasn't ready to form a coalition, or to face an election. They're still not ready for an election, but they are prepared to form a government.
In this last election, the Conservatives secured 37.6% of votes; the Liberals and NDP together 44.4%. The remaining 18% went largely to the Bloc, with a handful of Independents rounding out Parliament. By the numbers, a coalition government would actually be more representative of the will of the people, than a Conservative minority government.
- the Conservatives say that since they've backed down on public financing and right to strike, the coalition is a power grab on the part of an opposition that doesn't have the best interests of Canadians at heart.
Yes and no. It's a power grab in response to a Conservative power grab. The Canadian Left (and centre) is moving into the opening that the Conservatives gave them, which is only politics as usual, and no less debilitating for the Canadian people than it would be at any other time. There's some concern over how long the coalition would last, and that is where rightfully our concern should lie. Is the coalition government viable in the long run? I don't know. What I do know is that it the Conservatives lack of commitment to economic stimulus and their woeful LACK of environmental policy are in themselves enough reason for the opposition to unite. The Liberals, NDP and Bloc actually agree on the need for a stimulus package. As do the majority of Canadians. It's only the Conservatives who favour wide ranging belt-tightening measures, while the rest of us see clearly the urgency of our situation.
Harper has said that Dion is "playing a political game," with this move. But it is of course Harper who's been playing games for years now. The only difference is that he's lost control of the ball.
Now, the coalition is not a done deal. Harper could still prorogue Parliament. The Governor General could call yet another election (sigh!). Needless to say, I think that any suspension of parliamentary activity to support a faltering Conservative government would be the worst sort of hypocrisy, from a party that continues to campaign on ethics (ha!).
This story has more details.
Liberals, NDP, Bloc Sign Deal On Proposed Coalition
December 1, 2008
CBC.ca
The six-point accord includes a description of the role of the Liberal and NDP caucuses, which will meet separately and will sit next to each other on the government benches in the House of Commons, Dion told a news conference alongside Layton and Duceppe.
The proposed coalition cabinet will be composed of 24 ministers and the prime minister. Six of these ministers will be appointed from within the NDP caucus.
The accord will expire on June 30, 2011, unless it is renewed. It includes a "policy accord" to address the "present economic crisis," which states that the accord "is built on a foundation of fiscal responsibility."
An economic stimulus package will be the new government's top priority, while other policies include a commitment to improve child benefits and childcare "as finances permit."
There is also a commitment to "pursue a North American cap-and-trade market" to limit carbon emissions.
The Bloc Québécois would not officially be a part of the coalition, but the new government's survival would depend on its support.
Canadian politics in comparison, is and always will be, small beans. There isn't as much money in covering politics national and local, so we haven't the same media machinery, devoted to documenting the minutia of political life. So we can't put on quite the same kind of show. But Canadian politics is vitally important to the lives of Canadians and by that alone, if not because of the shenanigans, hijinks and bruhahas, it is in fact very, very interesting. Truthfully, Canadian politics is only boring if you aren't at all interested in politics. And if you aren't interested, well, tough luck, because we aren't trying quite as hard to get your attention.
I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. All this talk of people being alienated from the political process, and leaders not reaching out to the people, not being interesting enough, or charismatic enough, troubles me, to be honest. Don't we have some responsibility to get ourselves interested in decisions that affect every part of our daily lives? I don't need a charismatic leader to tell me that the makeup of the government of Canada is important to me personally. That the decisions they make will affect my movements through the country and the rest of the world; the kind of food that I eat and how it's labeled and packaged; the quality of air that I breathe; the type of social support available to me should I lose my job, or my health fail.
As much as politicians and bureaucrats have a responsibility to make space in the political process, we too have a responsibility to figure out how and why politics matter to us. It's not up to party leaders to package it for us, to make it palatable, or flashy enough to reach through the miasma of consumption and excess, to remind us that oh yeah, maybe we should vote! I'm not, talking about disenfranchised voters; those of us who face structural barriers to participation in the political process (and there are some in every country). No, I'm talking about the people who have had every opportunity to exercise their right to vote, to do more even, but haven't, because it's not interesting.
It's driving me crazy that in this time of crisis (yes crisis, on multiple fronts), adult Canadians of sound mind and body are overwhelmingly expressing a wish for government to be less obtrusive. To be quiet and go about its business without bothering people. Politics should be less partisan and politicians should concentrate on the important things, like keeping Canadians employed and their wallets full. What people can't seem to answer is how they're supposed to do politics without politics. How exactly can people with unresolvable ideological differences to put aside their differences in opinion about how the country should be governed, to just govern the country? And yeah, you can take all this to mean that I don't think 'post-partisanship' is a pile of something. No, it's steaming mountain of bull. Political code for the appearance of high-mindedness, that actually conceals back room partisan dealings.
