It's not often in the modern era that we get to re-live history, but such a time may be upon us with the political brinkmanship now underway in Ottawa.
Canadians — it's almost unbelievable to write these words — seem about to experience a constitutional crisis similar to that endured by our grand- or great-grand parents during the famed (infamous) King-Byng affair in the mid-1920s.
It began yesterday, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government (through finance minister Jim Flaherty) tabled an Economic and Fiscal Statement in the House of Commons. (The ironic title of the document: "Protecting Canada's Future.")
All three of Canada's opposition parties — the Liberals, the New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois — quickly declared they could not support the statement and intended to vote against it.
The Conservatives have 143 parliamentary seats; the three opposition parties have a combined total of 163. (The opposition total actually is 162, because one of the Liberals, Peter Milliken, is the Speaker). The House also has two independent MPs.
Those numbers indicate that it is entirely possible that the combined opposition parties could defeat Flaherty's statement in a House of Commons vote. And because the statement concerns the Harper government's fiscal policies, its defeat would translate into the defeat of his Conservative administration.
Before looking at the consequences of such an event, let's briefly consider Flaherty's statement and why the opposition parties will not support it.
Nearly two weeks ago, at a meeting of G-20 leaders in Washington, D.C., Harper said he was considering "short-term deficit spending" to stimulate Canada's economy during the current global downturn.
The Prime Minister reiterated that sentiment last weekend at a meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) leaders in Lima, Peru. "The most recent private sector forecasts suggest the strong possibility of a technical recession the end of this year, the beginning of next," said Harper.
He added, in regards to concerns about world-wide deflation, "This is a worrying development, one of the reasons why it may well be necessary to take unprecedented fiscal stimulus."
Those statements by the Prime Minister, and similar comments by other leading Conservatives, led many observers to believe that Flaherty would introduce measures to stimulate Canada's economy.
That is, it was widely expected that the Tories would spend several billions of previously unbudgeted dollars to mitigate the impact in Canada of a "technical recession" and the pernicious effects (as the Prime Minister said) of deflation. Almost certainly, Ottawa's finances would return to deficit after more than a decade of surpluses.
But to the surprise of nearly everyone, Flaherty's statement did no such thing. Incredibly, the finance minister signaled his short-term intention to maintain balanced budgets. And rather than spending billions of new dollars to off-set Canada's "technical recession," the Conservatives intended to cut selected government expenditures.
The centre-piece for Flaherty's spending cuts seemed to be a political subsidy that gives federal political parties taxpayer monies based upon the number of votes received in the preceding election.
The Conservatives, simply, seemed more concerned with maintaining a balanced budget than addressing Canada's "technical recession."
Moreover, they looked petty for eliminating an item of expenditure that greatly benefited other political parties.
All three opposition parties responded in kind. Instead of focusing their concerns on the government's failure to deal with the recession and speaking up for Canadians affected by the deteriorating economy, they howled in outrage over the abolition of their own election subsidy.
As a consequence of being upset, the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois have vowed to defeat the Harper government next week in the House of Commons.
Barring some kind of compromise between now and then, the Conservative government will fall. Presumably, Harper would visit with the Governor General, Michaelle Jean, and inform her that his party did not have the confidence of the House. He then would ask her to dissolve the newly-elected House of Commons, thereby setting in motion another federal general election.
Not so fast, the opposition parties are saying. It seems that the Liberals, NDP and Bloc are having discussions amongst themselves about forming a coalition government. (Don't laugh. Yet one wonders about the reaction to such a plan by Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae, both of whom hope to succeed dead-duck Grit leader Stéphane Dion.)
In theory, representatives from the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois also could visit Madame Jean. They could tell her that their coalition, unlike the Tories, had the confidence of the House. Don't dissolve parliament, they would say, let us have the opportunity to demonstrate that we can survive in the House of Commons.
Canada lived through a similar experience more than eight decades ago. In the 1925 general election, prime minister Mackenzie King's Liberals lost 17 seats from the previous contest, and returned just 99 MPs.
