Hidden agenda

[Smallc]

IF the seat count of the liberals and NDP added together out number the seat count of the conservatives election night we will see a liberal ndp coalition.

They don't get to choose that. The Prime Minister would have to step down or lose confidence for that to happen.

[Alta4ever]

They don't get to choose that. The Prime Minister would have to step down or lose confidence for that to happen.

No they don't they go to the governor general and ask to form the government.

[Smallc]

No they don't they go to the governor general and ask to form the government.

That can't happen unless there isn't currently a government.

[capricorn]

That can't happen unless there isn't currently a government.

In what circumstances do we not have a current government?

[Wild Bill]

Yes, I fully understand the idea. This is what happened in Ontario in 1985:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Rae#1985_election_and_the_Liberal-NDP_Accord

The PCs won the most seats but the NDP backed the Liberals instead and David Peterson became premier. Like I said, that accord was successful and popular so it does make sense to me as a precedent. It is not a lawyer's trick to seize control over the will of the majority. It is an expression of the will of the majority if two parties who together have majority support can work together and accommodate the interests of each others' constituencies.

I too remember those days! I'm just not sure we have a true parallel. Davis had stepped down,leaving the contentious issue of Separate School funding a fait accompli. Miller was nowhere near as popular a leader. It seems to me that there was already a trend away from the provincial conservatives. So when Petersen with the NDP seized the reins there wasn't as much resentment as you would think. A significant chunk of the electorate might have voted Liberal anyway, if the election had been a few months later.

Right now federally we seem to have some very strong core percentages for the parties, with perhaps not as much of a swing vote as the Petersen example. Certainly, there seems no strong trend developing towards the Liberals so that if they formed a coalition there would be a large group of Tory voters that were going Ignatieff's way anyhow!

For such reasons I think there would be much more negative feeling towards such a coalition but I could be wrong. Perhaps so many Canadians have become heartily sick of the lot of them that nobody would care!

[Alta4ever]

That can't happen unless there isn't currently a government.

The governor general grants the right to form parliament. If a coalition goes to the gg the night of the election because they have the most seats between the two parties and asks to form the government, it could be granted.

[Smallc]

In what circumstances do we not have a current government?

The voluntary of forced resignation of the Prime Minister, I believe.

[Smallc]

The governor general grants the right to form parliament. If a coalition goes to the gg the night of the election because they have the most seats between the two parties and asks to form the government, it could be granted.

The Governors General is advised by their ministers. The opposition really has no official way to ask to form a government unless the Prime Minister resigns. The governing party, because of this, always gets the first shot.

[ToadBrother]

The Governors General is advised by their ministers. The opposition really has no official way to ask to form a government unless the Prime Minister resigns. The governing party, because of this, always gets the first shot.

Quite right. To do it they would have to vote no confidence, and as we saw in 2008, you don't even talk coalition until you're in position to actually go to the GG.

[Topaz]

The only ones talking coalition are the Tories because if the gun registry does work for more votes or for an election, then they try the long census, while talking about a coalition among the three to scare voters. Please. Tories it can't going to work we are on to you, come up with something else. BTW, how much he the Tories know about the torturing??

[M.Dancer]

BTW, how much he the Tories know about the torturing??

Not as much as the Liberals. They gave us Dion afterall...

[scribblet]

Not as much as the Liberals. They gave us Dion afterall...

:lol:

[Keepitsimple]

They don't get to choose that. The Prime Minister would have to step down or lose confidence for that to happen.

And in that case, I would have no problem with the Liberals and NDP trying to form a government - but ONLY if combined, they had more seats that the Conservatives. The BLOC is an abberation to a coalition government and will never be accepted by the ROC as a legitimate government. It may be technically legal but if the GG allowed it, there would be outrage across the country and it would form a clear path to a Conservative majority government in the follow-on election. We've been through all this before.....but I agree that if the NDP and Liberals outnumber the Conservatives, they would have the right to try to form a minority government if the Conservatives were defeated in the house or the PM resigned,

Edited September 23, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[waldo]

And in that case, I would have no problem with the Liberals and NDP trying to form a government - but ONLY if combined, they had more seats that the Conservatives. The BLOC is an abberation to a coalition government and will never be accepted by the ROC as a legitimate government. It may be technically legal but if the GG allowed it, there would be outrage across the country and it would form a clear path to a Conservative majority government in the follow-on election. We've been through all this before.....but I agree that if the NDP and Liberals outnumber the Conservatives, they would have the right to try to form a minority government if the Conservatives were defeated in the house or the PM resigned,

and your thoughts on the 2004 Harper Coalition embrace with the NDP... and the BLOC?

