Minority Government Talk

[maplesyrup]

Minority governments give Canadians what they like: a lot more grist for griping

Canadians are always said to like minority governments.

Those of long memory recall the three consecutive minorities in the 1960s and the Pierre Trudeau minority of 1972-74, four minority governments that defined much of what Canada is today, from medicare to indexed social security. Others, of course, would say that minority government deals are what got us into what they see as the current mess.

The media, of course, adore minority situations, regardless of whether they produce good legislation or financial mess. A minority government keeps Parliament Hill on edge, politics taking on the air of an endless overtime match that could end at any given moment. A minority government can decide to survive on deal-making, as was the Liberal style under Trudeau and Lester Pearson, or a minority can decide to "govern as if it were a majority," as Progressive Conservative Joe Clark attempted in 1979 with such disastrous results.

Smaller parties also love minority situations, as it would place both the New Democrats and the Bloc Québécois in immediate positions of new clout, often placing the governing party at their mercy. It also gives them enormous say in when the next election will be called.

Wow, what a difference a week makes in Canadian politics!

[maplesyrup]

Canada headed for electile dysfunction

That's why both the Liberals and Conservatives are going out of their way in this campaign to say there will be no deals with the Bloc Quebecois.

And if you believe that ...

As one of our parliamentary experts put it: "Any party on the verge of power would sell grandmothers to get it."

Now a little dose of reality. How refreshing!

[Bionic Antboy]

Canada headed for electile dysfunction

That's why both the Liberals and Conservatives are going out of their way in this campaign to say there will be no deals with the Bloc Quebecois.

And if you believe that ...

As one of our parliamentary experts put it: "Any party on the verge of power would sell grandmothers to get it."

Now a little dose of reality. How refreshing!

Although not a fan of minority gov't in principle, it may be appropriate this time round, to smack the Liberals and raise fundamental issues.

At the same time, it could get really messy.

[August1991]

At the same time, it could get really messy.

The messiness would arise in part because the NDP will likely not alone have enough seats to support the government.

That means if, for example, it's a Tory minority, they will have to seek the support of either the BQ or the Liberals on a confidence motion (or a money bill).

There are two key factors: 1) A strong ability to count votes (expect John Reynolds to be the Tory whip) and 2) the basic fear of all members to face an election (where they might lose). The worst fear is going into an election on the wrong side of a confidence vote.

I can see a Tory government surviving for a year or two. I think a Liberal minority would have more difficulty.

Also keep in mind that the government can wait several months before facing the House.

And that raises the interesting question of who the GG will ask to form a government. What happens if PM PM gets fewer seats than the Tories but says he wants to stay and seek the confidence of the House?

[maplesyrup]

A study of the most recent polling data for Global National projects that an election today would give the Conservatives 117 seats, the Liberals 112, the Bloc Quebecois 55, and the NDP 24.

In that scenario, just about anything could happen.

Paul Martin might remain PM despite losing the election. Or Stephen Harper could win and quickly lose the government.

If that isn't too weird, the separatist Bloc would have the government in a legislative vice-grip, no matter who becomes PM.

Interviews with a number of parliamentary and constitutional experts lead to only one conclusion: If the current numbers hold, this country is heading for a potential mess of historic proportions.

Given the current seat projections, here is what might happen.

On election night, with no party winning a majority, Martin does not have to concede defeat. Instead, to buy some time, the PM might tell the country he wants to await the results of judicial recounts in a number of ridings where the vote is close.

Even without recounts, Martin remains the prime minister until he tenders his resignation to Governor General Adrienne Clarkson. And in a close race, that could be a week or more after the election.

In the meantime, if the Tories and Liberals are only a few seats apart, Martin as prime minister would effectively have first crack at trying to form a workable government.

Then come ultimate power lunches as Martin and Harper try to barter enough support from the other parties. Talk about a recipe for political indigestion.

With the Tories winning 117 seats and the Liberals 112 -- the magic majority number is 155 -- neither would likely win a vote of confidence in parliament without outside help.

-from the same article

[maplesyrup]

Assuming there is no majority, chances are Paul Martin will try to continue governing. Would any party realistically try and force another election right away? I am not so sure they would. If they did, would they not incure the wrath of the Canadian voter for not giving the minority government a chance to function?

[Argus]

Assuming there is no majority, chances are Paul Martin will try to continue governing. Would any party realistically try and force another election right away? I am not so sure they would. If they did, would they not incure the wrath of the Canadian voter for not giving the minority government a chance to function?

It need not be that simple. If, for example, the Liberals are the ostensible government and the Tories force a loss on a confidence motion then the GG need not dissolve parliament. Instead she can (and is supposed to) ask Harper if he would care to try and form a government.

The reverse works as well, of course.

[August1991]

Argus, the interesting question is if Harper gets more seats but Martin still thinks he can face the House. (I think that would only be possible if the NDP has the balance of power.) Would the GG agree?