Arthur Meighen's Conservatives elected 116 MPs, while the Progressives had 24 seats. (Six seats went to other parties or independents.)
One might think that Meighen's Tories, which had won the greatest number of seats, would form a minority government. But King refused to step down, saying he could maintain the confidence of the House with support from the Progressives.
The Governor General, Lord Byng, was in a pickle, and the result was a constitutional crisis that lasted until a general election was held 11 months later.
Are we now experiencing something similar? It seems, to repeat words used earlier, almost unbelievable.
Will McMartin is a regular contributor to the Tyee.
33
Login or register to post comments
seth
3 years ago
Columbia free trade
Why no big stink about Neocon Harper following George Bush's last command and signing a free trade agreement with the murderous right wing death squad regime in Columbia. Even Bush himself couldn't that one through.
Dave Thompson
3 years ago
Ontario, 1985
Shortly after the Tories won a minority, the Liberals and NDP got together to throw out the Tories and form a coalition. It was the most progressive government Ontario has ever seen.
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/provincial_territorial_politics/topics/893-5196/
Frank
3 years ago
Monday
Let's hope it happens that on monday the Libs, NDP and Bloc dump the do-nothing Cons and restore sanity to government.
It would be nice to have a finance minister that understands the problem.
UnCivilizedEngineer
3 years ago
Undemocratic?!
I had read on the Sun that Flaherty or some other Con (not sure who) had dismissed the idea of a coalition gov't as undemocratic! How someone with only 37% of the national vote can say that makes no sense to me. I say it's about time this happened.
On the other hand, the Libs have the final decision here. If they can't resolve to form a coalition due to in-fighting over leadership I sense it will be the end of that party.
JIm
3 years ago
It's funny how Emerson going
It's funny how Emerson going to the Cons was undemocratic, but 3 entire parties baiting and switching is great for democracy and "about time". Very revealing.
"It would be nice to have a finance minister that understands the problem."
Yes like the Liberal finance critic who advocates handing over billions of taxpayer dollars, with little over site or planning, to private companies that are losing money hand over fist. To top it off those companies and their stakeholders won't have to make any fundamental changes to their failed business plans that have put them in such dire straits. That will really help, until the next billion dollar bailout 10 months from now. True economic vision, I guess.
Dan the socialist
3 years ago
This will be great if they
This will be great if they can form a coalition and toss Harper back into opposition where he belongs.
He brought this on himself with his totalitarian attitude and unwillingness to work with others.
Frank
3 years ago
JIm
Your party with 37% of the vote is going to get turfed by a coalition of those with 63% of the vote and you're upset about it.
Pretty funny isn't it?
As for Emerson, I guess only you could understand how that's similar.
Hopefully the next finance minister will know we're in a major recession, because yours doesn't although for some reason that hasn't stopped him from throwing around $25 billion here, $25 billion there to his banker friends.
I guess we know where Flaherty expects to be hired when he's done.
realisticman
3 years ago
Oh My Gawd
First of all Frank, there was nos such thing as any billions going to any banks, you're imagining things that may be happening in other countries but not here.
And, what's this! A Finance Minister that refuses to throw the country into a deficit, when a bunch of guys that just lost an election want a deficit soooo badly. Well fine, gather together and dump this fiscal conservative. Dammit, we're gonna have a recession and a deficit if other countries can!
If the Liberals can't agree on who's boss, what with one guy bowing out and the others preening their feathers for next year's battle and Jack Layton got less votes than them so he can't be PM, so, let's give it to the neutral guy - the Blocquiste.
Voila! Prime Minister of Canada, Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Québecois. Let's try it. Could be fun, especially on the international stage.
What do think they're offering Gilles for his support? Money? How much? Labrador? Communications? A UN Seat? The whole car industry? The St. Lawrence Seaway? CBC? All Revenue Canada offices? AECL? The Moon, for sure.
JIm
3 years ago
First off, if voters would
First off, if voters would have known it was Conservatives vs the "Coalition" those percentages would be heavily altered. Undeniable.
Second, the next Prime Minister will have at MAXIMUM 26% of the vote. Far less than than Harper.
