Partisan Piffle

Gentle readers will note that Mr Bill's primary concern is that the Coalition succeed.

Because working for hope is worse than living in Harper's dream ?

Reality bites....

The entire group of clowns in Ottawa are doing their best to show all of Canada how totally irrelevant and useless they all have become.

Vive La Quebec Libre!

Go BC Separation Parties!

GO Alberta Independance Groups!

How much more of the innane babble coming from these people do we have to put up with before enough of the populace realizes that Ottawa needs us more than we need them?

The Federal NDP/ BC NDP...

I guess when a party enters a coalition as a junior partner there's alot of horse-trading that goes on. Some would say abandonment of principles.

Typically, the federal NDP has been to the left of their provincial counterparts esp. in BC, SK, and MB.

Yet with the federal NDP's agreement on the framework for coalition, it now appears that the federal NDP is to the right of the BC NDP.

Some examples:

1. The federal NDP opposed the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts, while the BC NDP opposes the removal of the corporate capital tax on financial institutions.

Today, the federal NDP has agreed to the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts making the BC NDP seem further to the left.

2. The federal NDP has opposed national highway infrastructure spending while the BC NDP agrees with highway construction but opposes the Gateway Program (SFPR, Port Mann Bridge Twinning/Hwy 1 expansion).

Today, the federal NDP has agreed to:

Those "corridors" and "gateways" include the SFPR and the Port Mann Bridge/Hwy 1 twinning.

Again, the BC NDP is now further to the left on this issue.

3. The BC NDP has always stated that the provincial government is responsible for the ailing lumber industry.

Today, the federal NDP appears to think that the matter is a federal issue:

With all that said, how will the BC NDP reconcile its positions with those of its federal counterparts heading into the May, 2009 election???

Democratic?

"But they just won the most seats in Parliament in a free and fair democratic vote."

I fail to see how our electoral process is "democratic" within our country's antiquated first-past-the-post system.

In fact an NDP and Liberal coalition = 44.4% of the popular vote.

Add in the Bloc to the equation, and that total represents = 54.4% of the popular vote.

The Conservatives only earned 37.6% of the popular vote.

It's a waste of time to argue the symptoms of the real problem.

A coalition could not do

A coalition could not do worse than Harper. Lot more depth of talent among Liberals and NDP than in Conservatives.
Only downside is that inevitable growing fractiousness among (a) liberal leadership contenders, and (b) liberals and ndp, would open way for Tories to promise unified gov't in future.
With any luck, the tories would get rid of Harper (or he would leave in a hissy fit), and there might be more reasonable choices at the next election.

Bill

You state "Stephen Harper is proving in spades why Canadians have for two elections in a row made sure they only gave the Conservatives minority support". I would agree but then you suggest that the others all roll over and let him do what he shouldn't ba able to do in a minority.

Politically all this is very unpleasant and does not help the situation. It seems that that is just what Harper is banking on. I find that kind of arrogance more offeensive than a Liberal?NDP coalition of convenience with the Bloc offering support for a short term.

The give-and-take in politics is still as it always has been and always will be.

BILL!

As DeconstructingDinner says FPTP is antiquated. More than that, it is anti-democratic The Green Party was shut out of the seats, while the Conservative Party got way more representation than the votes they got warranted, as did the Bloc.

Moreover, Harper does not represent what Canadians want.

1918

I once heard somebody say that the second world war began with the Treaty of Versailles, imposed by the Allied victors to punish Germany for her sins to a point beyond the limits of a civilised nation to endure, forever.

I concede the point, the history is pretty clear. But it leads me to a question.

When did the third world war begin?

The liberal democracies, the western democracies are for many years now being punished to a degree that has led a large population to doubt whether we are in fact still interested in the complex system of checks and balances, duties and civic obligations that in aggregate make up what we have called civilization.

I mean, hands up everybody who hasn't wondered whether Earth will be able to support human life for another thousand years. This is a desperate thought, and everybody I know has thought it, one time or other. Is it more than the desperation of German workers in the 1920s?

As the Objectivist push to punish everyone who ever thought a country has a duty to it's people wavers, and the neo-whatever elite growl in malice and hatred, some hopeful signs emerge, but...

Here's another question: If the Allies had relented at Versailles, and Germany had not been driven so relentlessly to the wall, would the second war have been avoidable?

Or, maybe the question is, if we turn aside now from our corporate path to planetary disaster, if we somehow restore hope to the people who struggle to live decently and make real lives here, can the third war be averted?

Just my take on it.

IMO, Tieleman is out to lunch.

Coalition

Bill Thieleman has his head stuck somewhere other than under his hat on this one.

Harper brought this completely on himself by cowardly kicking the opposition once too often, this time while he thought they were down and out.

A weasel won't stay out of the hen house and Harper is not going to change his strips.

Harper is about to get the ass kicking he richly deserves.His own Party is seething at his stupidity and will rightfully throw him under the bus after this all plays out.

Thieleman forgot to tell us about the Conservative requirement that any and all infrastructure building bought with Federal money would have to be P3's, the one's were we the tax payer get to pay 25 to 50% more and are still exposed to ALL the debt if things go south.

Also Bill forgot to tell us that the Conservatives were prepared to sell off Federal assets to prop up their ferry tale surplus. Disaster politics at it's best.

It's time to say goodbye to this ideological monster.

The coalition will do just fine and will be kept in check by the three parties involved and the 60% of the electorate that saw the light and did not vote for this self destructing idiot.

Harper tried to play them

The moves against the election funding provisions and the right to strike were bargaining chips, to be used to gain a free hand in setting the economic agenda. My guess is that Harper anticipated withdrawing them in response to the objections of the other parties, who, he surely believed, wouldn't be able to work together to oppose him in the way they have.

Parliment

The bottom line in all this is that voters provided Steven Harper and the Conservatives with a minority government. Mr. Harper's job as Prime Minister is to find enough support to ensure that his government will have the confidence of Parliament. In a minority situation this usually means negotiating and tempering policies so that other members will vote with the goverbnment. Mr. Harper's insistance on conducting business as if the voters had actually given him a majority is irresponsible. His combative stance makes a workable minority government impossible. The point made by Jack Layton during the news conference made imminent sense: The coalition approach is likely much like the process that would take place after every election if we were to move to a system of proportional representation.

To be sure, the party with the most seats, even when a minority, deserves the opportunity to form a government. Mr. Harper has failed in that attempt and that opportunity must now be extended to Mr. Dion who apparently can.

Pragmatic Power Grab

Bill Tieleman is forgetting that the Conservatives also proposed curtailing the right to strike and the right to pay equity, in addition to trying to removing party funding. By taking stabs at these issues, Harper has brought this mess on himself just as much as the other three have tried to create it.

The fact remains that there are only two choices right now for governing Canada: Harper or a coalition.

A coalition is high risk, but at least we are finally seeing some leadership in Ottawa in the form of the three parties finding common ground. When coupled with the arrival of Obama, the coalition option will give us the best chance for relatively progressive policy to take root across North America regarding many issues, something which we have been lacking for at least 8 years, if not 18.

If one gives most weight to looking forward instead of fretting about past divisions, the coalition is the most pragmatic option right now to get new policy implemented in this country and continent.

I just pray to the almighty that Layton, Dion et al. have a real plan to back this up. It would be an unmitigated disaster if this all turns out to be a power play. But I think there is substance behind this coalition and I think we should give it the benefit of the doubt. After all, about twice as many Canadians voted for these three parties than for the Conservatives.

Teilman is right

I can`t stand any of the parties but we should be going back to the polls.

The NDP will pay the ultimate price,the NDP get scewed either way,looks to me that only the Liberal agenda is being pushed.

There will be no money for health or daycare,not with a 30 billion dollar bailout/stimulus.

The corporate tax breaks are still there,so where is any of NDP agenda in this package?
There won`t be a cap n trade,big industry can`t afford it,have you heard one word about the green shift?
I assume that has been put on the backburner as well.

There will be no money for the auto sector until they re-organize or re-tool and that won`t happen uhtil the USA auto sector gets rolling.

Infrastructure, hmmmmmm---Everything cost hudreds of millions if not billions,do you really think infrastructure on a small scale will revive the economy?

Do we bring in cheap foreign labour to build it? Like Campbell has brought in foreign labour on the Canada line,the golden ears bridge, will infrastructure help rural BC that has been in recession for years now?

I don`t see anything NDP in this coalition!

So anything that goes well will be claimed by the Liberals.

I don`t care if Harper gets removed but the NDP has just lost it`s voice.

Would you supporters of this coalition feel the same way if it was a Conservative/Bloc coalition?

Or how about a coalition of the Conservatives/NDP/BLOC? Would you feel the same way? I doubt it.

So if you wouldn`t be happy with a coalition without the Liberals, were going down a slippery slope here.

So all you die-hard Liberal power supporters,enjoy your orgasism,all you NDPers,enjoy this little party,your leader has just killed the Federal NDP`s upward movement.

Sometimes a country needs a little pain before it can make a diffrent choice.

WAY TO GO JACK

Coalition can work, as it

Coalition can work, as it has worked in many countries all over the world.

I keep coming back to the volunteer coalition Churchill had with Labour during WW2 and his will to have Labour's Aneurin Bevan to succeed him in case he dies.

Another good example are businesses with all kinds of ideologues and religions thrown together for a common cause, to succeed and make a living. When I had my shop in Vancouver, I, the boss, was the only NDP voter, all my tradesmen were Socreds and PC, but we worked together as a team and the best of friends.

If these guys can forget their egoes and their backrooms their ideological hysteria and concentrate on solid facts, they all have the qualifications to succeed.

I think Dion is the most underestimated talent among them and I'm still an NDP voter.

Anything and anybody but Harper !!!!!!

Ed Deak.

Where are the political commentators?

Why can't the Tyee find someone who can talk sense right now?

The parliamentary system is all about who has confidence to rule. The minority at the moment doesn't, and it's perfectly legitimate for the majority opposition to take a stab at it.

The Conservatives did something stupid and attempted to do things that are bad for democracy and didn't address the economy. What would you have the opposition do? The fact is, their bold move forced Stephen Harper to back down. What kind of Prime Minister does that? I would much rather have a government that has the chutzpah to come out swinging and rightly state "it's the economy, stupid!". So now the conservatives have backed down and will announce a stimulus package. Just what the opposition wants. The opposition got everything they wanted. If they are going to dictate policy, they ought to be the government.

Stephen Harper is not a president and has no fixed term. He must have the confidence of the House. Stephen Harper won an election but lost the confidence of the majority of voters as represented by the parliamentary majority. This is not a constitutional crisis, this is the greatest check/balance we have. This is Parliamentary democracy!

Now, Tyee, go find someone who can say this more eloquently than me.

Once more...

OK, so Harper screwed up and now all the others are screwing up as well in your opinion. I get it Bill and you others. What is your solution for the 60% of the opposition? I guess bend over and like it? Let's have some ideas that don't involve letting Harper reign as though he has a majority. We didn't vote for that either.

There is nothing in this article that gives any ideas.

wonders never cease. first

wonders never cease. first time i've ever agreed with tieleman, though for different reasons. the coalition exists b/c a bunch of desperate losers see absolutely no other way to seize power. the libs are disgraced and must rebuild and the ndp never gets more than 20% of the vote. as a conservative supporter i say let them go ahead and govern so canadians finally realize what a bunch of clowns these guys really are. with a new leader of the cpc after a year of bureaucratic bungling (or worse) by the 'coalition for canada and quebec' -layton's words) the new conservative majority will have their way for as long as they want.

A coalition government works

A coalition government works for me. I voted against conservatism. I don't want conservatives dictating my social programs or my economic programs. I think the majority of Canadians felt the same way the last time we went to the polls.

A coalition sounds innovative enough to actually work in Canada's present climate.

Now we get to watch

all those proud Canadians who support Harper become raging Western separatists literally overnight because the NDP and the Liberals are basing their coalition on the support of .... are you ready for this?... separatists. (Who can't separate because not enough of their electorate want to separate)

None of them seem to have any problem with this. Cognitive dissonance, no?

Sorry, Bill, but Canadian politics just got a lot more interesting. All the cries of rage from the 37% of the voters who thought that they had a divine right to absolute power only make me absolutely certain that the coalition is the best thing that could happen under present circumstances.

Harper has lost the confidence of the house

Harper no longer has the confidence of the majority of the elected members of parliament. Altering the financial statement now is too little too late. The conservatives have played dirty pool, first they tried to bankrupt the opposition, then they maligned the opposition and proved their lack of ethics by releasing recordings of opposition talks. (I won't even get into taking away the rights of workers to strike and the right to pay equity for women) Why on earth should the opposition express confidence in a party and a leader that has demonstrated a complete lack of respect for them? It's over for Harper, it's a fact he needs to accept. If the GG calls another election so be it, but there are many legal precedents in the English parliamentary tradition for coalition governments. It's time to let those who have expressed a willingness and ability to work together take a crack at it.

