Let the coalitions begin.

[Machjo]

I'd be curious to know what would happen if a race for coalitions began in Canada.Bear in mind though that this thread is more just for fun and brainstorming possible future hypothetical scenarios and how you think such a war would transform the Canadian political landscape.

I could see the Liberals and NDP possibly plugging their noses and forming a coalition of sorts... maybe... perhaps... if they're desperate.

Or the NDP agreeing not to run in Quebec Federal elections anymore. More likely, though still with a bit of nose-pinching on the NDP's part.

The Green Party would likely collapse, with the red greens likely joining with the NDP, and blue greens possibly looking to rebuild the old Progressive Conservative Party by possibly joining with the Progressive Canadian Party and then trying to attract some conservative liberals and red Tories to it.

And assuming the CPC is not willing to go down without a fight, it would likely shift left to try to attract blue members of the Green Party to itself and possibly squeeze out the Progressive Canadian Party in a desperate bid to counter the left coalition.

Any kind of coalition war would likely completely transform the Canadian political landscape except for the Bloc sticking around. And seeing that the Green Party comprises both red greens and blue greens, that party would have the most to lose in such a war as it would simply be ripped at the seems right down the middle.

Another possible reaction I could see would be for Alberta possibly not tolerating such compromises and so adopting a similar strategy to Quebec's by forming a regional party, and of course more Canadians might start turning to independent candidates.

With both the right and the left forming big-tent-coalitions, It's also reasonable to suppose that party discipline would crumble considerably, with ever more MP's voting their own conscience and so candidates' character would become ever more important at the polling booth compared to the policies of the coalition in question. And that might not be a bad idea.

Your thoughts? How do you think the political landscape would be transformed in the event of a coalition building war between the parties?

[Topaz]

If that is what it takes to get this government down and out, so be it. There's too many people hurting financially and yet this government only spends more for their own purposes. In the next election, which Harper will probably be the one to call, Parliament not working again, I think the Tories will lose seats. I think voters who didn't vote last time will come out and vote against the government and it may result in a coalition or minority for the Libs or the NDP.

[Machjo]

If that is what it takes to get this government down and out, so be it. There's too many people hurting financially and yet this government only spends more for their own purposes. In the next election, which Harper will probably be the one to call, Parliament not working again, I think the Tories will lose seats. I think voters who didn't vote last time will come out and vote against the government and it may result in a coalition or minority for the Libs or the NDP.

Short-term perhaps, but let's learn from history. When the right was split, they eventually recognized that the only way to fight the Liberals was to unite. Certainly if the Liberals and NDP unite, they might win a few elections, but there is no doubt that after a few elections, the right would react with a coalition of its own to counter it, most likely by having red Tories of the CPC, blue greens, and the Progressive Canadian Party coalescing to counter the new left coalition in some parts of Canada, and perhaps a rise in a regional party in more right-leaning parts of Canada.

Over the long term, it is inconceivable that a coalition-building endeavor on the left would not be met with a counter-offensive on the right. You seem to be suggesting that somehow the right would just sit back and take the blows. Initially perhaps, but it would only be a matter of time before they finally reacted.

[Machjo]

Now of course if Alberta ever decided to establish some kind of Alberta Party, then that would likely make it even more essential for national parties to form coalitions seeing that they'd already be knocked out of Queebc and Alberta for the most part, and increasingly they might even find themselves having to work together with either the Block of the AP after the election. And that would likely cause a domino effect with more regional and provincial parties rising up.

[Machjo]

Double post.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Machjo

[wyly]

Short-term perhaps, but let's learn from history. When the right was split, they eventually recognized that the only way to fight the Liberals was to unite. Certainly if the Liberals and NDP unite, they might win a few elections, but there is no doubt that after a few elections, the right would react with a coalition of its own to counter it, most likely by having red Tories of the CPC, blue greens, and the Progressive Canadian Party coalescing to counter the new left coalition in some parts of Canada, and perhaps a rise in a regional party in more right-leaning parts of Canada.

Over the long term, it is inconceivable that a coalition-building endeavor on the left would not be met with a counter-offensive on the right. You seem to be suggesting that somehow the right would just sit back and take the blows. Initially perhaps, but it would only be a matter of time before they finally reacted.

how does that make any sense?..."the right would react with a coalition of its own to counter it"...haven't the right already done that? the wacko christian/nazi/redneck right and the old moderate PC right, where do you see another right coalition?...Canada is a left leaning country only through a F***** up electoral process does the right gain power

[Machjo]

how does that make any sense?..."the right would react with a coalition of its own to counter it"...haven't the right already done that? the wacko christian/nazi/redneck right and the old moderate PC right, where do you see another right coalition?...Canada is a left leaning country only through a F***** up electoral process does the right gain power

The initial right-coalition was just broad enough to counter a split left between the Liberals and NDP. It would in no way be broad enough to counter a Liberal-NDP coalition. At that stage, the right would have no choice but to broaden its base even further, and whether the right likes it or not, that would likely mean bringing back a red Tory party of sorts. It would almost bring us full circle I guess.