Finally, why don't we have an election. Conservatives vs the "Coalition". I guess that would be undemocratic, scrap that idea.
Why is the "coalition" so against elections?
I guess in the end it's better to have a French national becoming the Prime Minister of Canada through back room deals and extortion then actually getting elected. Democracy socialist style.
G West
3 years ago
Sorry R/man you're wrong...again
The federal treasury had purchase two lots of mortgages for 25 billion each from Canadian banks. You can read about it here:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Canada_buys_25_billion_dollars_in_mortgages/articleshow/3581698.cms
That's just the first installment. The second is covered here:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081112/Ottawa_mortgages_081112/20081112?hub=Canada
G West
3 years ago
As for the current situation
When pee wee was in Peru he sounded like a Keynesian...I guess the Finance Minister didn't get the message.
Something about Tories in power I guess - just can't get onto the same page very often.
And they laughed at Joe Clark!
Frank
3 years ago
GWest
You beat me, I was going to post this headline from the National Post
"$25-billion for banks a sound investment: Harper"
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/10/10/25-billion-for-banks-a-sound-investment-harper.aspx
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
"Dammit, we're gonna have a recession and a deficit if other countries can!"
The Conservatives already gave us the recession and the only way they can think of to keep us our of deficit, which no economist believes is possible given the current climate, is to sell off assets. Selling one's house during a downturn to pay the mortgage doesn't make for sound economics, unless you're a Conservative.
"What do think they're offering Gilles for his support? Money? How much? Labrador? Communications? A UN Seat? The whole car industry? The St. Lawrence Seaway? CBC? All Revenue Canada offices? AECL? The Moon, for sure."
Sounds like you're channelling Gordon Campbell again.
Frank
3 years ago
JIm
"First off, if voters would have known it was Conservatives vs the "Coalition" those percentages would be heavily altered. Undeniable."
Really? Because Cons here always tell me that the first-past-the-post system doesn't warp people's votes at all, that they'd all vote the same way under pro-rep or STV.
"Second, the next Prime Minister will have at MAXIMUM 26% of the vote. Far less than than Harper."
How so? Not if he's the head of an actual formal coalition. If he is, he'll have over 60% of the vote.
"Finally, why don't we have an election. Conservatives vs the "Coalition". I guess that would be undemocratic, scrap that idea."
We just had an election, you want to keep having them until you get a result you like?
"Why is the "coalition" so against elections?"
We like 'em, especially the one that we just had which gave us over 60% support.
realisticman
3 years ago
The Coalition of the Whining
Dion won't want Iggy or Rae as PM, especially while he's still performing his swan song. It's still his baby. Iggy and Rae won't want Dion as PM because their chance is about to come up and the train has left the station. Rae won't want Iggy as PM because he's been after it for ages and his team is playing now. Same for Iggy; he didn't come back to Canada to age quickly and loose momentum while the baby Dion blusters and tries to herd the cats that would be a coalition government.
All the Liberals are familiar with Caesar.
Jack can't be PM because he would be capable of positioning the NDP as a viable alternative instead of an idealist that shouldn't have even his own chequebook and giving him too much stage presence, further diminishing the once-mighty Natural Governing Party.
It has to be he want's to leave Canada; or Elizabeth May.
realisticman
3 years ago
and
Iggy couldn't accept Rae sneaking in without a leadership challenge and vice-versa.
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
According to early reports they already agreed on Dion. But who knows, maybe it'll be like the Canucks and they won't have a PM, just 3 assistant PMs. Maybe Jack will be PM on the 2nd Thursday of each month. That'd be fun eh?
realisticman
3 years ago
Frank
"Why is the "coalition" so against elections?"
"We like 'em, especially the one that we just had which gave us over 60% support."
Suddenly identify with the Liberals and the Bloc Frank? OK.
The $50 billion was not thrown at the banks but it was used to purchase good mortgages, since there are no Ninja ones in Canada, and inject liquidity into a world-wide financial system that had slowed to less than a crawl. Thereby, enabling companies to secure funds to pay working families. Good move. No hand outs but fair exchange. I expect you've heard of CMHC insured mortgages?