It's Proportional Representation

Anybody who was watching the three Opposition leaders speak as a unified Coalition (well, two of them, with support from the 3rd), heard Jack Layton say something which was very heartwarming.

He was responding to a journalist's question about whether the disparate parties could possibly get along together.

He said "What you are seeing here is something like Proportional Representation at work. If we'd had P.R. in the last election, this is just about how it would have worked out. And we'd be expected to work together to resolve the issues."

So that's what we've got: Proportional Representation ... a bit early.

Getting It

Quite right - the opposition forces Harper to amend his bills, Harper threatens to dissolve Parliament, opposition forms coalition to become government ...

See ? Not so hard to understand .

sirjohna

All I have been hearing is that they want another crack at it at the end of January. That sounds to me like we'll work it till the opposition loses its initiative we get to flood the airwaves with our message. Hell we can govern by trial and error. Next time we try to bully them and the reaction will be the same but they will have spent their ammunition. Yes I get it. Harper hasn't learned a thing.

How do you know how government works in Canada in this situation. We've never had a minority government that did not understand the meaning of "we don't have the votes" and compromised to make sure they had. That the offending issues would never fly to the others is not rocket science. We don't live in the U.S. of A. and thank heaven for that.

I have no idea what Tieleman

I have no idea what Tieleman is talking about on this issue. Is he being sarcastic?

This coalition could show the Canadian people how proportional representation might work, and we could have a progressive government to boot.

Anybody but Harper at this critical phase in history.

Tieleman Drinking Kool Aid

"Canadians clearly want all parties to cooperate as much as possible in a time of economic crisis."

Quite right!

Harper proved himself an insufferable autocrat, incapable of co-operation. Therefore, if the parties comprising the majority of the popular vote can come to an agreement to co-operate, then they have demonstrated a willingness to do what the electorate expects. What's the problem?

Oh! The Canadian people never voted for that, according to Tieleman, a self-confessed First Past the Post supporter. So what? Who ever votes for a coalition?

For a coalition to survive, it will be much more obligated to co-operate than hubristic Harper. He had his chance; he blew it. Time for him to land on the dung heap of history.

Whoever votes for a minority government.

When you cast your ballot you just vote. The outcome is left to the final count. Everyone votes for a majority government. If it does not happen then we get this. The arguement that people didn't vote for a coalition so it should not happen is silly. They didn't vote for a minority government either but it happened.

Where is the consistency?

Bullies: Harper, Campbell

One bully down, one to go.

We live in interesting

We live in interesting times, right now. I'm no political expert but Harper was running things as if he had a massive majority, not a minority situation. The opposition does represent more folks than he did, so does he work with them? Not likely . Does Harpers plan for the economy mean anything? He has flipped positions so often since the opposition started talking coalition. We should all be having head aches with the twsists and turns down Ottawa way. Maybe that's why a lot of folks want Harper gone.

Quebec is staying as part of Canada, and so are the western provinces. All three opposition parties are taking risks by forming a coalition. They know the background aboout coalitions. They know the risks so they will no doubt work hard to make this things work.

As usual Bill a good column that provides a forum for discussion. We may not all agree with you on this subject but that's the way it should be .

Coalition Work? Not a chance.

Here is the reality: Libs, NDP and Bloc, form a coalition, in order to maintain themselves in a semblance of "power" the Libs under Dion and whomever, with "Smilin' Jack" are constantly blackmailed by the Bloc, until they can squeeze no more, coalition fails, election is called, Bloc goes back to Quebec and says: "See what heroes we are? Look what we got for Quebec!"
The Conservatives are re-elected a strong majority under a new centralist, "Red Tory" leader and the Liberal and NDP are severely punished by the electorate for being self-centered and stupid.

From "Western-Centric" to "Ontario/Quebec-Centric" Government

No one has yet analyzed the Canadian election results in terms of today's context:

BC:

C - 45%
L - 19%
N- 26%
G - 9%

AB

C - 65%
L - 11%
N - 13%
G - 9%

SK

C - 54%
L - 15%
N - 26%
G - 6%

MB

C - 49%
L - 19%
N - 24%
G - 7%

After reviewing the above recent federal votes, it's quite obvious that the Cons won a plurality/majority of votes in each of the four western Canadian provinces.

Ergo, the Con government could be described as "western" based or "centric".

The proposed coalition government could be described as "eastern" or "Ontario/Quebec" "centric" with the majority of Liberal/BQ support/members from that region. Even NDP support, for that matter.

Be careful of what one wishes for... one might not always like what they get. And yes, I'm a centre-right Liberal who believes that the current Liberal party is still in disarray after the recent drubbing at the polls.

die hards...

I am certain that the NDP will still get 15% in the polls no matter what Jack does.

I am certain that the Liberals will still get 28% in the polls, no matter what Dion does.

I am certain that the Conservatives will still get 28% in the polls, no matter what Harper does.

That leaves the usual 'mushy middle' to decide the outcome.

Unless we 'collectively' really want the BQ to govern? For I certainly think that Duceppe would ask for one post in the cabinet and one only, Finance.

It is the only one that really matters to Quebec.

Once the BQ has the chequebook, count on the 'western separation' movement to gain momentum, for whom is it that is now paying for everything?

Do you wish to continue paying for this dog and pony show from Ottawa?

I think that Tieleman is right on with his observations regarding the 'mushy middle' should the GG not send us all back to the polls if Harper calls for a dissolution. The offer to go to the 'coalition of mixed nuts' would virtually seal their fate to a very reduced position...as I do not see the Bloq ever co-operating with the other two without garnering very significant concessions...concessions that once given would be very painful for the parties to explain away, much less reverse.

Go on form a coalition, thumb your noses as the electorate...most of the sheeple will not notice.

Some already have been for some time.

Wonderboy, foiled

Bill, you jest.

If you believe in the public common good, opposition to the coalition is illogical, no matter what sewer politics were used to make it happen. Harper's government has been vile, rapacious, elitist, and yeah, let's not forget, philistine.

Wonderboy, foiled. What a GREAT day in Canadian history.

Playing footsies

Oh boy. After Rafe, it is Tieleman to dump on the coalition now. Have you guys been playing footsies with the CanWest and likes?

Well Bill

I take it you were horrifically exercised when Brian Mulroney put Lucien Bouchard in his cabinet?

My understanding of the coalition agreement is that the Bloc is only agreeing to vote with the coalition formally for somewhat more than one year precisely because the two parties in the coalition WOULD NOT accede to the demands of M. Duceppe relative to specific Quebec interests.

I think your concern is overblown. The people of Quebec – through their representatives in the Bloc – have every right to support the coalition – a coalition which is formed with the precise purpose of addressing issues and problems that the Harper Government is not able or prepared to do. The actions of the Bloc’s members are, as such, entirely understandable.

Furthermore, the success of the coalition as an entity will NOT further the interests of separatism any more than, as I mentioned, the presence of Lucien Bouchard in Brian Mulroney’s Cabinet did.

In fact, it could be argued that the one thing Mulroney did which might have had some lasting positive impact on the country was his positive overtures to PQ supporters in la Belle Province.

Now, whether or not the Liberal/NDP coalition will hold together is a legitimate concern and I understand that a first past the post supporter like yourself would have a hard time agreeing to the wisdom of what the NDP (which is clearly leading this move) is up to.

It is, as they say, an enormous risk - predicated upon actually responding to economic bad times in a successful way in the next 30 months or so...on the other hand, the rewards - as they were for the Labour Party in its shared power agreement with a fracturing Liberal Party after the First World War in England.

We are either going to end up with some kind of proportional representation or a permanent right wing government in this country.

I think now is the time to make a move - the next election would be too late...

I don't know if it will work - but I'm pretty well convinced noblesse oblige won't.

Respectfully, it's time for politics to enter the new century Bill.

Lets go back to the polls

Why don`t the greens get a voice,I know they have no MPs but they got 8% of the vote.

Lets have the NDP and Liberals unify their party and run a campaign,Dion and Layton can both wield power,hell even have the Bloc join their party.

Thanks for the western province`s election numbers Luke Skywalker,they were very revealing,anyone with have a brain can see that this coalition will be bad news for BC.

The way we change goverment is to go to the polls,over and over and over again.

Elections are good stimulus packages,300 million spent on poll clerks,advertising,and all kinds of other crap.

What will happen when Harper offers Quebec a sweeter deal? DOWN GOES THE COALITION.

Don`t be surprised is 6 MPs cross the floor, 2 NDP 2 Liberal 2 Bloc --Then what? You guessed it A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY,what backroom deals are happening right now? What could be offered,cabinet posts?

There are many within the Liberal party that are furious about this proposed coalition,many irate NDPers as well, be careful what you wish for,there are many more turns coming.

Rest in peace Ndp party, maybe you can join with the greens to re-make yourself!

egmont

I agree with you - the Greens do deserve a voice - almost a million Canadians voted Green in the election - just another sign of what's wrong with our electoral system and dysfunctional democracy

But...

In the end, I think it's the Liberal Party that is in real trouble here...The Conservatives will survive Harper and become a real progressive party once again - I'm not sure the Liberals ever will.

Politically Explosive Stuff...

Proroguing Parliament???

From CTV News:

And if that "Manual of Office Procedure" from the "Government of Canada" is constitutionally correct... and the government does have the power to prorogue Parliament... there likely will be no coalition government.

The biggest losers in this scenario would be the NDP ... by now publicly agreeing with the Liberals on the Afghanistan mission, the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts, etc. in contravention of their stated principles.

Bill, you have some good political instincts.

why not prorogue until the

why not prorogue until the budget is introduced in january? the coalition for canada and quebec has already taken this farce into the gutter anyway. in the meantime perhaps harper will resign?

Not at all luke

In my view, if Harper prorogues he will be on the run until he delivers his promised budget on Jan 27. The press is already on his case for the utter stupidity of his the vainglorious attempt to 'assassinate' his political opponents in cold blood and the hounds in his own party are out for him now.

Do you really think Stevie would like that 'vision' of him and his government (a good portion of his caucus are ready to eat him now) on the run from the coalition for two months?

You should check out some conservative sources.

He's already severely damaged goods - he has one hope left, that the GG will agree to call an election - otherwise, he's toast. And the country will have spent another 300 million at a time it can little afford to. Even if he wins the election he loses because he likely won’t get a single seat in Quebec or Ontario. He will have turned the party back into what it was when he started – a western Canadian fundamentalist Reform rump.

But, never fear, it'll just be the end of Harper and the Reformatories - in his stead will rise up a real conservative party that understands parliamentary democracy, representative government and the role that true conservatism should play in this country's future.

Bill Tieleman weighs in

Thanks for all the comments pro and con - this is not just an important but an historic moment for Canada.

I want to briefly answer a few points.

First, while many are quick to point out that the new coalition of the unlikely won more votes than the Conservatives, they did not do so on a platform where each stated they would form - or support - a coalition government. Had they done so, it seems highly likely we'd have a Conservative majority.

My view of democracy is that you tell voters what you stand for and what you would and would not do.

Second, no matter how much some people would like it to be about proportional representation, it is not. And to those who say Harper lost his right to govern by not acting with the support of the other parties, I point out that when faced with strong criticism from them, Harper quickly dropped all his objectionable legislation - BEFORE a vote.

I don't like Harper or the Conservatives but the fact remains he reacted to opposition and public criticism, as he should in a minority government situation.

Third, sorry but the Bloc Quebecois want to break up Canada, period. Gilles Duceppe is a very capable and progressive politician but he is a separatist. The photos today of Duceppe, Layton and Dion signing their agreement will be the centrepiece of the next Conservative advertising campaign - and they won't wait until the next election to start.

The BQ support this deal is contingent on will yet prove to be the poison pill.

To G West - your Lucien Bouchard comments makes my point wonderfully. Bouchard went on from the Mulroney cabinet to help lead Quebec to within a hair of separating in the 1995 referendum as leader of the new Bloq Quebecois, supporting the Parti Quebecois.

Perhaps this coalition government will do a wonderful job - I truly hope so because the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Canadians depend on it.

But I fear that the way it has come to power will engender a terrible counter reaction.

Let's see what the first polls say about this situation before declaring the new Jerusalem.

A correction, Bill

Totally and completely wrong. In 1984, the Liberals won only 40 seats.

Our esteemed author is part of the NDP's ideological "Hard Left" which believes that it is better to perpetually sit in opposition than to soften its stance regarding state capitalism. He was even the communications director of an NDP premier who held the same political values and saw his party reduced to two seats.

Layton did the right thing. Harper is a bully and has to go. The opposition smells blood and the only way to satisfy them is Herr Harper's head.

And I am glad they are, too because Harper and his brand of one man democracy has to be stopped.

means justify the end

Bill,
Wasn't it John Kenneth Galbraith who said, "I don't know about you, but when I hear new information, I sometimes change my mind. What do YOU do?"