[myata]

Over the long term, it is inconceivable that a coalition-building endeavor on the left would not be met with a counter-offensive on the right. You seem to be suggesting that somehow the right would just sit back and take the blows. Initially perhaps, but it would only be a matter of time before they finally reacted.

I believe that broad coalition of progressive parties (Liberal, NDP, Green and possibly some agreement with Bloc) based on a program of meaningful democratic reforms and not just for power wrestling sake is the only positive development that could happen in the federal politics here.

Personally I've no further interest in election time struggles deciding which side of the eternal duet smells a tidy bit better than the other.

I've no interest either in watching perpetual transformations and consolidations that change nothing in the essense, leaving us with the same eternal duet.

Democratic change now or our federal politics is dead for as much as I care. If I can't choose the party that represents my opinion and interests with any meaning, there's no point in pretending to having any choice at all. Let's leave "porridge or potato" game to politically two year olds.

P.S By meaningful democratic change I mean (e.g.) a referendum on some form of proportional representation; fixed - for real - election dates; strengthening independence of the Parliament by removing government's total control over Parliamentary agenda, and so on.

[wyly]

The initial right-coalition was just broad enough to counter a split left between the Liberals and NDP. It would in no way be broad enough to counter a Liberal-NDP coalition. At that stage, the right would have no choice but to broaden its base even further, and whether the right likes it or not, that would likely mean bringing back a red Tory party of sorts. It would almost bring us full circle I guess.

and where are these mythical supporters? they're not coming from liberal ranks, if they're liberal now it's because they can't stomach the reform contingent in the CPC...to bring them back would mean driving away the reform loons... Edited June 1, 2010 by wyly

[bloodyminded]

The initial right-coalition was just broad enough to counter a split left between the Liberals and NDP. It would in no way be broad enough to counter a Liberal-NDP coalition. At that stage, the right would have no choice but to broaden its base even further, and whether the right likes it or not, that would likely mean bringing back a red Tory party of sorts. It would almost bring us full circle I guess.

Then federally we'd have the two main parties that we have here in NB: there is literally no distinction between our Conservative and Liberal Parties.

And I'm not exaggerating, in a kind of "ahhh, their all the same," grouchiness. They are exactly the same party in every way you could ascertain. So elections are pure leadership races, since partisanship (aside from the NDP and the occasional fringe party) is meaningless here.

[Machjo]

P.S By meaningful democratic change I mean (e.g.) a referendum on some form of proportional representation; fixed - for real - election dates; strengthening independence of the Parliament by removing government's total control over Parliamentary agenda, and so on.

So give parties even more power? I agree that change is necessary, but in the exact opposite direction, by removing power from parties and towards non-partisan democracy. In other words, remove party names from ballots and remove all legal recognition of political parties altogether.

[Machjo]

and where are these mythical supporters? they're not coming from liberal ranks, if they're liberal now it's because they can't stomach the reform contingent in the CPC...to bring them back would mean driving away the reform loons...

That's why I'd said it would essentially bring us back full circle, likely with a return of the Reform Party, but seeing that we always learn from the past, maybe with some kind of agreement that Reform and the PCP would each run in their own regions.

Indeed coalition building would always be a constant merry go round. Obviously this thread is more for hypothetical fun since in reality the only real solution is to remove political parties form the map, or at least weaken them considerably.

[wyly]

So give parties even more power? I agree that change is necessary, but in the exact opposite direction, by removing power from parties and towards non-partisan democracy. In other words, remove party names from ballots and remove all legal recognition of political parties altogether.

sounds good to me...but how are you going to make it happen without a center left coalition?...the NDP will up for change but the gruesome twosome will want to keep a system in place that kept them in power since confederation, they won't expend any energy to changing the system until they have need a coalition that forces the issue... Edited June 1, 2010 by wyly

[wyly]

That's why I'd said it would essentially bring us back full circle, likely with a return of the Reform Party, but seeing that we always learn from the past, maybe with some kind of agreement that Reform and the PCP would each run in their own regions.

Indeed coalition building would always be a constant merry go round. Obviously this thread is more for hypothetical fun since in reality the only real solution is to remove political parties form the map, or at least weaken them considerably.

the Reform and the PCP are the same thing...the moderate PC party has been lobotomized and neutered

[Jack Weber]

Then federally we'd have the two main parties that we have here in NB: there is literally no distinction between our Conservative and Liberal Parties.

And I'm not exaggerating, in a kind of "ahhh, their all the same," grouchiness. They are exactly the same party in every way you could ascertain. So elections are pure leadership races, since partisanship (aside from the NDP and the occasional fringe party) is meaningless here.

Really?

Because one of the main issues with the Federal Liberal Party,at least to me,is that I don't think it would do a whole lot different from the Tories if it ever regained power.That seems obvious as it rarely goes after the Tories on substantive policy issues,but more on the "bad and unethical behaviour" side of things...

[Michael Hardner]

P.S By meaningful democratic change I mean (e.g.) a referendum on some form of proportional representation; fixed - for real - election dates; strengthening independence of the Parliament by removing government's total control over Parliamentary agenda, and so on.

