Coalitions - what good are they?

[OddSox]

Honestly, I don't get it. I am not sure what the fascination is with making decisions by 'committee' or 'consensus'.

For example:

In the current coalition (and I'm leaving the Bloc out of this, although I believe they are part of it) the priority of the NDP campaign was cancellation of the "corporate welfare" tax breaks which would result in a $50 billion dollar kitty for their favourite causes. The priority of the Liberal campaign was the 'Green Shift' which would result in sufficient revenue to pay for all their favourite causes. I would presume that many people voted for either of those parties because of the priorities they promised to pursue. Now, the coalition has dropped the concept of a corporate tax revenue, and dropped the concept of carbon tax revenues. What's left? Spending priorities - there are lots of them and nobody has dropped any (and I think the Bloc added a few of their own).

How is this type of scenario good for a country? If every political party negotiates away their priorities just to "get along" it really does not leave much to inspire any interest from the electorate at all. In the long run, the government of your country ends up being "average" which results in an "average" country. Is that what you want?

Why should these coalitions not be formed in advance? That is what this country has done for many years (not always successfully). For example, the current 'Conservative' party is actually a coalition of several parties - which include the fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, progressive conservatives and also a bunch of others (is there a libertarian conservative?). The Liberal party has a similar makeup of different ideologies - which are currently fighting each other. It seems that the Green Party might as well be a faction of the Liberals so why not join up and force change from within? I am sure that the contributions from a million voters would be able to sway policy in their direction if they were to make the attempt. In every party, there is constantly a tug-of-war between different factions, and I don't understand why every faction should have their own little "party".

I'm just saying:

If you feel that your voice is not being heard, perhaps you should make a little more effort to be heard (and not tilt at windmills if its not needed).

[Smallc]

Honestly, I don't get it. I am not sure what the fascination is with making decisions by 'committee' or 'consensus'.

We already do that.

[Wilber]

The history of Canadian coalitions indicates they are most likely to damage the parties that formed them.

[-VMG-]

The history of Canadian coalitions indicates they are most likely to damage the parties that formed them.

Is that supposed to be a joke?

[betsy]

This particular coalition in this current economic situation is the worst thing that can happen to the country.

1. Having the Bloc have a veto on every vote is like having a gun pointed on the heads of the Liberal and the NDP. The Bloc can threaten to pull out of the Coalition anytime by simply citing it is not to the best interest of Quebec. It was stated by an expert on TV that the document signed by the three is not legally binding.

2. Their votes will never primarily be for the good of Canada. It will be about what's good for the Coalition to survive. Deals and more backroom deals. I shudder to think of the massive spendings when concessions are made to have each and every party involved in this Coalition happy.

They have a free reign. They got our wallet.

3. Being united together as one will be impossible for all three. Right now, yes they are showing their unity....they have to, if they want to succeed in grabbing that power. As we speak, there are already cracks showing. We already know that some Liberals are either against the Coalition, or against Dion leading the Coalition, or both.

According to James Moore in Vancouver, the NDP in Vancouver is also showing signs of splintering.

4. In the meantime, the Liberals will be busy with their leadership race. The focus will be on this race, not the economy.

5. And if and when Dion steps down and a new leader comes in....we go to another transition. By this time, the Coalition will most probably be at each other's throat anyway.

6. At the first golden opportunity, Diuceppe will be saying to Quebecers: "See? This is why we do not like to deal with Federalists! We're better off on our own!"

This is not an assumption. I'm betting it as a surety. If it manages to grab power, I'm giving the Coalition 6 months before everything really falls apart and all the things I've stated above happen.

Hold on tight. We're in for a very, very rough ride.

Edited December 6, 2008 by betsy

[scribblet]

Look at Italy, something like 61 coalitions in - how many Years LOL

[betsy]

I'm not sure but....wasn't Bob Rae involved in a Coalition before? If yes, what happened to that coalition?