Both the Liberals and the NDP had no formal intention of forming a coalition pre-election as they undoubtedly each hoped they'd win the election on their own without having to make compromises.

When it turned out neither won, and when it became clear that Harper broke his promises about party co-operation, nor had done his homework on the important measures needed to combat the current economic chaos and what-will-likely-be a very ugly and protracted depression, the opposition parties CHANGED THEIR MINDS - which they had every right to do, given this NEW INFORMATION.

There are times when the means justifies the end - and if in this case the end means throwing overboard a neo-con, dinosaur, earth-killing government that couldn't give a rat's eyeball about public interests (most notably our children's environmental future, including WATER), so be it.

Williamroberts

Can we hear some more commentary on what it means for us all to be living in an increasingly diverse, disaggregated, multicultural, multiparty Canadian universe. Gone are the days of big Mulroney or Chretien majorities - with the permanence of the Bloc, the intransigence of Alberta, the swinging pendulum of BC. Add to this the atrophy of political parties, the new internet politics of Obama and the Tyee, and deep mistrust of command and control anything.

So come on Canada, lets not dissolve into living in the past and resigning ourselves to pizza parliaments. Coalitions, collaborations, joint ventures, and the leadership of partnerships will have to be our new political skill sets. Stephen Harper seems not to have these skills. I hope that an emerging generation of those we elect do.

Muscular majority?

Recall that Harper made a reference during one of his campaign speeches that he wanted a "muscular majority". Well, he "bet the House and won a minority".

He's tried to act like he has a muscular majority and it has backfired. He deserves what he gets.

wow, bill please turn in your leftie credentials, you're fired.

blah, blah. Why is the Tyee populated by so many reactionary dinosaurs for political commentators? They have the instincts of sell-outs, shot through with petty prejudice.

Why Bill? We have a parliamentary democracy. The PM is supposed to be first among equals. The PMO has become far too powerful, and I for one look forward to this watering down its power. Can this work? Of course it can. Especially in the face of our current economic crisis. And I for one do not want someone like Harper running the show when we face something so serious as a country. It's crystal clear his instincts are vicious and poisonous. I wouldn't want someone like that running a lemonade stand let alone the federal government.

Thank god Harper never had a majority. Just look as what he's attempted with a minority: banning strikes, financially destroying the opposition (smacks of one party rule) a massive sell off of public assets. Just imagine the havoc he would wreak with a majority. He clearly would have eviscerated this country. The man is a menace.

No, this coalition, should it actually form, will be healthy for Canada.

Steve wasn't elected PM, he just got the most seats...

Steve forgot he didn't have a majority and instead of doing what a leader is supposed to do in a minority government -- or doing what a responsible gov't does in "an economic crisis" and thinking about, you know, the economy or something -- he decided it'd be way more fun to curb stomp the Opposition because he couldn't imagine them fighting back. Oops.

His response to a supposed economic Apocalypse -- stomp his enemies and outlaw strikes? And think about a budget in a month or two???

Steve wasn't elected Prime Minister. He was elected as leader of the RefomaTory party. And they won the most seats.

Isn't the PM's gig in a minority to do what Jack seems to have done and fashion a working coalition?

Heck, Steve tried to bond with the Bloc -- and with Jack -- to take down the Grits when Martin was in power.

The NDP has been fighting for proportional rep for ages. So have the Greens. Isn't this proportional rep in action?

Let's try it this way...

Which party is supposed to vote in favour of outlawing strikes?

Steve didn't say he'd kill party finance reforms, just that he was delaying them. Which party is supposed to sit on their hands for that vote?

Which party is supposed to vote for Steve's budget?

So... how exactly does this gov't survive?

Isn't the bigger question here why no one put this option on the table before letting Steve call the $300 million election we just had?

Afghanistan?

I think we can push the coalition to get us and our troops out of the debacle in Afghanistan, so hail the coalition.

I do not support propping up the manufacture of lurid vanity trucks and Hummers.

Can we all please find ways to introduce Caspian Sea oil and gas and pipelines into conversations in supermarket lineups?

Cherry-picked fom above

Very good advice, Williamroberts.

But on a different topic, I see that since so many Canadians support Socialist programs like EI, National Health Care, Federal Pensions, and so on, attacking the Socialist NDP leads into some pitfalls.

So we see the new codewords for NDP are "State Capitalism" - though in actuality that is Communism - but close enough, eh?

It is close enough, think the neocons, for warning the Public of the NDP dangers as seen in such Socialist enterprises as Hydro generation, Public auto insurance, publicly owned land, forests, and other resources, all of which should be be diverted from "State Capitalism" and given over to Free Enterprise for proper management.

Maybe Karl Rove works part time for Harper, or is it just that some posters are acolytes of Rush Limbaugh?

And among the dubious conjectures Tieleman makes in his apolgia above is found the following :

"First, while many are quick to point out that the new coalition of the unlikely won more votes than the Conservatives, they did not do so on a platform where each stated they would form - or support - a coalition government. Had they done so, it seems highly likely we'd have a Conservative majority."

Very clever straw man, Bill. So it would be quite instructive for us all if you could give us an example of where such a pledge has ever been given.

Evil bloc

I note Rafe, Tieleman and Yaffe from CanWest all dump on the coalition 'cause it has the support of the Bloc, a party deemed to "destroy Canada", producing the likes of Lucien Bouchard and God knows what else.

I will remind you that is what Québécois voted for in this working imperfect democracy of ours and that they are in full support of this coalition. Who was arrogant on all of this anyway, who wanted to go to Iraq and who was a George W. lacquee?

If it would be of the ROC only, we would still be a british colony. Bad enough that our "head of State" is still the monarch of England and that our MPs must swear "alegiance" to it. And the Bloc MPs have the balls to apparently mutter only the words while cashing in the benefits. Good lord...

Coalition

Jack Layton supported Stephen Harper's bid to become Prime Minister.

Jack Layton now supports Stefan Dion's bid to become Prime Minister.

The NDP will hold 25% of cabinet spots.

It's a win-win situation for all of Canada.

Merci beaucoup, Mr. Layton. You have earned my respect and my vote.

Vive le Quebec, vive la coalition et un gouvernement de centre gauche!

Can't imagine...

...why some think this coalition would mean a quick end to the Afghanistan mission because it was the Liberals that initially sent Canadian troops there. It was the Conservatives that committed a date to bring them home.

What we could expect with The Bloc hold a trump card is probably a multi-billion dollar high-speed Bombardier train with the first section between Québec City and Montréal. Full production of the new Bombardier Type-C airliner in Montréal. A new Centre-d'Excellence d'Energie-Alternatife in conjunction with Hydro-Québec. Control over Communications in Québec by the Québec Government, as opposed to the CRTC (Québec Anglos are gonna love that!), Whopping CO2 taxes on Oil Sands production. Cancellation of the Softwood lumber deal. Crown Victoria Hybrids and electric Chrysler mini-vans and, mine and Jack Laytons favourite, substantial Federal funding for the Formula 1 Grand Prix de Montréal!

Just Say No to Barbarian Rule!

A few things:

1) If Democratic rule means Harper rule, then something's wrong with Democracy.

2) Nationalism was just so 19th-20th century; if Canada is transmogrified into something different, so long as it smells good . . .

3) Like everyone else, anyone but Harper.

patrickmh

Bill

I think it's a little more complex than that.

The failure of the Meech Lake accord and the subsequent breakup of Mulroney's alliance with soft Quebec nationalists wasn't a result of the fact that Mulroney tried to bring Quebec back 'into' the Constitution - it was a failure of the rest of Canada to actually follow through on their commitments to that Province in the negotiations.

I know you've studied Canadian modern history more closely than that.

I don't know what Canada would look like today if the provincial agreement that was reached with Rene Levesque to take to Trudeau had proceeded as planned and not been derailed of course but Mulroney was genuinely trying to make up for that mess and the consequences which followed from it.

I've always wondered how different the country would be if the one decent and unselfish thing Mulroney tried to do had been handled in a less-oafish and self-centered way.

Furthermore, as you well know, this coalition agreement does not involve (as Duceppe clearly pointed out) anything with respect to Quebec sovereignty. That's why they're only in for 18 months, remember.

As I acknowledged above, there are risks involved. I think they pale in comparison with the risks of letting Stephen Harper continue to run roughshod over the very 'idea' of Canada.

As for the spectre of separatism, if you've read the average commenter here at Tyee, you should be aware that the same people who are now screaming about an alliance with the separatists are almost universally the same folks who've repeatedly expressed the view here that they couldn't care less about the continued presence of Quebec in Canada anyway.

I think 'including' the Bloc is good politics, good tactics and in the long run, a better approach to making this country whole again than freezing them out...

I don't know if this agreement will work, but the alternative was, under the circumstances, turning into little more than an Alberta dictatorship. His efforts to set the regions and provinces of this nation, the common interests of all Canadians, and the welfare of the people who most need government services against narrow fundamentalist special interests that created him are profound - exactly what those of us who have watched him expected - and clear proof of the thesis that Stephen Harper HAS NOT changed.

And he will not change - hopefully the Conservative Party will dump him for the utter incompetence of his actions - this country needs a real conservative party, not the aberration which now wears that label.

I hope you noticed Premier Campbell's reaction - because I think you're crawling in bed with him too.

I respect your views Bill, I'm just not convinced.

Regards,
G West

Coalition Perfectly Legal

The parliamentary political system is quite clear. Citizens elect MP's. MP's determine their leader (we don't vote for the Prime Minister) and if they have a majority government, they rule. If they don't, a coalition of parties is perfectly legal and possible. It may even be desirable. Let's give it a try. We have much to gain and little to lose. Now, Harper says he'll cancel parliament and hide. That is far worse than letting the majority of MP's try and work together. This could be the BEST thing to ever happen to Canada in my humble opinion.

Always great to see Bill Tieleman's work on the Tyee.

GWest -Meech

"it was a failure of the rest of Canada to actually follow through on their commitments to that Province in the negotiations."

MLA Elijah Harper (Manitoba) raised an eagle feather to mark his dissension. The Accord was officially dead. A variety of constitutional conferences and the efforts of former Prime Minister Joe Clark, resulted in the Charlottetown Accord, which contained many of the same proposals, along with concrete involvement of First Nations groups, a "Canada Clause", and an equal Senate. The Charlottetown Accord, unlike Meech Lake, was put to referendums, but it was also defeated in most provinces including Quebec.

All completely democratic and voted down by a majority of Canadians, including Québecers.

A failure perhaps but that's what actually happened.

The decision, either for new

The decision, either for new election, or the coalition, will not rest with the GG, but with her legal advisers.

She's only a figurehead, who signs papers, the same as the Queen, without any personal opinions.

So, the question is solely and exclusively from the point of legality and the Constitution.

Harper will definitely ask for new elections, while the 3 opposition parties have already approached the GG to give Royal assent to the coalition, and so the dice has been cast on both sides.

Any other talk is futile waste of time.

Where are the educated legal eagles on this blog to give us a hard and dry legal opinion what to expect?

Otherwise, the subject has been thrashed to death on both sides, which won't make a damn bit of difference in the decision.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Majority rules???

Yes Harper is ordained with 35% of the popular vote. Only in Canada you say? This first past the post system is an international disgrace. However, this is the kind of system (with parties morphing and changing form -- remember reform?,PC?) and politics that breeds coalitions. Its been happening informally for years and now its out in the open and those hurt by it don't like it. Let 35% rule!! What about those that voted NDP, Liberal, Green and Block (the 65%)specifically to keep Harper out? He just tried to quash your or our voice. Now with a coalition the 65% have a voice. Funny now the majority may rule. Gotta love Canadian politics.

Sorry realisticman

I don't agree that it is that simple and that's certainly NOT the way the Meech failure is seen in Quebec.

The process was certainly flawed but that doesn't deny the truth of the matter that there have been serial failures of this country and its politicians to address the initial sell out of Quebec and Levesque in the first place.

My only point, as I suspect both you and Bill Tieleman recognize, is that the fact the Bloc is currently supporting a 'viable' alternative to the Harper dictatorship is irrelevant - especially in terms of the long and conflicted relationship between Quebec and Canada.

It simply doesn't matter and making it the key point of Pee Wee's current attack on representative parliamentary democracy is childish and dishonest; but certainly not unexpected.

And Ed, you're right, this is not a decision that Michaëlle Jean is going to make on her own; on the balance of probabilities - and for very good constitutional reasons - this Harper government is over.

Coalition is an extreme response...

...to an extreme situation. And sadly, Bill is right here. The coalition will only set the table for a really ugly election in a few months. One where Harper is very likely to get his majority.

This isn't about the coalition being legal. This about it not being a very good idea. It's only a matter of time before the BQ drops the sword of Damacleus on their head with some unreasonable demand that's designed to fan the flames of separatism. When this happens, it will create a huge generation that will never vote Liberal or NDP again.