Further, Frank, the Conservatives did not give us a recession. It hasn't yet arrived in Canada thanks to the Conservative's policies. When the recession, if ever, arrives then you can crow about it. Meanwhile suffer the misery -if you wish - of Canada, so far, escaping it.
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
"Suddenly identify with the Liberals and the Bloc Frank? OK."
Yes, suddenly the Libs and Bloc are my bestest buddies, hasn't it always been thus?
"The $50 billion was not thrown at the banks"
Your argument to the contrary, the money helped banks and came from taxpayers.
"Further, Frank, the Conservatives did not give us a recession. It hasn't yet arrived in Canada thanks to the Conservative's policies. When the recession, if ever, arrives then you can crow about it."
The recession happened on the Conservative watch. You may argue that it wasn't your fault and ignore the fact the economy has certainly got worse since your favourite party has been in power but in the end the facts don't look good for the Cons.
"Meanwhile suffer the misery -if you wish - of Canada, so far, escaping it"
Perhaps you're retired or perhaps the recession simply hasn't hit British Properties yet, but down here on Main Street the recession has hit and a number of people I know have already lost their jobs in the past couple of weeks. Numbers which will I'm certain increase until even the well-off denizens of the burg you inhabit hear their cries.
Frank
3 years ago
A quote from Canadian Press
"Whatever befalls the Conservatives, many non-partisan observers say the government is in a bed of its own making.
"Here is Harper, who has promised to be lovey-dovey and make goo-goo eyes at the opposition and increase the civility of Parliament - and the first thing that his government does is blatantly partisan and aimed at hurting the opposition," said Ned Franks, professor emeritus at Queen's University and one of Canada's pre-eminent scholars on parliamentary procedure. "
and as for Gilles Duceppe :
"While Liberals and New Democrats discussed who would sit in a coalition cabinet, Duceppe said his party's demands are simple: economic stimulus, aid for the manufacturing and forestry sectors and improved employment insurance."
realisticman
3 years ago
It was a Swap
"Your argument to the contrary, the money helped banks and came from taxpayers."
Taxpayers 'purchased' mortgages from the banks to enable cash to flow. No handout. If you run into a cash flow problem there will always be someone to help you out, for a fair price.
"The recession happened on the Conservative watch."
So it wasn't the US's lax banking practices that caused this world-wide financial crisis? It was Harper? Where did you find those blinkers Frank?
My contacts downtown and in a couple of burbs tell me that all's well in retail and still chugging along very strongly, although big projects have slowed way down. No panic heard. Honest.
realisticman
3 years ago
The CBC says the Bloc doesn't want to rule
Therefore;
Liberals & NDP -114 seats.
Conservatives -143 seats.
Under our system the Conservatives have the necessary majority.
The Liberals will really damage themselves and the party if they give Jack such prominence as he would have in a coalition.
One day he could even be seen getting, say, 20% of the vote!
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
"Where did you find those blinkers Frank?"
I borrowed them from you, the ones you use to blame the Asian Meltdown on the 1997 NDP.
Seems fair to use the same methodology now, don't you agree?
"Taxpayers 'purchased' mortgages from the banks to enable cash to flow."
Are you listening to yourself? You're in favour of the Con gov't "injecting liquidity" (I'll avoid the use of the word bailout in deference to you) into our banking system but when other sectors are up for discussion you ask where the money is going to come from.
"My contacts downtown and in a couple of burbs tell me that all's well in retail and still chugging along very strongly, although big projects have slowed way down. No panic heard. Honest."
Retailers will hold on to Christmas in the hopes that a miracle will happen. Those of us in manufacturing or a related area are already feeling it. Those people have already applied for UI. Others have had their hours shortened as a group to avoid some being laid off and others kept on. And that's here in a province where we're told we're recession-proof. I can only imagine what it must be like in this sector in other parts of Canada right now.
