Canada: Living in interesting times

Seems like the Liberals, along with the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois, have really and truly agreed on a deal to form a coalition government in the event that Harper’s Conservative government falls, and right now that looks astonishingly likely. (Though Andrew Steele of the Globe & Mail outlines some other possibilities.) I’d about resigned myself to at least another year or so of this government, and then a nasty fight that might well have led to a Conservative majority, so this is a very interesting surprise.

I’m not convinced that the end result won’t eventually be a Conservative majority anyway – although perhaps not with Stephen Harper as leader – but a shake-up in our Parliament is not necessarily a bad thing. Especially as many Canadians (e.g., those who are commenting on this CBC story) seem to need a reminder that we live in a Parliamentary democracy, and that our electoral system does not match that of the US (see, oddly, a Making Light post for an excellent and logical explanation of how elections are called in Canada; see also this rundown of the options of the Governor General). The people who are loudly declaiming that the request to form a coalition represents an attempt to seize power in a coup d’etat by the opposition parties in particular need this reminder.

I like the idea of a coalition government far, far more than I like the idea of having the Liberals and NDP form a united party, because I think that having a broad array of political positions represented in government and in Parliament is preferable to gradually narrowing the options for voters. However, unless the coalition does a truly phenomenal job of governing, and keeps the BQ onside without making major concessions to Quebec, both the Liberals and the NDP may be in trouble when the next election rolls around. If things have not improved, and particularly if there has been a worsening in the economic situation, they’re going to take the blame and I think it’s going to be greatly exacerbated by the way they took power. The formation of a viable alternative government given a loss of confidence in the existing government is entirely permissible in our system, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the alternative government will enjoy public legitimacy. The fact that under a coalition government, the Prime Minister would essentially be a caretaker until May, and that the new PM would almost certainly be either Ignatieff or Rae, both of whom would be problematic, would increase the perception of illegitimacy.

At this point, I believe that things have gone too far for there to be any option except the formation of a new government, an election, or Harper’s resignation as leader of the Conservatives. The opposition would destroy itself if it backed down now without any changes in the current government, regardless of whether or not it gets public funding. And I don’t believe that anyone wants another election, particularly if the results would be essentially the same. I could live with Harper’s resignation if there were somebody reasonable to replace him; the problem is that I’m not sure that there is. I certainly do not want to see Jim Flaherty, Tony Clement, or Chuck Strahl (though I doubt he’s a serious contender, I’ve seen his name suggested) as Prime Minister. In any case, this would be contingent on Harper stepping down; so far, he has not indicated that he will.

A coalition seems like it’s the best option right now, and barring major changes, the most likely outcome, but the long term prospects for a Liberal-NDP coalition are unsettling.

test Filed under canada, politics | Comment (0)