[Wild Bill]

and your thoughts on the 2004 Harper Coalition embrace with the NDP... and the BLOC?

There you go again! Same old, same old.

"My brudder did it too, Ma! So let me off the hook!"

If Harper had pulled off his attempt he likely would have experienced a similar backlash. The only extra factor he had at the time was AdScam becoming the next major election issue.

Too bad for you he didn't get away with it, although I doubt if it would have been enough to save the Liberals during that scandal. Eventually however it surely would have come back to haunt him!

The popular feeling in the rest of Canada has always been that the Bloc are traitors! On the political level the players can't say that and the legal definition is also moot but as far as the man in the street is concerned, that's how he feels! Joe Lunchbucket may understand that he has to put up with the Bloc but he will NEVER trust them to do anything that's good for anywhere but Quebec!

Any coalition that includes the Bloc would be poison at the ballot box anywhere else in Canada!

[Alta4ever]

and your thoughts on the 2004 Harper Coalition embrace with the NDP... and the BLOC?

There you go again skipping and repeating.

[Smallc]

And in that case, I would have no problem with the Liberals and NDP trying to form a government - but ONLY if combined, they had more seats that the Conservatives.

I would see no problem with fewer or more seats.

The BLOC is an abberation to a coalition government and will never be accepted by the ROC as a legitimate government.

Well, they won't be part of any government.

It may be technically legal but if the GG allowed it, there would be outrage across the country and it would form a clear path to a Conservative majority government in the follow-on election.

Maybe...maybe not.

We've been through all this before.....but I agree that if the NDP and Liberals outnumber the Conservatives, they would have the right to try to form a minority government if the Conservatives were defeated in the house or the PM resigned,

Definitely.

[Dave_ON]

Hmm is it time for another coalition thread? Well why not?

I guess my question is, why are so many people here convinced Canada is so unique in this position? We now have two other commonwealth parliaments that are "coalitions" why would Canada in all sincerity be unique? I suppose the way I see it if no single party has the majority of the seats, and thus cannot form a stable government for a maximum of five years, they have no more "right" to form government than any other single party or combination thereof. If two parties can form a majority government, that is preferable to a minority government that won the most seats. Again the BLOC is the real sticking issue for most people, and on this I agree. What I don't like is this it flies in the face of democracy and shakes the very foundation of our country rhetoric most anti-coalition folks spout off about. With no majority in site for any party I think we have to consider the possibility of some type of coalition, there was no dreaded "public backlash" in AU or the UK so I dare say most folks here would hardly take note, or would forget soon after.

[P. McGee]

The popular feeling in the rest of Canada has always been that the Bloc are traitors! On the political level the players can't say that and the legal definition is also moot but as far as the man in the street is concerned, that's how he feels! Joe Lunchbucket may understand that he has to put up with the Bloc but he will NEVER trust them to do anything that's good for anywhere but Quebec!

Any coalition that includes the Bloc would be poison at the ballot box anywhere else in Canada!

Could be, are you aware of national opinion polls to support that? It's been some time since the Bloc campaigned on separation, and I wonder if there may be a fair number of voters outside Quebec who bear no particular resentment to the party.

[Dave_ON]

Could be, are you aware of national opinion polls to support that? It's been some time since the Bloc campaigned on separation, and I wonder if there may be a fair number of voters outside Quebec who bear no particular resentment to the party.

I think it's safe to say that separation is all but off the agenda. While far from scientific, the most folks I run into actually have quite a bit of respect for Gille Duceppe and many wish they had a party leader that would fight as hard for their region as he does for Quebec.

[Wild Bill]

Could be, are you aware of national opinion polls to support that? It's been some time since the Bloc campaigned on separation, and I wonder if there may be a fair number of voters outside Quebec who bear no particular resentment to the party.

I tried a google but couldn't find anything. It all came up with percentages supporting the BQ in an election, which of course was not the question. I really don't know if anyone has asked how the ROC feels towards the BQ and the PQ, at least not in a publicly funded poll that would be freely available on the Internet.