[maplesyrup]

In the real world, does the Governor-General have any leeway, or does she do Martin's blessing, seeing as the Liberals appointed her to her position? Mind you, I am not so sure Adrienne and Paul are buddy-buddy.

For example, if Martin continues as PM after June 28th, and then gets defeated in a vote, can he not request the GG to dissolve Parliament, and force another election?

[Michael Hardner]

Argus, the interesting question is if Harper gets more seats but Martin still thinks he can face the House. (I think that would only be possible if the NDP has the balance of power.) Would the GG agree?

I think something like this happened in Ontario in the mid-80s. The Libs and NDP were allowed to form a coalition government even though the Libs had less seats.

[Remus]

In the real world, does the Governor-General have any leeway, or does she do Martin's blessing, seeing as the Liberals appointed her to her position? Mind you, I am not so sure Adrienne and Paul are buddy-buddy.

For example, if Martin continues as PM after June 28th, and then gets defeated in a vote, can he not request the GG to dissolve Parliament, and force another election?

I thought the GG has to ask the leader of the official opposition in the previous Parliament to try and form the government. If this is not in the constitution in words it will be in the unwritten part of the constitution.

[maplesyrup]

The reality is, once the election is over, the Liberals and the Conservatives will work together to defeat the progressive social policies of the Bloc and the NDP.

[BQSupporter]

More LIES Maple, the BQ and the NDP do not share the same view of Canada. Stop promoting this LIE.

[playfullfellow]

The reality is, once the election is over, the Liberals and the Conservatives will work together to defeat the progressive social policies of the Bloc and the NDP. 

I really doubt this will happen, for one thing, the Liberals have thrown too much manure in the face of the Conservatives. I really doubt that MArtin and Harper can get along for very long. Martin is a lawyer and Harper is an economics major. As for defeating the social policies of the BQ and NDP is a bunch of marlarky. If anything, the BQ has more to gain than anyone from a minority government. If the country really wanted all of the social policies of the NDP, then they would od so with a vote at election time. It is not the Liberals, Conservatives or the BQ that hold the NDP back but rather NDP policies themselves. The policies sound wonderful in theory but in reality they make no sense to the average Canadian. Maybe if the NDP did not have a history of wanting to spend tax payers hard earned money on such policies, then they might be more effective.

I think we can all agree that the Liberals have shown that there has been some funny business going on and this in turn shows lack of control or care. If the average person performed their jobs this way, they would be looking to apply for EI, which no one can seem to find out how much money this account contains. I am starting to wonder if this money has been squandered too to pay for some BS program? If this is so, then the Liberals absolutely have to go with a great big ol size 9 in the keester.

I, like any open minded person can look at all the party policies and agree with certain points from each party. Now I also have to decide which party has the most policies I agree with. Finally I have to decide which party will be able to follow through with the promises that they have made. The Liberals have basically broken the majority of the promises they have made or handed us watered down versions over the past 11 years. eg. sponsorship scandal, gun control and we still have the GST to boot, not that I hate the GST but a promise is a promise. So in other words, I can't trust them to follo wthrough on any of their promises. I have looked at the NDP policies and can not find the economic feasibility of their promises. The math just doesn't add up unless they take more money out of my paycheque and that is not acceptable because being a middle class worker, I can't afford it. I am not looking for more daycare so my wife and I can work longer hours. I am looking to make more money so I can spend more time with my wife and kids instead of working an extra 2-3 weeks before I hit tax free day. I already work almost half a year before I make money for myself. I also disagree with some of the Conservative spending numbers but I like their ideas of giving more power to the provinces. I also like their ideas of getting rid of corporate subsidies but I feel they also need to keep in mind that they also have to continue with job creation. I liked the idea I saw in another thread of putting time limits on incentives, never really thought about that before.

If a person is really looking for a centrist type government, then it would have to be a NDP-Con coalition but can you imagine the chaos? A Liberal-NDP coalition would see the NDP kept in the dark when it comes to the money books in return for seeing some NDP policies being put in place. The BQ will only ever back any party that will benefit Quebec whether it benefits the rest of Canada or not. Dependant on voting results on the 28, the BQ could literally hold the rest of the country hostage. Now that thought really scares the crap out of me more than any other coalition.

[maplesyrup]

Governor general must turn to Martin if minority win in federal vote

As titular head of government, Clarkson will be asked to oversee formation of the next government. But experts say her options are very limited. Unless Stephen Harper's Conservatives win a majority in the federal vote, Paul Martin and his Liberals will have another kick at the can.

"In a minority situation, even if he (Martin) has fewer seats than the Conservatives, he has that right to meet the House of Commons and put forth his agenda - end of story," says political scientist David Docherty.

Canada's political conventions say that if no party wins a clear majority, the incumbent prime minister - Martin - gets the first crack at forming the next government regardless of who won the most ridings.

Even if Harper's Conservatives take more seats than the Liberals, without a majority, Harper will be second choice.