Before this most recent election, I said that public opinion to the contrary, this one was important. With the Conservatives now barely keeping their heads above water, and the Liberals, Bloc and NDP preparing to form a coalition, I think I've been proven right. *g* Canada may soon have its first coalition government since the First World War, the united Right is showing strain, and the fragmented Left is considering alliance. The vilified Stephan Dion is now being touted as the next Prime Minister of Canada. A shocking upset that shouldn't be a shock to people who have been paying attention to the pressure cooker the House has become. Harper has spent his time in government running roughshod over media elites, opposition politicians and even his own party. The recent move to end public funding to political parties is only the latest salvo, in a sustained cold war with the Left.
As complacent as Canadians have become since Harper first became PM, his government has never been rock solid. His ability to govern as though he had a majority, despite the Conservatives consistently taking only a minority of seats, has been the result of a fragmented and confused opposition, made up of the NDP, who've never really held power, the Bloc, who don't exactly want it, and a Liberal party ravaged by two decades of bloody infighting. But now, thanks to Flaherty's laughable economic report, the move to end public financing of political parties and eliminate the right of public employess to strike, the Conservatives have handed their opposition the greatest gift of all: issues around which all three parties can form a consensus that will serve as the foundation of a broader agenda. Harper has been saying for years that the Left should unite (for various reasons that I won't get into), but now he's managed to get them united in precisely the worst possible way for him, and at the worst possible time.
Hilariously, the Conservatives are trying the mesmerize the Canadian public into supporting them with blatant lies about our political system. Are you ready to debunk some myths? Let's go.
- the Conservative spin doctors say that Harper won the last election.
Stephen Harper won a seat in Parliament, which gives him the right to join his colleagues in the House. The Conservatives altogether won enough seats to attempt to win the confidence of the House, and form a government. They didn't 'win' the election, or the right to govern, because that's not how the parliamentary system works. They can govern only so long as they have the confidence of the house, which they have now lost. Stephen Harper is not the President of Canada. He's the Prime Minister, the first among equals, and he and the entire government can be replaced without another election.
- the Conservatives say that the potential coalition would be unelected.
We don't elect governments in Canada. We elect members of parliament. Those members belong to political parties, who can form governments when they have the confidence of the House. Confidence can be read as either being a majority of seats, or the other parties refraining from shooting down very important motions. Sometime during the last go-round, Harper declared that every vote would be a confidence vote. He did this because he knew that the opposition wasn't ready to form a coalition, or to face an election. They're still not ready for an election, but they are prepared to form a government.
In this last election, the Conservatives secured 37.6% of votes; the Liberals and NDP together 44.4%. The remaining 18% went largely to the Bloc, with a handful of Independents rounding out Parliament. By the numbers, a coalition government would actually be more representative of the will of the people, than a Conservative minority government.
- the Conservatives say that since they've backed down on public financing and right to strike, the coalition is a power grab on the part of an opposition that doesn't have the best interests of Canadians at heart.
Yes and no. It's a power grab in response to a Conservative power grab. The Canadian Left (and centre) is moving into the opening that the Conservatives gave them, which is only politics as usual, and no less debilitating for the Canadian people than it would be at any other time. There's some concern over how long the coalition would last, and that is where rightfully our concern should lie. Is the coalition government viable in the long run? I don't know. What I do know is that it the Conservatives lack of commitment to economic stimulus and their woeful LACK of environmental policy are in themselves enough reason for the opposition to unite. The Liberals, NDP and Bloc actually agree on the need for a stimulus package. As do the majority of Canadians. It's only the Conservatives who favour wide ranging belt-tightening measures, while the rest of us see clearly the urgency of our situation.
Harper has said that Dion is "playing a political game," with this move. But it is of course Harper who's been playing games for years now. The only difference is that he's lost control of the ball.
Now, the coalition is not a done deal. Harper could still prorogue Parliament. The Governor General could call yet another election (sigh!). Needless to say, I think that any suspension of parliamentary activity to support a faltering Conservative government would be the worst sort of hypocrisy, from a party that continues to campaign on ethics (ha!).
This story has more details.
Liberals, NDP, Bloc Sign Deal On Proposed Coalition
December 1, 2008
CBC.ca
The six-point accord includes a description of the role of the Liberal and NDP caucuses, which will meet separately and will sit next to each other on the government benches in the House of Commons, Dion told a news conference alongside Layton and Duceppe.
The proposed coalition cabinet will be composed of 24 ministers and the prime minister. Six of these ministers will be appointed from within the NDP caucus.
The accord will expire on June 30, 2011, unless it is renewed. It includes a "policy accord" to address the "present economic crisis," which states that the accord "is built on a foundation of fiscal responsibility."
An economic stimulus package will be the new government's top priority, while other policies include a commitment to improve child benefits and childcare "as finances permit."
There is also a commitment to "pursue a North American cap-and-trade market" to limit carbon emissions.
The Bloc Québécois would not officially be a part of the coalition, but the new government's survival would depend on its support.