There needs to be a less divisive way out of this. So, in that spirit, I'd like to make a suggestion for a real way out:

A.) Harper resigns. Nothing can happen now with him as leader. He's precipitated this mess and nobody trusts him. If he's as deeply concerned with Canada as he says he is, he'll realize it and do the right thing.

B.) The new leader should agree with the opposition that election financing is off the table as an issue. Instead, campaign funds should be entrenched and entrusted to Elections Canada in a way where no future government can ever revoke it.

C.) The new leader of the tories should convene a special multi-party panel of financial experts to advise the government on the financial crisis. The tories could continue to govern and create financial policy, but with legitimate consultation before implementation.

In short, all the Tories have to do is be a little more consultative, a lot less unilateral and authoritarian, and a lot more interested in being Canadians first and conservatives second. That's how they can remain the government.

But none of this can happen with Harper at the helm.

leftofcentre

Coalitions are NOT extreme - in fact, quite the opposite. This coalition is a response to extremism though.

Otherwise, I don't disagree with you. And I think, from my reading of the news, that there's a small chance Harper will resign and the Tories may cling to power.

However, he is not a man who takes well to advice and it may not happen - once this goes to the GG, and especially if Harper asks to prorogue, then the die is cast - either now or in January. In my view.

As to the sword of Damocles, please, the Bloc members are legitimate members of parliamentary democracy - as are the Scottish independence MPs in Westminster. That's the way the system works - those who advise throwing them out and treating them with disdain and disrespect are the ones who, mutatis mutandis, are really threatening the country.

In fact, it is that kind of slice and dice divisiveness that got us to this place. Perhaps you've forgotten Pee Wee's manual for subverting Parliamentary committee work.

Personally, I think it won't be long before we're back at the polls - whether Harper folds his tent or not.

And the next election - strategic voting will be in the mix - trust me.

No other alternative

There is really no other alternative to the coalition. I am surprised it happened but Harper is a nasty character and me must be stopped. He needs to be turfed and his party has to get the clear message that the majority parties in Parliament will not work with him. Harper is political history and thank god he did not get his majority.

The really interesting thing here is how everybody got drawn towards the political centre. Layton backed down on the corporate tax cuts for example. There is a valuable lesson to be learned here: that if you want to govern in Canada you had better have middle of the road policies that appeal to most voters. Harper strayed way too far to the right and for some incredibly bizarre reason tried to bait a new parliament that he had pledged to work with. His true colours came shining thorough.

But really, the centre wing on the NDP and we Liberals have a lot in common.

-Harper is a dangerous man who would tear out society apart and sell the remains to the Americans.

-We both believe that low income families need support in order to maintain their buying power and social stability.

-Populist nonsense like mandatory minimums are just that; populist nonsense.

-Some sort of programme to reduce GHG is vital. How we get there we can work out among us.

-In this economy, the government has to fund infrastructure projects that work for the benefit of the environment. The Evergreen line and the UBC line immediately come to mind.

Thus, this is a time were Liberals and NDPers have to realise how much they have in common when the alternative is not that far away from fascism.

G West...

I don't disagree with you either. And I certainly don't dispute the BQ's right to be in the house, or even part of the government if the coalition chooses.

I just think it's a bad idea.

The Bloc's political playbook here is straight forward. They will push for every conceivable concession. They will push for additional federal ministries to come under provincial control in Quebec. They will finally ask for something outrageous, and when they're refused, it will be an outrage to Quebecers and proof that federalism doesn't work. They'll win even more seats, and separatism makes its way to new generation. The Liberals and the NDP will shoulder the blame for decades.

That's the plan, anyway. The idea that the Bloc can be contained or placated within federalism is incredibly risky. Mulroney did it with Bouchard and we almost ended up on the wrong side of a referendum. If we've learned anything from this, we've learned the best way to keep separatists at bay is to keep them politically irrelevant.

Wilfrid

I don't think so.

I don't think I have a single thing in common with you and your attitudes - I'm not at all sanguine about the prospect of long term cooperation with the Liberals - especially the Marissen/Clark/Campbell variety and I'm holding my nose for the interim.

I think, however, that the current situation is complex, volatile and required a response. I'm just borderline on side with Layton's decision to support the tax cuts - if the economy weren't in such a mess (you don't get taxed on corporate earnings unless you make some) then I'd have said he should have walked away and let YOUR party swing in the wind a little longer.

I support this move because, on balance, I think it's better for the whole nation, not because I think the Liberals have changed their stripes.

So, you can think we're best friends but you won't be getting any Christmas packages from me.

Not much in common at all - in fact, if my dreams were to come true, it is the Liberal party I'd like to see wither and die.

leftofcenter

See my remarks above. I've lived in Quebec, Ottawa and several other places in Canada besides BC. I don't agree with your analysis of the threat to the country from a strong a vibrant French culture and I certainly don't agree with your version of history.

Apart from that, I know perfectly well what the BLOC's program is - that's why they're only in for 18 months and why, as I explained to Wilfrid above here, my support of this move is marginal at best for the reasons already outlined: But certainly not because I have a problem with anyone's democratic self-determination.

The majority voted against the Conservatives

The majority voted against the Conservatives... and the Cdn Dollar is actually UP^ today.

The BLOC would never seperate from Canada

The BLOC would never seperate from Canada... becuase Quebec would loose the cash-cow they've been milking for the past 100+ years.

Enough Partisan Fear Mongering already

There's irony in the current fear-mongering/demonization of the Bloc. Ultra-Partisan NDPers like Tieleman are on the same page as ultra-Partisan Tories and Libs - i.e. "A loyal member of party 'X', does NOT collaborate with the 'enemy'. They do not do cooperation. Period!"

There is another irony in the fear mongering about "separatists at the gate" coming from Tories, especially their right wing Reform/Alberta base. Because Alberta and Quebec have something uniquely in common. They are the two provinces with the most insular, provincial-"Nationalist" spirits. Harper when heading the NCC a few years back proposed Alberta create a legal "firewall" to protect it from federal intrusions of all kinds.

There's a history of a very real Western separatist movement based in Alberta. Some supporters of which have in the past argued for Western separation ended up in Manning's "the West wants in" Reform Party, and are now with Harper's Tories.

Western separation never gained quite the popularity in Alberta that Quebec separation gained in Quebec. But
Albertan "Nationalism" remains strong, just as Quebecois Nationalism does.
Quebec Nationalism as expressed in the Bloc is not unlike the extremes of
Alberta-first Reformers, and earlier Albertan pro-west parties like WCC (Western Canada Concept).

I don't mean this as criticism of the GG at all, but she and her husband are Quebecers who move in artistic circles there. It's no secret Quebec artists have often been strong Quebec nationalists and separatists. It's probably safe to assume many of the GG's friends are Quebec nationalists.
So, one aspect of the the coalition issue, the demonizing of the Bloc, is unlikely to resonate much with the GG. She's obviously a patriotic Canadian but, at the same time, she's not about to demonize the Bloc or Quebecers who happen to be Quebec nationalists. It's part of democracy.

As Layton points out, on social issues, the center-left Bloc has much in common with NDP and Liberal aims. Duceppe is a reasonable man, not a Lucien Bouchard style demagogue. He has signed an agreement stating he will not vote against the coalition on confidence motions. The Bloc will not be heading any cabinet posts/ministries.Like probably every Provincial Premier, Duceppe's stated main priority within the coalition is economic stimulus.

He's not in the coalition to somehow use it to break up Canada! If anything, he's getting heat from many Quebec Nationalists for being too moderate by "collaborating" with opponents. I believe the GG, like Layton, Dion and most in their parties, will ignore the fear-mongering, and realize a Lib-NDP coalition supported by the Bloc could be a win-win-win-win-win-win ,good for Canada, Quebec, Libs, NDP, Bloc, even Greens! Go GG!

G West...

Well, I'm not looking to turn you into my best buddy either :-). And I've lived in Ontario and traveled extensively through Quebec over the years as well. While we disagree on the Bloc's involvement, I don't think either one of us is talking from a poor reference point on Quebec.

I'm still of the belief that Canadians, and especially our politicians, have to make some goodwill efforts to ensure cooler heads prevail. Because the most likely thing we'll end up with if we cross this precipice is a politically divided and severely weakened country. We need to find whatever common ground we can now.

Parlamentary democracy

What surprises me is that Canadians don't seem to understand our system of government. You need the confidence of the majority of MPs to govern. Parlamentary democracies across the world have coalition governments that work just fine.

The only piece missing for us is some form of proportional representation (STV has no mechanism to ensure proportional representation btw). This would necessitate coalitions. Imagine ... politicians that would have to work together for the good of all Canadians. Fairy Tale? I don't think so.

Fairy Tale ending

Why Not? I know cynicism and "realism" is the political commentator's milieu, but there really is a deep wellspring of hope out here that politics can actually become about finding consensus to solve big problems. And hope is a choice people make. If we do not believe that buried deep inside every ambitious politician beats a heart wants to serve the nation, not just the self, then we have to agree with Mr. Bill that all this is dangerous game playing. But I believe that even Harper is motivated by a deeply held belief that the market and not government is the way to resolve the current economic crisis. And that's what makes him so dangerous, not just his ego and ambition. Let's choose hope this time and see what happens.

leftofcentre

Goodwill is certainly important...however, see above me here for evidence of how thin and insipid (relative to one of our three founding peoples) it actually is on the ground (even here at Tyee) and you'll know what I mean.

And I don't disagree with your last conclusion either - which is why, above us here, I suggested the best - but also the most unlikely result of this - would be for Stephen Harper to resign his position as Prime Minister to give saner heads in his own party a chance to rethink this process.

My view, this is the best way out now - prorogue the house, Harper and Flaherty both resign their portfolios and - before a new throne speech and a budget in January - the Conservatives get a mulligan.

I don't see any other way back from the precipice.

If Harper's acolytes continue the course they've started down today we're going over and the devil take the hindmost.

I wrote a piece (which was published elsewhere) describing what was likely to happen in this country when Harper first came to power as Prime Minister.

Sadly, it was pretty much on point - I'll see if I can find it and post it later.

Predictions - written Feb 1 2006

The key to Harper's program is incremental... but, I don't think you give him enough credit for understanding the dynamics of the Canadian electorate.

He knows that there is enough money in the kitty that he can shovel dollars to the provinces for several years and still keep the budget balanced. The previous government's record of good fiscal management has seen to that. But the Chretien and Martin Governments produced massive surpluses for most of the past decade by cutting transfers to the provinces (where the big bills for education and health care are actually paid). Now PM Harper can make up for all those years of provincial deficits (in most provinces other than Alberta with its massive oil revenues) by shoveling money out into the regions. That, along with being tough on crime, tough on corruption and because of a few other goodies is most likely going to ensure he gets re-elected with a majority next time. That's when the social agenda will rear its ugly head. It's especially a problem because the media here seems to have forgotten where Harper came from or believes he's renounced his past.

In the end, there's a lot of anger and resentment here about crime and immigration and there's a sense that many Canadians haven't shared locally in the prosperity that their country has been experiencing at the federal level. That's what Harper will play to with his tax cuts and hand outs to individuals. The area where he's most likely to run into trouble, in my opinion, is in the way he deals with First Nations and treaty negotiations - time will tell.

I can't help thinking that the campaign we've just been through is just another example of a Straussian 'necessary lie'.

Pee Wee didn't get his majority - but the 'program' certainly did raise its ugly head....to no surprise. And that's why, on balance, I disagree with Bill Tieleman and his polite and old fashioned approach.

Out of Touch?

I am surprised by Mr. Tieleman's article and its lack of analysis or (apparent) insight into both the democratic issues at play and the significance of a growing encadrement with the Bloc Quebecois.

In Canada, unlike the US, we do not elect a Prime Minister or Government. We elect a Parliament. Contrary to the headline, Mr. Harper did not win the last election. Mr. Harper does not have the confidence of the majority of elected members and there is no basis in the Canadian Parliamentary system for him to stay in power.

With respect to democracy, Mr. Harper has repeatedly and consistently lied. He has done everything he can to leverage the power of unelected hacks to the detriment of the elected Members of Parliament. He finally lost the confidence of the majority of the House when he tried to force the majority of elected members against their will to cut the right to strike, pay equity, and fair political funding.

Stephen Harper is a fraud, and the betrayer of the West. No voters in Western Canada have less representation in Parliament that those in the West who did not vote for Mr. Harper. They are the alienated West. They need a voice. They are the West that needs in.

With respect to Quebec, the goal of all Canadians should be to bring into the fold as many Quebecois as possible. The elected BQ members represent a significant number of Quebec voters. Many voted for the BQ as the social democratic choice in Quebec. Few voted for separatism. Quebeckers want in. Proof of this is in the polls in Quebec that show a majority support the coalition, but not separatism. To argue that the BQ should be shunned is preposterous. Let us not forget that Stephen Harper’s policies are what drove so many social democrats to the Bloq.

