The Future of the Coalition

[Boydfish]

The Coalition has nothing to do with East and West and whether or not the 'twain shall meet'. It is simply about following the rule of law.

It isn't an issue for you or for the people in Upper/Lower Canada. For those of us outside of those areas, it is a big issue. While the rules are exactly as you say they are, the fact is that those rules don't give Upper/Lower Canada the right to set what the issues are. To the vast majority of westerners, evicting a western PM and installing a Upper/Lower Canada coalition without an election will be seen as a slap in the face.

I'm pretty sure Diefenbaker, Joe Clark and Kim Campbell thought they were fully part of OUR confederation.

Dief was heavily harrangued by easterners for his entire career("Mr. Deeee-fin-bawker"). Clark was given a minority government that the eastern party of Liberals defeated at their first opportunity. Campbell was a temporary appointment to lead the party into an obviously coming defeat.

Of course, putting up those three minor examples totally disproves the resonance that the Reform Party achieved in the west with "The West Wants In!". Sure it does.

Again the misconception in Canada is that we elect Prime Ministers. We do not. We elect members of Parliament and the guidelines I've already mentioned apply. All 143 elected Conservative MPs will still be 143 elected Conservative MPs. That DOES NOT CHANGE. The only one trying to overturn the results of the last election is Stephen Harper, by attempting to turn a minority into a dictatorship. He failed.

Trust me, I can probably explain to you in far greater detail than you can imagine as to the political process. If the coalition wants to take power, they should do so in a manner that involves a general election. They did not run as a coalition and in essence, decieved the electorate as to their intentions. The accepted practice for a government that has lost the confidence of the house is to be voted down and a new election called.

Can you show me where and how Stephen Harper tried to turn the government into a dictatorship? Maybe if you took the baseless accusations out of the effort, it would gain more traction with the public.

[Wild Bill]

How is reminding you that Stephen Harper tried to form the same kind of Coalition with the Bloc and NDP, slamming Harper? You've slammed the Coalition as being unDemocratic or whatever, but Harper's using the whole 'Separatists' and 'Socialists' thing is hypocritical. That's a fact. It can't be spun any other way.

You believe in Coalitions or you don't.

You believe that the the Bloc and NDP are legally elected Parties or you don't.

It's that simple. There's specualtion, not unfounded, that Jack Layton actually got the idea for this Coalition from Stephen Harper, who convinced him of it's legality in 2004. Go figure.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't your inherent premise that the coalition being legal is enough for Canadians to accept it? That because Harper once tried something similar that makes it ok for today's coalition?

To me this is the sticking point. I think these arguments are both irrelevant and short-sighted. What matters is how Canadians would feel about it at whatever time they next get to vote. I'm not arguing with you about the legality or even the morality of a coalition. I'm suggesting that if they got away with it they would sooner or later pay a huge political price at the polls. Polls consistently show that Canadians would likely say "Yeah, it's legal I guess but Man! Does it STINK!"

I'm not surprised the Bloc and the NDP were on side. They had little downside. Their type of supporters would be less likely to have a problem with ANYTHING to hurt Harper! The Liberals are in a different situation. Dion being such an academic seemed blind to future consequences, like a chess player who can't see more than one move ahead. Iggy obviously knew from the start how it could eventually damage Liberal chances and that's why he tried to keep out of the limelight.

BTW, why do you keep dragging out the Airbus scandal? That was Mulroney. Harper had nothing to do with it. Reform had split with the Tories. Perhaps you feel that when they merged with the tiny rump that was left of the old PC party they had to take on the PC legacy of scandal. If so, I would submit that's just more proof that Reform/Alliance should have just waited for the PC's to die off by themselves. They only had a few Maritime seats and had ZERO chance of ever staging a comeback in the rest of Canada!

Here in Ontario people still spit at the mention of Mulroney's name! The only politician more hated would be Bob Rae, which is why the Tories would have loved nothing better than Rae winning the Liberal leadership!