OilbertaRedTory
3 years ago
unReal Recession
for those escaping into reality ; it's here , it's huge :
http://www.investmenttools.com/futures/bdi_baltic_dry_index.htm
Harper - the fauxTory - lied his way into power ; Flaherty is the country's worst finance minister ever.
It's high time to pry the power from their cold deadbeat fingers.
realisticman
3 years ago
Who Knows?
At least:
"By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 28, 2008
Wall Street finished higher Friday, wrapping up its biggest five-day rally in more than 75 years, even as investors digested signs of a bleak holiday season for retailers.
During the short trading day, investors turned to blue-chip names like Citigroup and General Motors, fueling a rally that surprised many market experts."
The direction is good.
Frank
3 years ago
realisticman
"After the 1929 crash, the stock market mounted a slow comeback. By the summer of 1930, the market was up 30% from the crash low."
Of course the Depression wasn't over in 1930 in spite of the markets doing better for a time.
The damage to the real economy is already done. People have and will continue to lose their homes, their businesses and their jobs.
G West
3 years ago
Huh...
then you didn't say this realisticman?
Mortgages are debt my friend - the Conmen paid the banks for 'debt' they were holding.
In the US they called it a bailout. I think the same terminology applies here - Flaherty's finance thingy deserves to be dumped into the wastebin...If a coalition - loose or otherwise - does it, well and good.
Personally, I don't think Harper's government will fall because he's going to blink. But if he doesn't realize he's mishandling this crisis - about which he wouldn't even admit to any understanding during the election (an obvious lie) - he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister for another month. And he also needs to call up a couple of experts in constitutional law - cause he hasn't a clue what he's talking about.
A great many countries in this world govern themselves through permanent coalitions - nothing wrong with them at all.
There is something 'wrong' with this government though....
G West
3 years ago
The crash
The market didn't reach its lowest ebb until the summer of 1932. It did a lot of dancing around in the interim....but it was lower by about 89% when it finally hit rock bottom on July 8, 1932.
This is early innings yet - and , in the end, it isn't going to be the stock market that makes the difference anyway.
OilbertaRedTory
3 years ago
The Depression's Worst Year : 1933
"October. This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in. The others are July, January, September, April, November, May, March, June, December, August, and February."
- Mark Twain
guystone
3 years ago
Canadas state of affairs
Our G8 counterparts, our G30 counterparts, IMF, World Bank, and OECD are all looking at Canada wondering why and how we are able to avoid this worldwide economic crisis so well.
We are kicking ass with the conservatives in power. They created 800,000 net jobs since taking office.
Yes, of course, we are in for tough times ahead but we are still doing the best and everyone is expecting us to the best out of the entire industrialized world. I don't want any changes.
The ABC group just keeps spouting nonsense and untruths about the economy which is certainly killing our consumer confidence. This seems to be the only problem in Canada at the moment. The opposition parties have no problems at all with hurting Canada to gain votes. Its very sad.
Now this coalition nonsense to lesson consumer confidence even more?
realisticman
3 years ago
guystone
Well said.
These gloom merchants refuse to recognize how well Canada has performed, been managed and is positioned. In their insisting that all is terrible they are trying to cause more damage to further their ideology, which will only punish those who they will tell us are their real concern, the Canadian workers.
Sad indeed.
G West
3 years ago
The 'best'
Sorry, I don't think so. Every measure indicates the only people who are doing the 'best' are the top echelon of society - the rest of us are doing worse than we did, on average, thirty years ago.
Society is far less egalitarian now than it was then, home ownership is an impossible dream and the only real growth in jobs is in the low wage service sector.
We are a failure at responding to needs and desires in a way that our parents would find laughable and pathetic.
Ask them?
alive
3 years ago
We are waiting!
Harpers latest move indicates to me, that he is waiting for his masters to decide if he should be allowed to precede the US Lawmakers with any form of help to the major automakers.
I am sure he is governed by the same multinationals that also tells Bush what to do, but there is a slight hope that they do not have that much influence with Obama?
So we all suck shit, while they sit around pondering what will be most profitable for them!
Great world where everything depends on a few parasites getting their act together!