The next necessary step is electoral reform. Half of Saskatchewan remains without elected members in Parliament. A significant minority of Albertans have been without representation for decades. All those social democratic friends in the BQ could vote for another social democratic alternative without fear that it would result in a Harper Government.

Strange, but both Mr. Mair's and Mr. Tieleman's articles this week sounded strangely out of date and out of touch to me. In my mind, we all need to work together to reinvigorate participatory democracy in Canada. The first step is to support the coalition. The next is electoral reform.

May the hacks never take power again.

Harper Didn't Win...the Left Lost

Harper had to be stopped and when you poke people in the eye with a stick enough times, they finally poke back.

www.bcandbeyond.wordpress.com

The GG knows nothing, has no

The GG knows nothing, has no say and has no executive powers. Her job is to look magnificent and sign papers put in front of her, like the Queen.

This whole matter is now in the hands of a whole slew of lawyers, who must be having a good time at 1000 bucks an hour.

All this is a waste of time, because the decision, one way or another, is no in the hands of the electorate, or the politicians, or the GG, but the lawyers and judges.

Ed Deak.

Loss of confidence

ergmont rapids wrote:

"The fact is that Harper has removed the no strike clause for workers, Harper has removed taking away the politicians tax-payer funded party money, Harper has backed off on these issues.

So what is left, the opposition is bringing down the government(attempting) because they didn’t like Harper’s "stimulus package"".

I would disagree with the suggestion that backing down in these circumstances can restore Parliament's confidence in Stephen Harper.

Stephen Harper's economic update resulted in the Parliament losing confidence in him for a number of reasons. He has repeatedly lied, and did so most egregiously with the economic update. It is a pattern of behaviour that is incompatible with trust.

I don't believe the fact that Mr. Harper backed down after realizing that he would lose power does anything to reinstill even a modicum of confidence in his leadership. After all, the very problem is that he will say or do anything to keep his way, democracy be dammed.

I think the Libs have made a communications error is focusing on the economic rather than the fundamental loss of trust.

Back off Jack

Lets face it, as they are all a bunch of opportunist egomaniacs which is what is required I suppose in that profession.
However, I think it was inevitable that this would happen happen eventually. Some of us were even hoping it would so I quess it's a matter of "careful what you wish for". I am in that 60% of Canadians who will vote either Liberal/NDP in accordance to the agenda they are pushing or the person running.
I think Stephen Harper just got too smart for his own good, and Karl Rove techniques are over now.

Wrong argument

Harper and the Tories did not win "the most seats". They won "more seats than other parties". However, if the other parties want to form a coalition - as is their prerogative - then THEY have "the most seats".

Yes, the Liberals do not have a mandate to lead. However, it could be argued that a coalition of Liberals/NDP/Bloc is no longer just "the Liberals" it's "the Coalition", and from the voting numbers it DOES have the mandate to lead.

As for Dion: I don't like the guy, but he has nothing to lose. He's already out in May. He can afford to work to being remembered as a true statesman who brought us back from the brink rather than working, as Harper has done, on purely partisan politics. Not having a future might make Dion the best choice to give Canada a future.

Just because someone is popular doesn't mean they're desirable. Sometimes it takes an unpopular person to do the right thing, rather than doing something just because it will make them more popular.

As for the NDP/Bloc. Of course they're salivating at having a say in how the country is run for the first time in years. Of course, it's a two-edged sword. If they do well, they might get a few votes. If they do poorly, everyone will remember their disaster and they'll have lost a decade of progress.

Talk about incentive to do it right the first time. Unlike Harper and the Tories, who were too full of themselves as a MINORITY government to even attempt to do the right thing.

Tieleman's been drinking Tory bathwater

What have you been drinking... or smoking, Tieleman, that you would sanction Harper staying in goverment even one more minute?!

This is a man who has shown absolute disdain for democracy - attempting to rule like a majority dictator, shoving inititateves down the throats of Parliament that would in effect make Canada a one-party state.

Then, Harper announces that he is going to completely ignore the Canadian Supreme Court ruling on Bill 29, which entrenched collective bargaining rights, and planned to remove federal unionized workers' right to bargain the terms and conditions of their employement. What's next -- abortion rights? Same sex marriage rights?

This is an undemocratic, arrogant, petty, cynical, scheming (shades of Chuck Cadman), lying (remember the fixed election date legislation?), cheating (who can forget the federal 'In-and-Out'funding scheme) horror of a goverment that deserves to join Brian Mulroney on the political scrap heap.

And let's not forget, Bill (because it seems that you've come down with 'old-timers' disease) that fully 62% of Canadians voted against the Conservatives in the last election.

And while we federalists cannot sanction the separatist agenda of the Bloc Quebecois, they do represent a majority of Quebecors in Ottawa. We cannot dismiss them merely because they are separatists, or we risk rejecting the Quebec people as well.

So get off your conservative high horse, Bill. There is plenty of precedent for a coalition government. Several European countries have function effectively for decades under this structure. If we give these Tory b******s another chance to screw up this country, there won't be many pieces to pick up later.

Better a coalition than Harper's "vision"

I think it is, at best, inaccurate to suggest that the Chretien/Martin Libeal did more to damage social institutions than the Mulroney/Harper Conservatives.

There is little doubt that Chretien's Liberal made significant cuts to social spending. However, Martin's spending was directed significantly by the influence of Layton's NDP.

What is overlooked by Mr. Tielman is the fact that where some Liberals cut social funding they didn't systematically begin to dismantle social institutions as Mulroney Conservatives and Harper's Republican-cum-"Conservative" party did.

Credit for PR savviness has to go to the Liberals in knowing how and when to tighten a belt (a euphemism, I know) versus the ideological shift seen by the Conservatives and "Conservatives".

It is equally naive for Mr. Tielman to hold that a coalition is somehow un-democratically grabbing power. The method to form a coalition is built into this democratic system.

It is even more naive to innocently hold Harper's Consrvative phoenix as bieng Conservative in the Diefenbaker, or Maritime, snse of the party. Harper is not a Conservative in the classic Canadian sense. Harpers crew is heavily involved and heavily influenced (there's no conspiracy theory here--just research public statements by these guys) by the neo-con ideology from south of the border. They are NOT Republicans, but their values have more in common with that ilk than of Canadian Conservatives of the past (and this ideological shift began with Mulroney's 'free market' love affair).

I think the coaliiton is a challenege to our understanding, and use, of democracy in Canada. But it is hardly UN-democratic. Furthermore, desparate times call for desparate measures as Harper's (Neo) Conservatives are not cutting social institutions, but eradicating the institutions themselves. Their ideology is in contrast to how we view oursevles.

A Liberal/NDP (with Bloc and Green support) far more represents Canadians than Harper's (Neo) Conservatives do. To quote stats about the vote is to ignore the fact that it was the lowest voters turn out in modern times. If voter apathy isn't taken into account (without accepting it as being apathetic) one need only look at the Conservative members to see whether they proportinaltey represent Canadians: they do not. Liberal aren't much better, but they are better; and, NDP and Green are far better (Bloc is more complicated, tobe sure).

Personally, I'd be happy to see Harper's Conservatives gone. It is not the case that the Liberals are better (although they are not as bad). And, the fact that the NDP unnecessarily collapsed governments to usher in Mulroney AND Harper shouldn't be forgotten. Perhaps one of the best ways to deal with these relative weak parties in general is to have them in a coalition where they will be forced to listen to us more closely.

Fod for thought...

Parliament is Supreme

Bill advances the astonishing proposition that the Conservatives are entitled to do as they please because "they just won the most seats in Parliament in a free and fair democratic vote." He forgets that a minority government has to win the confidence of Parliament and Harper has signally failed to do that. On the contrary, Harper's stupid attempt to steamroller the opposition, to say nothing of his head-in-the-sand approach to the global economic crisis, demonstrates his unfitness for office.

The opposition is not obligated to prop up such a government, especially one that 65% of Canadians voted against in the last election.

Parliament's role is to make and unmake a government. Since the Conservatives are clearly unwilling to make Parliament work, they should be defeated and make way for a new government that is prepared to take its responsiblities seriously. Besides, a Liberal-NDP coalition would represent the views of a larger plurality of voters than the Conservatives. Add the BQ to the mix--the preferred choice of Quebec voters in every Federal election since 1993--and the new government would represent a clear majority of Canadians.

Most democratic countries are governed, and governed well, by coalition governments. Bill should be less alarmist about the prospect of Canada joining the mainstream of democratic polities. The Harper Government is toast. Three cheers for parliamentary government!

Amor de cosmos

Loss of confidence means the opoosition brings down the goverment and sends the people back to the polls.

There will be another side effect of allowing this coalition to form,expect smaller fringe parties(NDP will go back to being a fringe party) to lose voters!

People will avoid voting for 3rd and 4th parties because they will want to avoid the TAKEOVER BY HOSTILE PARTIES.

If it is indeed true,as so many of you posters claim,that the country is furious at Harper and the Conservatives,the next election will reflect that,if your wrong Harper will be returned to power with maybe a majority!

It is my call that the GG will call for another election,and Ed Deak,you are correct,the GG is merely the deliverer of the message,she weilds ZERO POWER.

So there it is,Harper ran the longest majority goverment in Canadian history and now the shortest,divide it by 2 and it works out to the 18 month average.

Get ready to go back to the polls.

P.S. what a shame that the Federal Liberal leadership convention will be cancelled(it was schedualed for May 2009 at the Vancouver trade and convention center) The Liberals will have to find a leader on the fly on Ottawa/ My brain say Bob Rae--But I have a feeling Ignateuf(iggy) is better in a KNIVE FIGHT

Cheers

Harper's asked for it

The only crisis in Ottawa today is the prime minister’s feeble grasp on reality. One reality is that barely more than 1 in 3 Canadian voters cast their ballots for his party. The prime minister failed to persuade a majority of Canadians that his party deserved a majority. He was elected to make a minority government in Parliament work, not to act as if he'd won a majority by a landslide.

Another reality is that years ago he proposed, as leader of the opposition, to pull together a coalition that could replace the then soon-to-be defeated Liberal government. Why was it an acceptable option for him, but not for the parties that collectively won a majority of Canadians’ votes?

Nothing ventured, nothing changed

How delicious is this moment in time?! There are tough times ahead with the crumbling, global, capitalist structure, despite the make-up of the government. There is going to be pain and we will all be affected, no doubt. But we are in a position where our government may actually be structured to work in our best interests.

Steve-O has shown his hand and must not be allowed to get another opportunity to shove his fistful of destructive policies down our throats. You know he's gonna attempt to rip out our collective Canadian heart with that same hand on the way out.

For the first time in a long time, it feels as though there may be cooperation for the greater good of the citizens of this country. Sure the NDP has lots to lose, but they have much more to gain, we all do. Good on Jack Layton for taking a bold step.

After reading a comment about Stephane Dion's inclusive leadership style made by Briony Penn prior to the election, I am hopeful that between the the two views of the parties, we may get something that pleasantly surprises us. If there is an avenue of hope, as the world economy burns, I am optimistic that the plight of the Canadian people as a whole will be foremost in the minds of those that earned votes to represent us.

IMO this is the best chance for PR to be viewed as a working model and an opportunity to rid ourselves of the first past the post BS that we fool ourselves into believing is democracy. Unfortunately we may see that the old boys may not be quite as progressive as we hope.

If this coalition does work, surely we will not accept the status quo in the future. If it does not work, then perhaps we will finally demand a reorganisation of the ailing system that keeps real change from taking place.

I cannot imagine what will result if we are forced to go back to the polls under these polarising political circumstances, using the current voting system, particularly within the fragility of the financial calamity that is so unpredictable and far-reaching. We need a sitting parliament, not more propaganda on the airwaves.

The frustration of the people appears to be reaching the saturation point, so I see change coming. I hope we will respond thoughtfully.

Dictatorship or Democracy

Bring on a coalition government. This is true democracy in its essence, where all parties unite for the benefit of the people.
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

I don't care what your politics are, the fact is that three parties were willing to work together for the common good. Mr Harper can learn a lot from this turn of events, mostly you can't railroad your agenda through when governing in a minority.

The opposition parties represent the majority of Canadian voters and I stand by their inclination to unite and represent all Canadians in a governing coalition.

SAVE LIVES (Support Coalition)!

Let's place Partisan griping aside for just a moment and consider what coalition might mean in practical terms for people's lives.
Let's narrow it down further to life and death issues.