No comment for now.

[August1991]

As titular head of government, Clarkson will be asked to oversee formation of the next government. But experts say her options are very limited. Unless Stephen Harper's Conservatives win a majority in the federal vote, Paul Martin and his Liberals will have another kick at the can.

Trudeau resigned in 1979. That's the precedent, and that's how the parliamentary system works. PM PM would brook that precedent at his peril.

Common law is based on precedent, and the best acceptable way of doing things. It is not like a Code or a Charter or a Bill of Rights.

A comparison from every day life? In English, to define a word's meaning, there is no single dictionary but rather several, and ultimately usage. In French, everyone turns to Le Petit Robert.

Despite the experts, in this case, I'll go with Trudeau's precedent. But I have to say that the Robert dictionary avoids a lot of hassles and silly arguments.

[maplesyrup]

August1991....... why did Trudeau resign?

1979.05.22

Progressive Conservative 136

282 4,111,559 35.89 %

Liberal 114

282 4,594,319 40.11 %

New Democratic Party 26

282 2,048,779 17.88 %

Social Credit 6

103 527,604 4.61 %

Other

475 173,441 1.52 %

Total 282 1,424 11,541,000 100 %

Government--136, Opposition--146, Minority--10

The combined Liberal-NDP seats only amounted to 140 seats, not enough for control. Is it because PM Trudeau could not get the SC support?

What actually happened? Did Trudeau even try to form a government and get turned down by the other parties? Or was it because Trudeau was a class act and resigned because it was the correct thing to do?

[August1991]

Trudeau always quoted poets (both French and English) in his election night speeches and in 1979 (or was it 1972?) I think he said "the universe is unfolding as it should".

In any case, I recall he waved his hand downwards to objecting supporters when he said that he would resign.

Recall the times. The PQ was preparing its referendum question and was extremely happy to see Trudeau lose. [No comparison to 2004. English Canada's rejection of Trudeau in 1979 was perceived as a rejection of Quebec. No one would say that now if PM PM loses.]

I suspect that Trudeau would have fought to stay on if the seat results had been narrower. As such, he realized that he would have lost all support in English Canada if he had attempted to stay. At the time (May 1979), he had no idea what was to unfold but I think he suspected that Clark would bungle.

I have always thought that Trudeau was more of a federalist than a democrat. (And Lévesque was more of a democrat than a separatist.)

The other "modern" precedents are St-Laurent and Diefenbaker in 1957, and Diefenbaker and Pearson in 1963.

Incidentally, I was curious about other minority situations in parliamentary systems. I checked Australia and NZ without success. Anyone know? I think Canadians are the experts on British parliamentary minority governments.

[maplesyrup]

August1991....thanks.

You are very helpful, and a wealth of knowledge, even if it does have that Tory twist.

Do you think Martin is a Democrat?

[Stoker]

Trudeau always quoted poets (both French and English) in his election night speeches and in 1979 (or was it 1972?) I think he said "the universe is unfolding as it should".

That was in 72.......the only reason I know, I watched the two hour Biography on Trudeau on Sunday.....IIRC it was in responce to his slight win over the Tories, after basing his campaign on "logic"....

[August1991]

that Tory twist.

I'll respect your NDP twist.

[in the debate, did you see Layton say that at least Harper is clear? IMV, Harper should have returned the compliment.]

Martin, a Democrat? I think this has happened so fast that he has not had time to think about it. For the past four months or so, PM PM has been travelling in the eye of a storm. He has had no time to sit and think about anything. It's a disturbing sensation.

[playfullfellow]

If we have a minority government, what exactly will the financial repurcussions of this be? Will the world view us as unstable and thus start to pull their money out of Canada? I think this is a very real possibility. Lets put it this way, if you were sitting in Germany with several million dollars invested in Canadian bonds and a minority government was voted in, what would your reaction be? I think it would be dependant on who holds the balance of power and what coalitions are formed. If the BQ holds the balance, you might get worried that Canada could split if the BQ gains enough power. I think you would yank your marks out pretty quick. If the NDP holds the balance, you may sit back and wait to see if they start to try and enact some of their coporate tax ideas and then pull out. A Liberal-Conservative coalition would definately seem the most stable to the world but there would be too much bickering to get anything done. No matter waht, unless things change drastically in the next 11 days, we are in for an interesting time after the 28th.

[maplesyrup]

Actually this is being discussed by financial analysts right now. They said if history is any guide, Canadian stock markets usually perform better under minoritiy governments.

[playfullfellow]

thnx for the reply MS, do you have any links relavent links, I wasn't able to find much last night.

[maplesyrup]

pff.....watch CBC Newsworld when their business show is on, that is where I heard it discussed, and probably the Globe will be having articles on it in their business section.

I am sure there will be a range opinions just like any other issue Canada has.

Thomas d'Aquino is not too excited about the minority prospect, but that is to be expected.