PR would only achieve what the proposed coalition would achieve anyway, wouldn't it ?

[wyly]

PR would only achieve what the proposed coalition would achieve anyway, wouldn't it ?

what it would achieve is a fair democracy...

[Michael Hardner]

what it would achieve is a fair democracy...

PR is just a dumb idea, IMO, but we have discussed here already extensively in threads devoted to that.

[dre]

Id like to see political parties disappear completely, and have all politicians sit as independants. Coalitions would still form on an issue by issue basis but they would be different and constantly changing.

People dont send people to Ottawa so that they can two the party line and have some whip tell them how theyre going to vote.

And the very LAST thing we need is for political entities to coalesce around the false Left / Right dichotomy. We need more parties not two ideological monopolies.

[Michael Hardner]

While I do agree that the left/right axis is becoming restrictive I don't have a solution there.

Maybe 4 parties: a social left, social right, fiscal left and fiscal right.

But I don't want to engage in democratic deform. Canada, it should be noted, produced a successful if not the most successful country in the world with its system. Anything we do should tweak our current system and not explode it as PR would.

I propose that we continue to encourage smart dialogue, and discourage dumb dialogues (and monologues) by reducing campaign funding (thereby reducing the number of television ads - the dumbest) and creating ways for the parties to publish their policies online and in print - requiring lots of reading (the smartest).

None of this changes the mechanism of our democracy, but simply beefs up the system that already exists.

The system seems to actually be getting better, and we actually have our political parties to thank for that.

[myata]

Id like to see political parties disappear completely, and have all politicians sit as independants. Coalitions would still form on an issue by issue basis but they would be different and constantly changing.

Unfortunately that solution would be like putting out the fire with gasoline. Imagine 300+ independents trying to come to a solution to a critical problem. We have an example of our city council with just a dozen of councillors.

No, parties have come to be for a reason and that reason is the ability to have things done. This democracy is suffocating in the atmosphere of stagnation and lack of meaningful choice. The practical solution to this conundrum is more choice, more competition and more parties. Not less, we're already at the level only one notch above where there wouldn't be meaningful democracy anymore. But for it to work, parties must have fair representation according to their level of popular support.

This is the only thing that can be done now, other than going to sleep with never ending never changing status quo. Or pipedreaming about rolling back the clock to the time of independents.

[dre]

While I do agree that the left/right axis is becoming restrictive I don't have a solution there.

Maybe 4 parties: a social left, social right, fiscal left and fiscal right.

But I don't want to engage in democratic deform. Canada, it should be noted, produced a successful if not the most successful country in the world with its system. Anything we do should tweak our current system and not explode it as PR would.

I propose that we continue to encourage smart dialogue, and discourage dumb dialogues (and monologues) by reducing campaign funding (thereby reducing the number of television ads - the dumbest) and creating ways for the parties to publish their policies online and in print - requiring lots of reading (the smartest).

None of this changes the mechanism of our democracy, but simply beefs up the system that already exists.

The system seems to actually be getting better, and we actually have our political parties to thank for that.

Why not just keep the same system, but get rid of the idea of political parties? I dont see why our system wouldnt work just fine as a government of independants that forge temporary alliances based on the issues at hand.

People should just focus on who the best individual is to represent them in Ottawa. If im going to take the time to learn about a candidate and things they stand for and how they operate I see no reason why he should report to the bosses of a political gang or cartell to take orders from them.

The system seems to actually be getting better, and we actually have our political parties to thank for that.

Id give that credit to the people that designed the system and the checks and balances that in place. The political parties have actually tried like hell to corrupt the process but luckily theyve been unable to do too much damage so far.

[dre]

Unfortunately that solution would be like putting out the fire with gasoline. Imagine 300+ independents trying to come to a solution to a critical problem. We have an example of our city council with just a dozen of councillors.

Actually I prefer the way my municipality runs over how the federal government runs. And if an idea isnt good enough or hasnt been developed and explained well enough to get a majority vote than I dont really WANT it to be implemented. The party system allows them to jam stuff through, and the reality is most of our elected representitives dont even read the legislation they are voting anymore... they just vote how the party whip tells them to.

[Michael Hardner]

Why not just keep the same system, but get rid of the idea of political parties? I dont see why our system wouldnt work just fine as a government of independants that forge temporary alliances based on the issues at hand.

That ISN'T the same system. As I pointed out, why would we wreck the system that got us this far ?

Parties allow for centralized control and organization so that like-minded groups can forge a general direction.

Id give that credit to the people that designed the system and the checks and balances that in place. The political parties have actually tried like hell to corrupt the process but luckily theyve been unable to do too much damage so far.

Well, it's similar to the American system in design but yet it's much different in execution. I credit the powers that be for that.

[Jack Weber]

Actually I prefer the way my municipality runs over how the federal government runs. And if an idea isnt good enough or hasnt been developed and explained well enough to get a majority vote than I dont really WANT it to be implemented. The party system allows them to jam stuff through, and the reality is most of our elected representitives dont even read the legislation they are voting anymore... they just vote how the party whip tells them to.

This is true!

In essence,at the provincial and federal level we are voting for gang politics.