I don't think it's a stretch at all to predict that fewer Canadians will DIE UNNECESSARILY under the proposed coalition, than under Harper's reign.
A few examples:
1)Harper's Tories are dead set against harm reduction approaches to drug addiction. They've stifled attempts to set up new safe injection sites, and are still trying their damndest to shut down Vancouver's Insite.
-It's safe to assume harm reduction will spread across Canada under the coalition.
Safe injection sites will spring up where ever there is a pressing need for them.
Over 30 studies have shown such sites have demonstrable health benefits, including SAVING LIVES. The coalition is also more likely to put new money into detox and other drug treatment programs.
2) Harper's Tories killed the Aboriginal Accord agreed to by the opposition parties and Prov. Premiers. The accord was to
apply $5-Bill. to alleviating health problems and 3rd world conditions of many native reserves. Many reserves lack things as basic as safe drinking water.
Life expectancies of native adults are much lower than of other Canadians. Infant mortality rates much higher. It is indefensible that Harper would torpedo an accord which is sure to SAVE LIVES.
Only the coalition will reinstate it.

There are surely many other examples of likely coalition initiatives to improve health and SAVE LIVES: Safety in the workplace, stricter regulations of environmental toxins and toxic food industry additives,etc...

So, placing petty partisanship insularity ahead of getting needed coalition health policies in place, may be hazardous to many people's health. Maybe yours!

realisticman

I know all that. The first failure was at the so called night of the long knives when Levesque was double crossed - as you well know - and which led to the constitution being patriated w/out Quebec.

Mulroney, and it's the one thing he ought to get credit for but never does, tried to remedy the initial error.

Elijah Harper Was involved but you need to look further for other such as the Premier of Newfoundland for a complete understanding of the failure of the country once again to step up and bring about the changes (in terms of 'nation' - which Quebec now is according to another Harper by the way ) necessary to avoid the kind of slicing and dicing that our current Prime Minister specializes in.

Time to re-read your history - especially Quebec history.

But, that's not the issue now - any more than Harper's lies about the invisible flag behind the dias at yesterday's signing.

We are dealing with a snake trying very hard to bite anything that moves - truth and facts will have nothing to do with it.

For shame.

brilliant minds think alike or idiots seldom differ

Has Mr. Palmer been reading the Tyee--I re-iterate that Gordon Campbell put both of his feet in his mouth. This is the only thing I enjoy about this whole affair

Campbell having to do backflips!
Here is Vaughn Palmer`s take.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnistsstory.html?id=224f1e88-1c49-4cd6-b5c4-ccb356b6cdf1&p=1

Sorry about that link

I try again

Vaughn Palmer opinion

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=224f1e88-1c49-4cd6-b5c4-ccb356b6cdf1

Coalition gov'ts are bad for Tieleman

Tieleman doesn't want Layton to be getting into a coalition with the Liberals because Tieleman doesn't like the thought of coalition governments. They work elsewhere in the world. It might work in Canada. He doesn't want to see it working during the BC referendum because he is against STV.

Bill Tielman

"tell the voter what you stand for and what you would and not do"

Bill, your killing me. I thought you had a little bit on the ball now I fear the ball has hit you between the eyes with such force that it has rendered you deaf, dumb, and blind.
Please tell us that Harpo told the electorate that he was going to castrate the opposition or take away the right to strike,not to mention other fun things he had up his insidious sleeve.Saying sorry doesn't cut it Bill, this neocon monster needs to be drop kicked into political oblivion.

off the bloc

I think that this fear mongering about the Bloc is just another tactic to keep us stuck.
I, like Margaret Atwood, was rather impressed with the policies of the Bloc. They were right in there with the Greens, the NDP and probably the LIBS. They were strong on the environment and sustainability issues.
I am not very concerned about Quebec sovereignty. They are struggling themselves with it. As A Western Canadian, when I did live in Quebec, I voted for the PQ . If I lived there now, I would vote for the Quebec Solidaire.
As a Western Canadian I am actually more
concerned about Alberta. Tar sands.
Reformists.

Question Period

Anybody that had a chance to catch Question Period today will know that there is no alternative but for the coalition to persist.

Stephen Harper can not understand that he has to play nice in the sandbox. All he did today was kick more dirt in the faces of MP's and Canadians again today.

Harper is slipping away into a little fantasy in his own mind and should get help.

He is also whipping up hysteria, one of his trooper callers to a hotline show today threatened to burn down the Reichstag. Or was it Westminster?

Anyway, he didn't sound like Guy Fox, just a mean little neo-con who couldn't stick to the speaking notes provided by the Cons. Even suggesting exploding mailboxes again too. Jeez. A nasty, nasty little gang.

Respectfully Bill. You ought reconsider this piece.

I Can\'t Stop Laughing

This from the Globe and Mail...

And Green Party Leader Elizabeth May is endorsing the proposed coalition government and says she has spoken with Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion about the possibility of her being appointed to the Senate.

Big Rally Thurs. 6 P. M.

Bring your signs, your noisemakers and come on out to support the formation of a coalition government.

The Lower Mainland rally:

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA

Thursday, December 4th

Doors open at 5 p.m.

Speakers at 6 p.m.

Vancouver Trade & Convention Centre

Ballroom “A”

{Skytain to the Waterfront Station}

News Flash-Harper lost the last election

Given the circumstances under which the last election was called (Harper called for dissolution of Parliament in contravention of the recently passed fixed elections act, and without having lost a confidence vote) I submit Harper lost the election.

The only reason to have the election was to validate Harper's position that it was a necessity that there be a Conservative majority to avoid the continuing existence of a "dysfunctional parliament". He didn't get his majority- he lost. It is now crying over spilled milk for him to feel hard done by when a majority of members of the parliament are prepared to commit themselves to making the parliament that was elected a functional one.

Coalition, only if.......

I would only support a coalition if the three party leaders agreed that if and when the next election is called,6 months,1 years,18 months whatever that they will form a SINGLE SUPER PARTY and run as a coalition party.

Of course none would agree to that and they would be cutting each other down as usual.
If all you posters who love the idea of a coalition are confident that the people will remove Harper than we must go to the polls.

On a side note the Green party garnered virtualy the same amount of votes as did the Bloc but have no voice,is that fair?

I hope your all happy with what is going to happen.

I will lay it out for you all--The Govenor General is going to defer to the prime minister,she is going to allow parliment to shut down until the budget in January and---

She is going to make it perfectly clear that the parties either find a way to make it work or we will be going back to the polls.

So the Liberals WILL VOTE WITH STEPHEN HARPER when the budget is brought foward in January.
The reason--The Liberals don`t want an election,they can`t afford an election and they are afraid as are the rest of you posters that Harper will end up with a majority.

Don`t shoot the messenger,I could care less one way or another,I am just imforming you how it is going to go,the unfortunate thing in this whole sordid affair will be the wrath and major loss of support for the federal NDP

P.S. hey -DE Fella --I can see that happening,Elithabeth May giving up ALL OF HER PRINCIPLES FOR A SENATE SEAT,I don`t see anything in the coalition platform that resembles the Green platform,again if that happened expect the dis-illusioned green voters to park their vote somewhere else.

So congratulations to the Liberal party,with one coalition con-job you managed to destroy the greens and the NDP!

Public Opinion:

Bill Tieleman:

And, generally speaking, the BQ is frowned upon in many circles, notwithstanding being seen actively signing the coalition framework agreement.

Alot of anger out there, whether deserved or not, and it's certainly palpable.

I'm sure they are out in the field, but some "non-scientific" sampling:

From CTV News on-line:

Who would you prefer to govern the country?

1. The Conservatives - 19,054 votes - 66 %

2. The NDP-Liberal coalition - 9,797 votes - 34%

Total Votes: 28,851

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTemplate?Results&id=112755&pollid=112755&tf=ctv%2Fgeneric%2Fhubs%2FctvNewsSub.html&cf=ctv%2Fgeneric%2Fhubs%2FctvNews.cfg&hub=TopStories&subhub=VoteResult

Interesting times.

Senate???

Elizabeth May has had enough attention. She's on the 5 cent coin, for goodness sakes.

We've just had 2 elections

We've just had 2 elections within short order of each other with minimal change. Who's going to change their vote just because the minority parties they've voted for have agreed to compromise, build consensus and strike deals?

Not enough to send a party that most Canadians oppose into a majority rulership.

Egmont: Many of those who

Egmont:

Many of those who support the coalition do so as it best represents the elected Parliament. If you were mistaken in thinking that we in Canada automatically elect executive governments, you can blame your dear leader Stephen Harper for promoting "leadership" in his campaign while at the same time muzzling his MPS. [I never did understand how being incapable of working with others constitutes good leadership]. At its core, Stephen's Harper's politics is based upon manipulating a misinformed electorate.

Many of those who support a coalition as being more democratic also would like a proportional representation system brought in. I will be pushing for this. Yes, it is very unfair that the Green voters are not represented in Parliament. I’m sure you have heard that Ms. May supports the coalition.

Stephen "Betrayer of the West" Harper has done everything and anything he can to undermine the representation of Westerners who do not support his blind ideology. The $2 bucks per vote (or whatever it is) was the only voice those non-represented Westerners got out of the last election, and Steve tried to take that away too.

With a truly proportional system, there would be no need to form a super-party. On the contrary, people must be able to vote for the party of their choice. Pro rep is the way. Why do you think so many federalist social democrats in Quebec had to vote for the BQ?

There is no need to announce a coalition prior to the election, although it's an option. If no party is able to garner sufficient members to form a majority or minority government that has the confidence of the house, a coalition should be considered.

I also fail to comprehend why the Governor General would defer to Stephen Harper and not the will of the majority of the elected Parliament? We're the democracy in that?

You also say that she will tell Parliament that they must find a way to make it work or go to the polls. What? Isn't that exactly what is happening? Stephen Harper broke his election law and called an election. He only received enough votes to attempt a minority government, with a CLEAR expectation and mandate that he work with the elected Parliament. Instead, he used an economic crisis to take away workers’ rights, women’s rights, and fair democratic funding. As a result of this persistent dishonest behaviour, he lost the confidence of the House. A majority of the elected Members then agreed to get together and make it work like the majority of voters elected them to do. The elected representatives of the people are trying to make it work. I recall no mandate for any (apparently) pathologically lying wannabe dictator.

The mind boggles

Why is there so much misinformation being spread here and in other places? The Bloc are not part of the coalition proposed government. They will have no ministry positions. The Bloc is not pushing to seperate as bigger issues are out there, and the majproty of quebec voters are not pushing to seperate. They are doing their best to help the folks who vote for them. Some of their issues are our issues as well. I figure some commentators have covered the though that the NDP and the Liberals may get thumped. I also figure they are smart enough to know that. Going back to the last federal coalition government, before most of us were born, that's what happened. Not to say it will happen again. The leaders seem ready to accept the possiblity. The idea that Harper would attempt to get those senate seats filled really quickly is unliely as the GG has to be involved, and he has lost the confidence of the majority of MP's.Tow expeerts on the subject said, no way as he has lost the confidence of the house.

Like it or not, the Bloc members were properly elected, in the one province they decided to have candidates. Their vote as MP's is as good as anyone elses vote.

I read somewhere today that the culprit that got access to the NDP Cuacus discussions is a BC Conservatie MP and then they passed it around. Nice fellows with the best intentions no doubt.

Should the Harper governemtn fall, so be it. The guy has a lot of class, all low. His old Chum , Presto Manning, now a fellow in the Frazer Institute was givng us the word today on the CBC. Maybe steve boy can pick up a position in that right wing publically funded so called think tank.

Amor de cosmos

If you believe you are correct then you should not fear an election,clearly the bulk of Candians will see it your way and deliver the conservatives a strong message.

Yet I fear if you jam this coalition down the throats of canadians you will risk a backlash and when ultimatly we do have an election the people may make the conservatives a big fat majority.

I happen to agree with emont rapids that the govenor general will force an election,that way the public decides and what is wrong with a 300million stimulus in the form of an election.

Constitutional Expert - Ted McWhinney's Take...

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=f76b4fe6-d08a-44a8-9b8f-8bb71f1d3fed

And if McWhinney is correct, look to go back to the polls in January/February.

McWhinney?

In the interests of full disclosure you should have told your readers that McWhinney's most recent claim to fame is his plan, unsupported by any other credible academics or politicians, to do away with the position of Governor General.

Amusing

It's rather amusing that so many people are quoting "different" newspapers in support of Bill - all of which happen to be Canwest publications, a company notorious for having a, shall we say, "homogeneous" editorial policy across all its dailies. In other words, you're quoting the same story and editorial position whose only claim to being "popular" is that it has been reprinted many times in papers that pretend to be "independent", but aren't.

So what we have really is the Globe and Mail readers who sort of support kicking out Harper's disfunctional cabinet, the Canwest readers who, predictably, support Harper, and the rest of us who deplore the lack of understand people have about our parliamentary system and the roll of the Governor General. In truth, the G.G. won't have much choice - her answer will be determined by constitutional precedent, not by the whim of the Crown. As Harper showed in 2004, and as certain Provincial governments have shown, a majority of parliament forming a coalition is perfectly within the working parameters of our laws, regardless of how desperate that makes certain right-wing ideologues.