[DrGreenthumb]

It isn't an issue for you or for the people in Upper/Lower Canada. For those of us outside of those areas, it is a big issue. While the rules are exactly as you say they are, the fact is that those rules don't give Upper/Lower Canada the right to set what the issues are. To the vast majority of westerners, evicting a western PM and installing a Upper/Lower Canada coalition without an election will be seen as a slap in the face.

Maybe if you took the baseless accusations out of the effort, it would gain more traction with the public.

Speak for yourself, I have always been a Canadian living in the west. Canadian first,westerner second. I am glad that some of the regional prejudiced views held by a MINORITY of Canadians in the west is not allowed to be forced on the MAJORITY of the population of this country. If Ontario and Quebec are what stands between Canadian citizens, and the far right views of westerners(i think you mean Albertans) then I would like to personally thank the citizens of those provinces.

Baseless accusations? Those are the conservatives specialty. They even sent out talking points to all their members on how to spread their misinformation for them most effectively. There is nothing undemocratic about a coalition. It is a necessary instrument in a parlimentary democracy with more than 2 choices of party. A coalition is a MORE democratic form of government.

Edited January 1, 2009 by DrGreenthumb

[Boydfish]

I don't really care how westerners feel.

That's my point. If Ontario and Quebec don't recognize the need to run even a sham election to at least give a scant layer of legitimacy, the blowback in the west could have fatal consequences for the confederation.

I don't see any suffering going on in any of the western province. What I do see, is constant bellyaching by the people that, for some reason, believe that they should have as much say as Ontario while having only a fraction of the population.

Absolute democracy is contrary to every concept of civil and human rights. The fact is that Ontario and Quebec cannot ignore minority rights in order to install governments of their choosing to replace ones elected by the west.

They are thinking of themselves or their province before Canada. That's the real problem.

Of course westerners think of their provinces before they think of Canada. They don't get much, if any, say in Canada.

[Boydfish]

Speak for yourself

I am. As for your opinions, every village has one I guess.

I am glad that some of the regional prejudiced views held by a MINORITY of Canadians in the west is not allowed to be forced on the MAJORITY of the population of this country.

Ah, but a MAJORITY of westerners hold opinions that are directly contrary to your MINORITY views. Why is when you are in the minority it is wrong, wrong, wrong to force you to accept the democratic wishes of the majority, but when the positions are reversed, you become the loud champion of democracy?

The fact is that westerners see Harper as their Prime Minister as a result of the last two elections. Not all of them, of course, but the fact is that if Ontario and Quebec do not demand that the coalition face the electorate prior to taking office, the effects will likely be fatal to confederation.

[eyeball]

Of course westerners think of their provinces before they think of Canada. They don't get much, if any, say in Canada.

This westerner thinks more about his coastal region than of Canada. If its any consolation my region doesn't get any more say in our province.

As for some of your comments about the coalition...

They did not run as a coalition and in essence, decieved the electorate as to their intentions.

You seem to be saying that the entire electorate is or was completely oblivious to the notion of a coalition and is unable to come to grips with the idea of one.

I wrote all my ridings NDP, Green and Liberal federal candidates in the last election and specifically asked that they form a coalition. I voiced this to people I know in my community and heard others in my riding also talking along similar lines. I posted my intent to do so here and provided links to a few websites on strategic voting to achieve the minority result a coalition would need to form. I found these links in national newspaper stories and op-ed pieces on minority governments and coalitions during the election. How did you manage to miss any mention of coalitions or strategic voting during the election?

The development of the Bloc in Quebec ensures that minority governments will be the norm in this country from now on and in most democracies around the planet coalitions are the norm following elections that yield minority results. Unfortunately ours is a primitive form of democracy better suited for the horse and buggy era - back when the idea of a proportionally representative government was as foreign and probably as shocking a concept as a coalition is today. We're all vulnerable and less resiliant to the challenges of a rapidly changing economy and world as a result.

