Governing Without a Plurality of Seats

[Vancouver King]

I can't imagine political circumstances less conducive to re-election: double recessions, uninterrupted deficits, multiple scandals. If Conservatives can generate a majority from the current mess let's just proclaim Harper emperor and save the expense of elections and parliament.

[blueblood]

I can't imagine political circumstances less conducive to re-election: double recessions, uninterrupted deficits, multiple scandals. If Conservatives can generate a majority from the current mess let's just proclaim Harper emperor and save the expense of elections and parliament.

We can nit pick and say june had positive growth which is getting out of recession, but thats for the campaign team. The deficit has already been taken care of. As for scandals, there is a lot worse out there...

[cybercoma]

I can't imagine political circumstances less conducive to re-election: double recessions, uninterrupted deficits, multiple scandals. If Conservatives can generate a majority from the current mess let's just proclaim Harper emperor and save the expense of elections and parliament.

I can't imagine a government that was found in contempt of parliament being returned with a majority, but then apparently Canadian voters aren't very bright. Let's not forget Rob Ford was mayor of the largest city in the country and probably would have won re-election too if he hadn't dropped out for health reasons.

[Smallc]

I can't imagine political circumstances less conducive to re-election: double recessions, uninterrupted deficits

I would agree with you, were it not for this kind of revisionist history where you pretend that reality didn't happen.

[ReeferMadness]

The deficit has already been taken care of.

By "taken care of", I assume you mean that we are safely on our way to another year of fiscal deficit?

How many will that be in a row for our fiscal heroes? 8? 9? I've lost count.

[Evening Star]

actually constrains Prime Ministers, and really leaders of any parliamentary party, is supposed to be their own caucuses. In the original Westminster tradition, caucuses wield enormous amounts of power, and, at least in the UK, factions within caucuses like the Tories' 1922 Committee are renowned for their rebellious nature. While the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom wields, in some way, even more power than the PMs of Canada or Australia (due to these two countries having entrenched constitutions with formalized divisions of powers and responsibilities), the British PM is often forced to modify positions based upon his own backbenchers sometimes rather public declarations of opposition.

In the UK a lot of that has to do with the fact that though party leaders are chosen largely the same way they are in Canada, the twin notions of caucus and cabinet confidence actually retains considerable meaning in Britain. Thatcher was brought down by her own cabinet, with a considerable amount of support for her removal by elements in the Tory caucus. It's hard to imagine such a thing happening in Canada, where the notions of caucus and cabinet confidence have been essentially replaced by a sort of hari kari system where a leader is basically given the powers to act unilaterally, with the provision that if he or she loses an election, they're expected to publicly commit political suicide on election night.

So why is there this difference? How could we strengthen caucuses in Canada?

[ToadBrother]

So why is there this difference? How could we strengthen caucuses in Canada?

Replicate the constitution of the British Conservative Party, that a leader must retain the confidence of the caucus to remain leader.

[blueblood]

Replicate the constitution of the British Conservative Party, that a leader must retain the confidence of the caucus to remain leader.

Better yet MPs of the house, unless your indicating that as caucus.

[blueblood]

By "taken care of", I assume you mean that we are safely on our way to another year of fiscal deficit?

How many will that be in a row for our fiscal heroes? 8? 9? I've lost count.

Theyre saying surplus, so no deficit. I think its 6 or 7.

Sounds like trudeau wants more...

[ReeferMadness]

Theyre saying surplus, so no deficit. I think its 6 or 7.

They said surplus after first quarter. Which is partly due to selling their GM shares.

There is no guarantee that the fiscal year will end in a surplus.

[eyeball]

So now you're advocating that the tax code be decided by public vote? And what would this referendum decide? Whether all tax credits are bad, or just ones you don't like.

Maybe a citizen's assembly would be better, in any case I was thinking someone other than politicians might be better positioned to decide how taxes will be determined i.e. expert opinion vs political expediency - the bigger problem here seems to be the process leading to a proliferation of tax-cuts rather than the cuts themselves.

I suppose the assembled citizen's could decided to scrap the tax code and party like it was still 1999 but...seriously?

[eyeball]

So, how is the behind the scenes horsetrading any worse than the behind the scenes PMO meetings where all of the decision making is currently done?

I agree that transparency would be better but there is absolutely no reason to believe that PR will result in more backroom dealing than already goes on. The only difference is that the backroom dealing will be between parties than within the party.

People are sick and leery of anything that smacks of the sort of elitism that suggests only party insiders should be party to the wheeling and dealing between them - what you're suggesting is precisely what the most incensed galvanized critics of PR fear and loath the most. So defuse them, yank the rug out from under them by opening up the doors and windows to the process right from the get go.

What do I know though, I still seriously think we should lock them all in the same room and cut off their food, water, toilet etc until they settle their differences. It would be a lot faster than the years and decades long process of laboriously incrementally dragging our sorry country's ass towards what appears to be a fairly trifling change in the scheme of things when you really think about it.

[ReeferMadness]

People are sick and leery of anything that smacks of the sort of elitism that suggests only party insiders should be party to the wheeling and dealing between them - what you're suggesting is precisely what the most incensed galvanized critics of PR fear and loath the most. So defuse them, yank the rug out from under them by opening up the doors and windows to the process right from the get go.

I'm not suggesting anything other than whatever wheeling and dealing gets done with a PR system would be no worse than we have now; and could be a lot better.

Currently, a bunch of unelected party hacks in the PMO make decisions and communicate them to the ministers and the caucus. What about PR will be worse than that?

[Bob Macadoo]

Currently, a bunch of unelected party hacks in the PMO make decisions and communicate them to the ministers and the caucus. What about PR will be worse than that?

Ummmm.....more parties = more unelected party hacks?

[Triple M]

There has been some talk that if things are that close, and the old Westminster rule that the incumbent PM gets the first shot at forming a government, that the Tories might try to cling to power.

Outside of this thread i have not seen any talk of this but it is an interesting thought. However, i don't think they would try to delay the sitting of the house until late winter. They might try to bring the liberals on side for the throne speech than prorogue.

[ToadBrother]

Outside of this thread i have not seen any talk of this but it is an interesting thought. However, i don't think they would try to delay the sitting of the house until late winter. They might try to bring the liberals on side for the throne speech than prorogue.

Joe Clark didn't recall Parliament for five months after the Tories won in 1979. I can well imagine if the Tories manage to hang on to a minority, they might see this as a significant enough precedent to push off recall until February or March. Strictly speaking, because supply was already passed for this fiscal year, they wouldn't have to produce a Throne Speech and budget until next spring. Again, the advantage here is that the greater the distance between an election and a potential loss of confidence, the greater likelihood of a new election. The Tories have banked on voters not being overly aware of Parliamentary processes before, and it has paid them pretty good dividends.

[ReeferMadness]

Ummmm.....more parties = more unelected party hacks?

The unelected hacks sit in the PMO and the numbers have grown steadily since the PMO first came into being. Without PR.

What makes you think the situation will be worse under PR?