Government stability does not come from people playing partisan games. Right now I would trust a coalition government of MPs cooperating and representing a majority of Canadians to be less partisan than what the Tories have proven to be with their latest proposal. For the Tories to use this crisis - yes, crisis - to further their own partisan goals at the expense of the MAJORITY shows them to not only be traitors to all Canadians, but damn stupid as well. They need to be removed from office forthwith.

As for an election? I'd rather wait and see what a majority government, albeit a coalition, can do for a few months before heading back to the polls. It will be a novel idea to see parties cooperating for once.

I'm sorry

But Ted McWhinney IS not a constitutional expert - he's an old Liberal lawyer and twice member of parliament for Vancouver Quadra...here's his parliamentary bio:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=ff70f057-63f4-4c1f-89a6-6162c73e41d9&Language=E&Section=FederalExperience

Harper for President !!

This anti-Canadian ReformaTory hates Parliament - just as many of his supporters hate the Charter of Rights.

History never exactly repeats, but there are warnings for us today from Scotland 300 years ago.

http://www.forscotland.com/aou.html

Intimidation campaign against GG

It seems every "expert" and pundit "knows" exactly what poor Ms. Jean's duty is, and aren't shy to share it!

I wonder, is this a threat against the GG from Prof. Michael Bliss (from the NP)?:

"I hope that responsible Liberal and NDP MPs, as they regain their senses after an emotional few days and hear from their constituents, are reflecting on all this. But suppose it happens anyway. How long would a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition or partnership last?
My guess is that it would collapse within a week -- Parliament would be chaotic, backbenchers could not be controlled. The Governor-General would then have to return power to Mr. Harper, who would probably insist that there be an election in which a key issue would be Ms. Jean’s ABUSE OF HER OFFICE. She certainly could not grant a dissolution and election to some other prime minister, as Lord Byng did to the hapless Arthur Meighen in 1926."
-A group of Cons. supporters is planning a "rally" outside Ms. Jean's
GG mansion on the weekend. Sounds like an intimidation campaign to me.
-If I were Ms. Jean, I'd stay put in Europe, and make my decisions there (taking counsel by phone and email from sober, informed, non-partisan advisers), and stay far away from the near-hysterical Cdn. press, and the 10,000 agitated voices who'll be screaming in her face.

Constitutional Expert - Ted McWhinney

1. "Is a Canadian lawyer and academic specializing in constitutional and international law."

2. "Advised successive Canadian prime ministers since John George Diefenbaker, as well as several governors general."

3. "Has been a legal consultant to the United Nations."

4. "Constitutional adviser to the Premier of Ontario and to the Premier of Quebec."

5. "Played an advisory role in the creation of Ontario's Liberal-NDP coalition government in 1985;"

6. "Chief adviser to the Canadian government's Task Force on National Unity (the Pepin-Robarts Commission)";

7. "Royal Commissioner of Enquiry to the Government of Quebec"

8. "Special Commissioner of Enquiry for the Government of British Columbia;"

9. "Special adviser to the Canadian delegation to the United Nations General Assembly;"

10. "Constitutional and international law adviser to a number of foreign governments"

11. "Author of 24 books (two of them in French and one in German"

12. "Editor of 11 symposium volumes, and author of several hundred scientific articles"

13. "First jurist from Canada to be elected to the century-old Institut de Droit International"

14. "Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague"

15. "Member of the Institut Grand-Ducal of Luxembourg, and of the Académie Internationale de Droit Comparé in Paris"

And yes "suggested that a future government of Canada could begin a process of phasing out the monarchy after the eventual demise of Elizabeth II;"

Anybody here attempting to discredit McWhinney doesn't have much credibility IMHO. :)

Political Science 101

In a minority parliament the Prime Minister must secure a majority of the confidence of the House to govern. To do this he or she has to listen, co-operate and, where necessary compromise to be able to legislate.

Needless to say, Mr. Harper obviously has lost the confidence of the House.

The Governor General can now ask Mr. Dion to try to form a government. She also has the option of calling an election.

Mr. Harper has not indicated any plan to show he has any hope of regaining the confidence of the House.

Because we have just gone to the polls, it would seem that the obvious thing for the GG to do would be to ask Mr. Dion to form a government.

Coalition governments are often very effective governments. They are effective because they more closely reflect the wishes of the majority of the population and because they have to listen to diverse views to survive.

King-Byng Affair

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-Byng_Affair

No attempt to discredit him

I just don't think he's a constitutional expert - and your citation pretty much proves it. He used to get regular gigs as on CBC Vancouver to hold forth on almost everything.

I don't think the GG will be calling him for advice luke, which is the only point I was trying to make.

Far Fetched Scenario #1:

Far Fetched Scenario #1: Harper grants Quebec its independence; instant majority.

Far Fetched Scenario #2, the losing side occupies the airports.

Cabinet

The NDP should demand at least 8 cabinet posts. The 6 offered doesn't represent either our seat count or our popular vote vis a vis the Libs.

One thing this has made clear, too many Canadians have no idea how their government works. They seem to think its like the American system.

The solution? Have people pass a test before they vote, that would reduce the Cons to less than 5 seats and the problem would be solved.

Also pretty interesting that Norman Spector

Who ought to know better, is also fronting Ted McWhinney as an 'expert'....things are getting a little slim for Norman these days.

Whatever people think of the Bloc - and I can't find a single of Pee Wee's supporters who will actually respond at all intelligently to the fact that Harper was doing exactly the same thing with the same dance partners when his priority was dumping a Liberal minority government.

Why is that?

In my book, what's sauce for the goose - is, as they say, sauce for the gander...

But then, these are the same people who can't see two Canadian flags when they are in clear view for the rest of the world.

The fact is, the truth and Stephen Harper are strangers. Credibility isn't something they care much about....

This just in

This just in, Emerson has crossed the floor and joined the Coalition. Says he was really really pro-Coalition since he was a boy. Really.

Is being offered a cabinet post as the Minister in charge of counting to 155. John Baird is on the record as saying its too bad the Conservatives didn't think to fill that ministry with anyone not a product of the Alberta school system.

Also in the news, the Western Producer has announced that non-white gay communists will now be allowed to leave their camps and travel freely in all parts of Wild Rose Country that lie within the city limits of Edmonton.

Angus Reid Nat'l Poll Results on Coallition

I don't see it up yet on the ctv.ca site, but the CTV National News with Lloyd Robertson released results of a new Angus Reid/CTV national opinion poll:

-35% of Canadians believe the Conservatives deserve to remain in power.

-40% believe the Conservatives do not deserve to remain in power.

-37% want the Coalition to take power

-32% want a new election

-On the Question, "Would you be comfortable with Stephane Dion as P.M?", 64% said No.

-57% said they are uncomfortable with the Bloc's involvement.
--------------------------------
-Not exactly good news for Harper, but not so great for Dion as PM either,
not to mention those forever unloved darned "separatists at the gate" (or maybe inside the gate!)

Meech -3

GWest, now you say that the failure was first at the Chateau Laurier meeting. When before you said it was at Meech Lake. Why don't you get to the point instead of parroting classic BQ/PQ rhetoric? What do you want to say?

As I pointed out, history clearly shows that the accord died in Manitoba, at the hand of the aboriginal member of the legislature, by all considerations of law and fact. Now you are bringing in two guys very much involved in the present coup, Jean Chrétien and Roy Romanow who were there at the Laurier negotiating. As for the Newfoundland Premier who you bring into the equation, history shows that he was actually willing to reopen the deal and put it to a democratic referendum but this was moot since it had gone down and was dead, and all said so!

I know the history very well, there's no need to tell me to re-read it.

It is encouraging to read here, and there, the optimistic sentiments that so many hold. A real positive and sincere belief that what is perceived as a better Canada can be possible. So much for a cynical and disinterested populace.

I cannot sat that I am anywhere near as sanguine. Impossible demands may well be made and then the calls of betrayal will surely follow. Canada will go back to soul searching and a new generation of cynics will become converted - probably.

Poll correction:

To correct my prior post,there's a preamble missing as follows:
-If the Conservative government falls,
37% want the Coalition to take power,
32% want a new election

realisticman

Please, just go back and read the posts in question - they were quite clear and there was no ambiguity about what I was saying.

I'm not parroting anyone's rhetoric - I lived in Quebec for some of those years and I am very familiar with the betrayal that Quebecers felt on both occasions.

Given the kind of inflammatory things I read in the press and see in the media right now, I would not be at all surprised to see the PQ make an amazing recovery on December 8...and I will wager you a bottle of good wine that, if that happens, the cynical forces who support Pee Wee Rambo in his apparent disregard for the unity of this country will use the fact to bring us back to a state of danger that we have not been in since 1995.

The fact that the Bloc would have been part of Stephen Harper's stillborn attempt to do the same thing to Paul Martin cannot have escaped you. The fact that there was none of the inflammatory rhetoric in the air that time (in comparison) certainly hasn't escaped me.

Stephen Harper and his western bigots are playing a very dangerous and undemocratic game. Someone who comes from Britain, of all people, ought to understand what this is doing to Parliamentary principles.

I'm actually quite shocked and disappointed at the level of ignorance displayed by so many of my countrymen and
women.

Gimme floor crossings!

Frank:
Maybe it doesn't need to be compulsive-floor crosser-Emerson, but what could give this Coalition big Mo, WOULD be a few shocker floor crossings from Tory ranks!...that is, if there are any who might actually be assets. Slim pickings, those.
Of course,in their fantasies, Tories would love to be rescued by recruiting from Coalition ranks -- maybe if Tories offer sufficiently generous life insurance policies-?

Oddly enough, the impact of

Oddly enough, the impact of this "crisis" on the Canadian dollar on world markets was minimal. Is that the world's way of saying, "you are a bunch of pre-pubescent boys pissing on each other's shoes in a parking lot at the back of some unkown bar in a small town?"
Well done lads. You have reduced our nation to a backwater banana republic.
100 years of building world respect for this country, was lost, when the three stooges sat (sat!) on the stage and said that they thought that they had a mandate outside of the electorate..."we don't like the budget" Perfectly good reason to usurp the democratic process. The world is chuckling emberassingly at these poor, power-hungry dirty faced boys.

edmund

I agree with you, the Conservatives have shamed us with their schoolboy antics.

Just like Dion

Remember that CTV interview with Dion,the one where Dion wanted a "do-over"

Well boys and girls we are going to get a do-over election.

Frank what are the ndp priorities in this dream team? Universal child care,raising minimum wages,corporate tax cuts,workers rights.

What cabinet posts are the ndp getting,minister of intergovermental affairs,minister of the arts,minister of sport,minister of bi-lingualism,minister of hold the blocs hand.How about minister of the enviroment,obviously the enviroment is being put on the backburner.
Harper may be an asshole,but at least he doesn`t have a starring role in the latest ottawa production of ( Breakback mountain 2)

This is bizarre

There is no need for an election and, if one were held, it would amount to the immolation of representative parliamentary democracy in this country. It would be tantamount to anarchy….

Who runs things in the House of Commons has nothing whatever to do with popularity - it has to do with having the confidence of the House.

Harper has lost it and his truculent and childish behavior is damaging the country every moment it continues. Any doubt I once had that my instinctive aversion to the man and what he stands for might be unfair has gone up in smoke – the figurative smoke coming out of the man’s ears during Question Period today.

He is an ass – and a dangerous one at that.

You may not like the system - but it is our system and, unless you're prepared to take up arms against it, it should continue as it has done since the 1840s (and longer in Westminster).

The ignorance of Canadians about their own government is appalling - the only thing more appalling is the behavior of the Conservative Party.

Play by the rules or resign and go home.

Revenge is a dish best served cold.

(Thanks for the quote, Egmont Rapids)

Re the usefulness of McWhinney's Bio.

I am dead certain I could assemble a similar bio for Dubya, and one cannot deny he IS the leader of his Party AND President of the US. What more proof of credibility does one need?

As for Professor Bliss, I doubt very much he would seriously consider any solution that did not favour his bizniss buddies.

And I too, like GWest, have been thinking of Harper as a cornered snake, baring his fangs and striking out at any available target, throwing caution to the winds.

Proof positive of this is his making Quebec separatism an issue, in particular resurrecting the virulent anti-Quebec sentiments, centered in his home Province of Alberta. Until now, these were, IMO, gradually being put to rest.

This too is a blunder of profound proportions, and I'm certain that if there are any genuine Tories left among Harper's Reformers, they're now sharpening their long knives for use on him.

With this one incredibly inept move, Harper has ensured that any Conservative hopes for rebuilding their once powerful base in Quebec will not have the slightest chance of success for many years to come.

If only for that reason, Duceppe will think very hard before he moves to destroy the Coalition. And besides, as we've seen, he's far from a stupid or duplicitous man. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain from such a move.

The Newblockerall Party?

OMG. Every time I think politicians cannot get any more stupid they find another way to play their fiddles while planet Earth burns.

ME2

Don't know if you get CPAC - but they are interviewing Duceppe right now.