We need to move up into a more efficient hybrid-era democracy that includes coalitions, decentralization and perhaps the wholesale removal of redundant layers of government and divisions. I'd suggest we get rid of provinces and switch to more localized and bioregionally administered jurisdictions myself. Watershed and traditional 1st nation cultural divisons make ecological and social sense and as a result probably more economic sense too, although I seriously doubt that big corporations would think so.

[Boydfish]

You seem to be saying that the entire electorate is or was completely oblivious to the notion of a coalition and is unable to come to grips with the idea of one.

No, they can grasp it quite easily. The problem is that they didn't articulate that as even a possibility to the electorate, only once they had been defeated did it suddenly become an option. In fact, both Layton and Dion made it quite clear that a coalition wasn't an option during the election.

I wrote all my ridings NDP, Green and Liberal federal candidates in the last election and specifically asked that they form a coalition.

You aren't the leader of the NDP or LPC. Until you are, you don't get to set their agenda. Layton and Dion didn't make coalition out to be an option prior to the voting.

Unfortunately ours is a primitive form of democracy better suited for the horse and buggy era - back when the idea of a proportionally representative government was as foreign and probably as shocking a concept as a coalition is today.

It's funny how the proportional representation crowd seems to believe that it will fix all and deliver some form of electoral utopia. The fact is that proportional representation is fraught with disasterous consequences. Or are you unaware that it was the proportional representation model in the Wiemar republic that allowed Hitler to rise to power? If the Wiemar republic had a FPTP system, Hitler would have been a mere fringe player in a lunatic fringe party.

I disagree with proportional representation for numerous reasons, the least of which is that it empowers the village idiots needlessly, plus makes lunatic fringe players on both ends of the spectrum viable. Worse, with a fractured parliament, those small parties can become absolutely critical in obtaining coalitions. The end result of this is that for every good piece of the agenda a small party like the Greens would add towards environmental responsibility, there will be agenda items from lunatics on the fringe suggesting that we roll tanks into Caledonia, allow the RCMP to execute enemies of the state or any other seriously flawed measures you can or can't imagine.

I agree that reform is needed to the democratic and undemocratic institutions of the confederal government, but proportional representation will only entrench the power of fringe parties and ideas.

We need to move up into a more efficient hybrid-era democracy that includes coalitions, decentralization and perhaps the wholesale removal of redundant layers of government and divisions.

I'd agree in principle for removing needless government. The fact is that we need to see the federal level of government evolve into more of a Commonwealth style organization rather than an actual governmental body. There are numerous reasons for this, the least of which are the inherent ethical superiority of a local government over a distant one and the fact that small countries cannot wage widespread war like large ones can.

I'd suggest we get rid of provinces and switch to more localized and bioregionally administered jurisdictions myself. Watershed and traditional 1st nation cultural divisons make ecological and social sense and as a result probably more economic sense too, although I seriously doubt that big corporations would think so.

Provinces are actually a far more useful model for governance than a distant leviathan like Ottawa. While Ottawa works well for Upper and Lower Canada, it certainly has no relation to places like British Columbia. I think that is especially true for issues like First Nations. Ottawa is prone to hiring it's "local experts" on native issues in Ontario and Quebec and trying to mint one-size-fits-all solutions, ignoring the fact that the west coast first nations share zero significant commonality with culture, traditions and situation with those east of the Rockies or the Inuit or with those in the east for that matter. The attitude that I've often encountered with Canadian "experts" on native issues is that they believe that because they have determined the situation regarding a band in Ontario or Quebec, it automatically applies to a band in the Okanagan. To contrast, it would be like trying to make decisions on Russian culture and history based on speaking to a French peasant.

[eyeball]

...small countries cannot wage widespread war like large ones can.

Provinces are actually a far more useful model for governance than a distant leviathan like Ottawa.

Provinces are to their regions as Canada is to its provinces. I have zero confidence in either of them mostly because I think big governments are fundamentally ecologically unsustainable. Small governments just don't have the widespread capacity to mismanage and ultimately wreck the planet's ecosystems that big ones do.