You can believe they are traitors to Canada without getting all het up about it. You can also at the same time respect Gilles Duceppe for how well he represents his province. That doesn't at all change how you may feel about his mission.

Once again, I am going by personal experience. Perhaps others have found that people in the ROC love the separatists and think they are good Canadians! I have only my own opinion.

[Evening Star]

The Bloc is weird for me. I tend to agree with them on nearly every issue that doesn't relate to Quebec's place in Confederation. They are good advocates for the environment, left-leaning economic policies, human rights, culture, and immigrants' rights and are possibly more effective than the NDP, owing to their greater number of MPs and Duceppe's articulateness. As such, I was actually somewhat enthusiastic about the idea of a three-party coalition in 2008. That said, I'm not totally sure what their goals and priorities even are anymore. They have been dominating Quebec's federal representation for 15 years or so now without achieving anything at all for the cause of separatism or even sovereignty. Does anyone still see them as a viable and effective separatist party? Are Quebecers voting for them simply because they like their leanings on other issues and think that they are strong advocates for Quebec's interests within Canada? If so, why do they not just run as a progressive/social democratic party interested in a 'renewed federalism' that affords QC some more autonomy or funding in key areas? (I would still probably oppose the second part of that but could at least understand the point of such a party.) I'm honestly not sure what the point of a separatist federal party even is, beyond spite: Only a provincial government in QC can call a referendum on separatism, right? (And that does not appear to be on the agenda of QC's provincial leaders.)

[Dave_ON]

Perhaps others have found that people in the ROC love the separatists and think they are good Canadians! I have only my own opinion.

I'm not a fan of lables, I find them to be too limiting. In all sincerity when was the last time the BLOC even raised the specter of separatism? Sure it's on the books officially, but if there is no active pursuit of it, it's just words. Honestly if they can be faulted for anything it's that they are a regionally specific party, they're just trying to put their region in the best possible position possible. You and I both know, and I suspect most of Quebec does as well, we're both better off together than we are apart.

This is the same reason I don't like it when people call the CPC "The Tories" or the LPC "Grits" these labels may have been accurate at the time of their inception but they have long since passed out of the realm of accurate. The CPC's are not the Tories of Sir John A MacDonald's day and LPC's has lacked "Grit" for the better part of 3 decades.

[wyly]

I tried a google but couldn't find anything. It all came up with percentages supporting the BQ in an election, which of course was not the question. I really don't know if anyone has asked how the ROC feels towards the BQ and the PQ, at least not in a publicly funded poll that would be freely available on the Internet.

You can believe they are traitors to Canada without getting all het up about it. You can also at the same time respect Gilles Duceppe for how well he represents his province. That doesn't at all change how you may feel about his mission.

Once again, I am going by personal experience. Perhaps others have found that people in the ROC love the separatists and think they are good Canadians! I have only my own opinion.

I have no issues with the Bloc or Duceppe or their separation goal...I may not agree with their end game but they have the support of those who elected them...

[wyly]

The Bloc is weird for me. I tend to agree with them on nearly every issue that doesn't relate to Quebec's place in Confederation. They are good advocates for the environment, left-leaning economic policies, human rights, culture, and immigrants' rights and are possibly more effective than the NDP, owing to their greater number of MPs and Duceppe's articulateness. As such, I was actually somewhat enthusiastic about the idea of a three-party coalition in 2008. That said, I'm not totally sure what their goals and priorities even are anymore. They have been dominating Quebec's federal representation for 15 years or so now without achieving anything at all for the cause of separatism or even sovereignty. Does anyone still see them as a viable and effective separatist party? Are Quebecers voting for them simply because they like their leanings on other issues and think that they are strong advocates for Quebec's interests within Canada? If so, why do they not just run as a progressive/social democratic party interested in a 'renewed federalism' that affords QC some more autonomy or funding in key areas? (I would still probably oppose the second part of that but could at least understand the point of such a party.) I'm honestly not sure what the point of a separatist federal party even is, beyond spite: Only a provincial government in QC can call a referendum on separatism, right? (And that does not appear to be on the agenda of QC's provincial leaders.)

if the Bloc became a national party and dropped the separatist agenda I'd vote for them and I think many others would as well...