[scribblet]

Can't find anything and don't remember.... If this did come about it with Bob Rae as Liberal leader it would be interesting to see how he gets along with Jack Layton as Bob Rae is not really a Liberal he is NDP. Is there room for both of them in this scenario. loL

Most Canadians are angry with the Coalition’s attempt to take over power from the government, too bad Harper didn't call an election !

[betsy]

Can't find anything and don't remember.... If this did come about it with Bob Rae as Liberal leader it would be interesting to see how he gets along with Jack Layton as Bob Rae is not really a Liberal he is NDP. Is there room for both of them in this scenario. loL

Most Canadians are angry with the Coalition’s attempt to take over power from the government, too bad Harper didn't call an election !

That speech of Dion after the GG granted the prorogue might be evidence that this is not about the lack of economic plans....but rather because of Harper. Dion attacked Harper by saying it's part of "his DNA," and it sounded really of personal nature.

I think an expert said that if the issue is about inability to get along together, then an election might be called.

[Donaill]

I still think it would be best to get away from party politics and focus the power on the individual MP, allowing the MP to vote according to the moral, or political views of his constituents.

[speaker]

The coalition of conservatives that have made up the NEW Conservatives should be a serious caution to this new coalition. Any group of people that can focus on an overt, arrogant, and cynical attempt to hobble democracy like they did, when the economy is in such bad shape that their power base in the oil patch is even slowing down, has evidently got mind siezure. And then to turn around a week later and say oh Hey , , , we didn't really mean it, We were just foolin around, should pay more attention to Babe Bennetts.

I'm hoping this coalition has a better frame of mind. I think that is the benefit of having options. At least before each election the parties have to think about what people out here want.

[Topaz]

This vow to get along from Harper is laughable. One only had to watch his group in action within the walls of Parliament since they came to be and know that NO ONE could get along with the conservatives. The verb abuse all the oppositions members have had to swallow I`m surprised no one has gotten hurt. In the House there`s no repsect, and the personal attacks are out of line! Harper himself is the one to start the smart-mouthed remarks and then his immature gangs takes over and claps and hoots when they put the opposition member down, when that member only wanted an HONEST answer! So if you have watched this over the months, then you know why the 3 parties came together and tried to get rid of Harper with a confidence vote. I hope when Harper is gone this Cons were show more respect for their members and then maybe Canada can recieve its help that Canadians need. My only question now is, why does Harper NEED a majority? What is it that he needs to do, that all 3 parties would be against? Expand the war for Canadians or something else?

[betsy]

This vow to get along from Harper is laughable. One only had to watch his group in action within the walls of Parliament since they came to be and know that NO ONE could get along with the conservatives. The verb abuse all the oppositions members have had to swallow I`m surprised no one has gotten hurt. In the House there`s no repsect, and the personal attacks are out of line! Harper himself is the one to start the smart-mouthed remarks and then his immature gangs takes over and claps and hoots when they put the opposition member down, when that member only wanted an HONEST answer! So if you have watched this over the months, then you know why the 3 parties came together and tried to get rid of Harper with a confidence vote. I hope when Harper is gone this Cons were show more respect for their members and then maybe Canada can recieve its help that Canadians need. My only question now is, why does Harper NEED a majority? What is it that he needs to do, that all 3 parties would be against? Expand the war for Canadians or something else?

Yes. The anger and insults from the Oppositions have gotten personal.

True leadership should be able to rise above the personal and focus on the job!

[Topaz]

Yes. The anger and insults from the Oppositions have gotten personal.

True leadership should be able to rise above the personal and focus on the job!

The PM is suppose lead the tone of the House and there Harper is at fault. When personal attacks have nothing to do with the question at hand the Cons are at fault not the oppostion, it has NOTHING to do with the question. The Cons dont want or cant answer truthfully so they attack and this kind of government cant work, so maybe Harper should step down!

[eyeball]

Look at Italy, something like 61 coalitions in - how many Years LOL

Look at Switzerland, something like 1 coalition in - getting close to as many years.