I honestly think our whole species is due for some drastic disturbance if its to survive over the long haul, much like a decadent old-growth climax stage forest that's long past its fire disturbance regime due-date. My thinking follows similar lines towards big climax stage governments like ours, sooner or later they just burn to the ground and like a forest sometimes its better this happen sooner than later for the sake of everything that lives in it.

Long live the coalition, the Bloc, western seperatism...whatever else it takes to get the fire burning. I'd settle for torching the provincal governments as an alternative though.

[Jack Weber]

Exactly. They were given a 13 billion dollar gift and spent through it during good economic times. A boondoggle tank scheme with equipment no one knows how to repair, and a bunch of junk tanks for parts that won't fit on any of the equipment, that no one knows how to repair.

I only want the Coalition to remain strong and united so that the Conservatives are forced to do their jobs. This will be a year full of Party scandals from the new revelations re: airbus scheduled for February and the possible convictions of 65 Conservative MPs who tried to defraud taxpayers with forged receipts and fraudulent documents in the "In and Out" scam.

I'm sitting back with Iggy and an apple martini to watch the show. It will be sweet.

Don't forget this Listeris business..With the Harris gang seemingly well liked by our Economist in a Tank,the name Walkerton comes to mind.

I'll bet a juicy public inquiry into that mess would really paint the Con's as compassionless money grubbers......

[Smallc]

That's my point.

I'm from Winnipeg.

Of course westerners think of their provinces before they think of Canada. They don't get much, if any, say in Canada.

I think of my province and Canada in the same amount. My province gets the say that it should, even a little more than it should. I love Manitoba, but I love Canada so much. Its such an amazing place. I think many westerners have forgotten how lucky we really are. Right now Alberta, Ontario and BC are short changed, but that is being fixed in a short time.

If Ontario and Quebec don't recognize the need to run even a sham election to at least give a scant layer of legitimacy, the blowback in the west could have fatal consequences for the confederation.

I thought you said you could probably tell us all about how the system works?

1. An election wasn't necessary no matter what happened. We had just had one. Its how the system is designed to work in such a case. And a sham election? What are you talking about?

2. It would be a cold day in hell before a province could separate. The clarity act ensures that.

Edited January 1, 2009 by Smallc

[Jack Weber]

Odd that may have Mr.Dion to thank for that.

[Boydfish]

I'm from Winnipeg.

That doesn't change the fact that this coalition is primarily driven by the usual Upper/Lower Canadian axis that defines the confederation's priorities.

I think many westerners have forgotten how lucky we really are. Right now Alberta, Ontario and BC are short changed, but that is being fixed in a short time.

Right. Exactly how do you see western alienation being "fixed" any time soon? If at all? Heck, you'd first need to convince the Upper and Lower Canadians that there is even such a thing as a "westerner", let alone that they are alienated from Canada.

1. An election wasn't necessary no matter what happened. We had just had one. Its how the system is designed to work in such a case. And a sham election? What are you talking about?

What have you got against democracy and elections? If the support for this coalition is as widespread as you suggest, then it should welcome the election and the resulting legitimacy it would represent. Surely, if it is supported as broadly from coast to coast as you think, it should return a whalloping majority or at very least minority government?

Perhaps the fear that the coalition has of facing the voters it lied to speaks the greatest volumes as to it's democratic legitimacy.

2. It would be a cold day in hell before a province could separate. The clarity act ensures that.

I know. It would be as impossible as a Dominion no longer having it's affairs run by Westminster or even no longer being subjects of the British Empire.

[Smallc]

If you're simply going to twist my words, theres nothing to say. I don't support the coalition, but I support its legitimacy. I don't see the western alienation people talk about because I don't look for problems around every corner. I see the positive in things, you should try it some time. We live in a beautiful, prosperous, and fair country and it time that the people that complain all of the time start to recognize it. I will go as far as to say that we live in the best country on earth. Alberta and the rest of the west are part of it. They have their voice. There is no alienation. Stop thinking so provincial.

You suggest I have something against democracy. Well, truth is, its not perfect. but its the best we've got. Given that, I respect OUR democratic system, all of it. I support the constitution, all of it. That's why I support the legitimacy of the coalition.

As for your last attempted point, I suggest you read the clarity act. Even if the act was not applied to a vote, most of what is in the act would apply defacto.

[DFCaper]

What always surprises me is how the whining portion of westerners accuse Ontarians of trying to force Dion on them with this coalition. Most Ontarians were against it as well. I guess realizing this fact may open your eyes to reality. Quebecors vote differently in elections, so politicians try to get the seats that are up for grabs. How many Albertan seats are up for grabs??? I bet the ratio of what Alberta gets from the federal government betters that ratio, and we all know how much extra Quebecors get. Why do Albertans blame Ontario for Quebec??? They are a pain for all of us. The French language in the government is not against Westerners, but most Canadians outside of Quebec. Awe... Poor Albertans... is that what you want to hear???

On Topic: The Coalition will never happen. Iggy is too smart to do that. That and it is so fragile before power, I cannot see it lasting long enough for GG to be convinced to allow it. And Harper is smart enough to play ball on the January budget, so the topic should die off a bit. I do hope that it does spark discussion amongst Canadians about coalitions in the future as they will likely be a necessary for us to stop having elections so often. I cannot see the electorate wanting to see a coalition with the leader not being from the party who has the most seats. The public out cry has proved that. I think we will have another election before a Coalition as Harper doe not seem to be able to get along with anyone well enough.

I'm just thankful that the NDP are not getting ore power. They scared me more than the Bloc...

[DFCaper]

You suggest I have something against democracy. Well, truth is, its not perfect. but its the best we've got. Given that, I respect OUR democratic system, all of it. I support the constitution, all of it. That's why I support the legitimacy of the coalition.

I sometimes think the separatist Albertans are confused by a political system that has a different political party take control of the government. They aren't used to it.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Alberta is used to governments that last decades, we like political stability. The PC government here is on its last legs, maybe one or two terms left at the outside a decade and it will disappear the way the Socreds did.

[Mr.Canada]

Alberta is used to governments that last decades, we like political stability. The PC government here is on its last legs, maybe one or two terms left at the outside a decade and it will disappear the way the Socreds did.

LOL, and who will Albertans vote in? Is this a joke?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Who knows who will get voted in? Perhaps a new party will rise to power, that is the historical truth anyway. Once we decide to get rid of a government we look for something different. There is one new party, The Wildrose Alliance Party, which comes to mind but time will tell.

[Smallc]

Odd that may have Mr.Dion to thank for that.

I have great respect for Mr. Dion. It just turns out that he had no place in the leaders chair.

[Mr.Canada]

I have great respect for Mr. Dion. It just turns out that he had no place in the leaders chair.

But 3 months ago he was akin to the second coming and a much better leader then Harper...hrm ok..

[Smallc]

But 3 months ago he was akin to the second coming and a much better leader then Harper...hrm ok..

Yeah, ok, that makes a great deal of sense since I didn't vote for the Liberal Party of Canada despite being a card carrying member.

[Mr.Canada]

Yeah, ok, that makes a great deal of sense since I didn't vote for the Liberal Party of Canada despite being a card carrying member.

There are only a handful of real conservatives here, maybe 5. The rest are socialists and therefore in favor of the traitorous coalition.

[Smallc]

Whatever you say.

[Mr.Canada]

Whatever you say.

Oh just admit it. I make it exciting around here. If I wasn't here you'd all be sitting around nodding at each other. I spice things up playing devils advocate and such.

[Jack Weber]

I have great respect for Mr. Dion. It just turns out that he had no place in the leaders chair.

I do,as well.I think he's more of a backroom policy wonk than a leader.That Clarity Act is going to save this country one day.Either with seperatists in Quebec or the kooky fringe in Alberta.