It is absolutely clear that Harper lied his face off in the House.

This man cannot be trusted and he has to go.

I'd trust Duceppe's word in a moment and I wouldn't pay you a plugged nickel for Harper's word.

James Moore

It's now clear that the snakes are trying hard to convince some members of the coalition to pull an Emerson.

These guys are unbelievable - and they talk about the Bloc threatening the future of the country!

The trouble is the rules allow him to play

[b]quote]Play by the rules or resign and go home.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/
story/RTGAM.20081202.WBSteele
20081202134134/WBStory/WBSteele/

No they don't

Once he has lost the confidence of the house, if he continues to play silly buggers, he does it at the risk of the stability and future of the country itself...not to metion his already trashed credibility as an honest man.

He accepted Duceppe's cooperation and now he can hardly question the coalition's doing the same - the suggestion that he would try to fire the GG is absurd.

Even an idiot like Harper would be hoist on the petard of his own party.

Only options 8 and 10 are really viable

There is no guarantee that the GG will even permit prorogation - and Harper would look like the sleaze he really is proving to be if he tried.

No doubt he's got John Reynolds on the blower enticing Liberals like David Emerson.

Deal or no deal?

You can bet that there is all kinds of wheeling and dealing going on in Ottawa.

Like I was saying,how many are going to cross the floor for a cabinet seat?We are talking about politicians aren`t we?

Your welcome for the quote(Me2)shhh don`t say anything,hint hint

Yes I agree G West that the Cons are sleezy,Harper is sleezy but the Liberals invented the words sleezy,backstabbing,conniving,the Liberals have no competition in the world of ARTFULL DODGERS,and as for Duceppe,he doesn`t bite you with fangs,he sneaks up on you in the middle of the night and lays spider eggs under your skin!

These are politicians!,The sleeziest bunch,expert sleezeballs,all of them,Harper,Dion,Layton,now even Lizzy May.

I don't disagree quarry bay

But at the moment the rules and the traditions of parliamentary democracy are being trampled on by Stephen Harper and that, for the country, is the critical thing.

He is doing this at his peril and, I fear, the country and Canadians will suffer because of it.

The man will go down in history as the destroyer of the country if this continues much longer.

And that's a shame.

Touched a nerve, eh?

I've never seen such a response here at the Tyee to any article.

The only other lefties opposed to the deal are ultralefts who know that Libs and NDPers have cut the welfare state before.

Bill appears to think that only Harper is able to do this and should take the blame so a future NDP leader can exploit the Tory record in three years.

I have no illusions that a coalition will solve the crisis. I do believe that democracy is not a spectator sport, and we need to hit the bricks, talk door-to-door (house-to-house agitation, if you like) and fight for social programmes.

The coalition will have to talk left and will have a slightly harder time trying to stop us. Are you with me?

First things first Ian

Harper is going to try to hang on to power - the best hope we have now is that some of his own members will take him out but, until we get there, the next step is way too far off.

As for mobilizing, the time for that may well come too - and we're going to get a chance to vote for change here in BC on May 12, 2009.

Bizarre Actually...

1. The Liberals admittedly got walloped in the last election with the subsequent resignation of Dion; They are in disarray, in financial trouble and in the midst of a leadership convention;

2. The NDP is listless and now has apparently agreed to the Afghanistan mission extension and $50 billion in corporate tax cuts; So much for principles;

3. The BQ, signed the coalition framework agreement, to "further Quebec independence" as Duceppe stated on CTV News; And also according to CTV News, the BQ "has a say" esp. regarding the "adoption of the budget";

And this is the foundation for a stable coalition government????? NADA.

Now it's also being reported that both John Manley as well as Frank McKenna will not act as part of the economic advisory team for the purported coalition.

I was wondering why Dion, Layton, and Duceppe felt uncomfortable with each other during yesterday's press conference.

Lots more will be leaked to the media in the coming days.

And lots more polls in the coming days as this all sinks in to the public consciousness.

And people here still believe that a coalition will be granted by the G-G???

Bets anyone? ;)

Reminds me a bit of the bizarre coalition negotiations subsequent to the election in the German state of Hesse earlier this year concerning Die Linke (our relevant version of the BQ... and that's where they have a historical tradition of coalition governments).

luke

none of that is at all relevant.

We have a parliamentary system of government about which it is increasingly obvious that Canadians know virtually nothing.

We do not vote for a Prime Minister - we vote for members of parliament and that's all.

The decision about who gets to govern is a result of deliberations in the house - it is not a popularity contest and has nothing to do with the 'will' of the people.

Did you not bother going to those lectures in Constitutional Law?

g west...

Yep... LOL

Good times

Nice to see so many voices here that seldom post!

Frank

Are you watching CPAC?

It's a revelation - and no commercials.

These guys can't even tell when they are lying anymore. I just heard Chuck Strahl try and backpedal over his blatant lie about the flags that 'weren't' there for the signing ceremony...you know those flags - the disappearing ones?

One things' for sure - there will be no more Conmen coming from Quebec.

I'm very impressed with Duceppe - Stephen should offer him a position in his cabinet - he's clearly smarter than any of the clones on the Conservative front bench.

Long overdue

McWhinney? Wasn't this guy a McWhimp in the house of commons?

This type of political indignation should have come about in the cons last term.But I'll take it. I count myself along with the majority of Canadians who don't vote for less democracy and less inclusion.

So for me it is simple the cons do not have the confidence of the house of commons. Less than an ideal coalition but far less worse than Harpers' vision of Canada.

All the cons can do now is prime the propaganda machine for the next election and inflame the passions of zealots west and east of Ottawa.

Sorry Bill can't support you on this one.

Don't back off Jack!

I am flabbergasted at Bill Tieleman's comments that Jack Layton should back off on the idea of a coalition with the Liberals and the Bloc! Though I rather Jack Layton lead the Federal government to continue with the social progress their party has made to Canada through our history, I believe that democracy must rely on the best ideas of all.

Minority governments when collaborative as they tend to be, could bring about compromises we could all live with, to improve the lot of the majority of citizens. However, a minority government under Prime Minister Harper in the last parliament and the beginning of this session carries on with his bully tactics, where, like a spoiled child, if he can't get his own way he won't play. He attempted to control everyone in his path, obstruct working committees at every turn and bully through with confidence motions.

In his first kick at the cat he promised and promised but broke those promises and created confidence motions to prevent the majority of parliament from being able to put through legislation in the best interests of its' electorate.

When he then promised a different approach in this parliament, he continued on his bullying tactics and a confidence motion, not only to close off money for political parties but to delay a stimulus package in a time of great need and urgency.

So, since Mr. Harper will not let a minority government work as it should be, by consensus, the only solution is to vote for non confidence and collaborate with the parties who will endeavor to work together on the economy.

To continue with the specter of a non confidence motion every time Stephen Harper wants to push through his agenda when he doesn't have the majority of consensus is intolerable.

No, it's not time for Jack or the other parties to back off, it's time to tame the Tory tiger and get on with the public's business.

Saltery Bay

First, no, I don't trust the Libs because as Naomi Klein says, they were the ones that implemented the neo-Lib "shock doctrine" here in Canada in the 1990's.

However, I think that cat is effectively belled with the NDP being in cabinet.

Second, Harper has become a threat not only to public assets, the poor and the human rights of workers and women, but to democracy itself in this country and is so unstable he has to be removed.

I know you said you voted for him but I would like to think you wouldn't support him now.

I am in strong disagreement

I am in strong disagreement with GWest and others who think merely getting rid of Harper will solve our Parliamentary problems.

There is not the slightest chance that he alone has made the decisions and the policies he's been following. Rather, he's acted in concert with his caucus and his advisors, all of whom have interpreted and followed Party ideology - though he will, of course, be their sacrificial lamb, their scapegoat.

I see Harper as analogous to the very visible conk on a tree which shows up only after the tree's core is irremediably rotten. Leaving the disease to flourish only means awaiting its inevitable crash to the ground, destroying everything in it and around it. "Meltdown" watchers please take note.

Though they pretend otherwise, they are not the old Progressive Conservatives, of whom (to my surprise) I once heard Dalton Camp claim had introduced many Social Safety Net programs back in the days when Tommy Douglas' CCF posed a threat. Today these are merely Reformers, hiding behind the old Conservative name.

The goal of these people is destroy everything in government that does not further Corporate goals. These are the kind of people who pushed Friedman's economic policies to the max in the US, and who now deny their impact upon Canadian economics as well, the full effect of which we have yet to feel.

Now is the time to remove them entirely from positions of power, employ more sensible policies, and if we screw up, as the neocons here assure us we will, then the public will judge that in the next election.

From Tories To The Bloc Then ?

This talk about The Bloc being separatist and hence evil is no way to bring a country together. Quebec has changed since the days of Vive Le Quebec Libre. That was over 40 years ago! The first referendum was more than 25 years ago. Provincially the PQ is not even currently a contender.

This coalition may be the best chance we've had to bring Quebec back on side since Lucien Bouchard and all the Quebec Tories abandoned Brian Mulroney's Conservative Party.

Who knows, maybe the Bloc will even favour the NDP over the Liberals and support for the NDP in La Belle Province will finally be achieved.

A Campaign to Watch

If the coup doesn't succeed and there's an election instead who will the Liberals run? Will Dion bow out early? Will Iggy praise Layton? Will the debates have Layton and Duceppe singing from the same hymn book? Who will Duceppe go soft on? Is the chapter on Québec in Iggy's book 'Of Blood and Belonging' being serialized in La Presse?

If the Conservatives just stay cool this hodgepodge might well just self-destruct like a rogue wildfire.

Oh, and by the way

I hope you haven't just been reading La Presse - Le Devoir is pretty interesting too.

Quebecers seem pretty happy with the prospect of replacing Stevo with Les 3 mousquetaires.

Let the 'Prime Minister' continue with his ranting and provocation a little longer - I don't think Quebecers are very much looking forward to another election...

If you haven't realized that Pee Wee made a mistake of historic proportions with this little statement and his childish bullying in the house - maybe you will soon.

A Conservative endorsing a Liberal

Well, I just about split a gut laughing when I saw Peter van Loan yesterday on CBC Newsworld pleading the Liberals to invoke the spirit of Pierre Elliot Trudeau to "do the right thing" and "to do what Trudeau would do".

I think the time is about right for the Liberal Party of Canada to ask Peter if he would be willing to donate to the Liberal Party. I mean, that is what Trudeau would do.

I would suspect, however, that Peter was thoughtful in not asking the Liberal Party to do "what Chretien would do" as I think the results would not be pretty.

GWest

Don't worry about the country too much; unless, of course, your coup succeeds and your gang learns late that perhaps The Bloc is not completely in love with Canada and all they did was swallow the bait in a vain lust for power.

Harper did what he was meant to do in a minority position. Bring forward a plan then listen to the opposition and modify it.

The long-incubating plot that had nothing to do with any policy and everything to do with a government overthrow was then hatched.

So backward

It amazes me that in 2008 a referendum asking on the Internet whether canadians want this proposed coalition government to run our country has to be so %$% expensive and complicated. Having such a tool would be so useful in times like these. Instead we have to rely on the GG...

In a parliamentary democracy

In a parliamentary democracy the majority rules. In this case the Reform/CRAPP have lost the majority. Period.

My feeling is that Parliament will be shut down till the end of Jan. with the blessings of the GG, as a "cooling off period", which will give Harper the opportunity to come up with a new Minister and a new budget, heaping goodies, especially on PQ.

Meanwhile, the Reform/CRAPP mindbenders will spend huge amounts of effort and money on the words "separatist coalition", to discredit any attempt for cooperation.

Harper's mandate is to sell Canada into the corporate dictatorship of the "Proto Parliament of the North American Competitiveness Council" and ultimately into the NAU and he won't stop until it is achieved.

Ed Deak.

Candidates for Crossing the Floor

Right at this moment I would bet that Harper is trying to find out if anyone in the Coalition has terminal cancer so he can cut a deal with them.

Let's face it, he has done this in the past, and if he can stoop as low as that, there is no telling how Machiavellian he can be. I mean, if I was invited over for Christmas Dinner at his house, I'd bring my own food.

So this is what fascism looks like: the Big Lie

Realisticman characterizing exercising democracy as a coup. Clearly up is down, and night is day.

The Conservative tactics and that of their supporters are simply a continual state of lying when they are making any form of public comment. The lies and fear mongering are coming fast and furious. Lie about the flag, lie about the parliamentary majority. They clearly are willing to say anything to retain power. The question now is, what are they willing to do to retain power?

How much longer before the Conservatives start to advocate violence?

The Conservatives risk doing permanent damage to our democracy with this kind of despicable behavior. The worst that will happen with the coalition, should the Bloc betray them, is another election. What the Conservatives are really afraid of is that this coalition will work.

The best thing for the Conservatives would be to get rid of Stephen Harper, and to clean house, by getting rid of the garbage that is polluting their party. Their leadership is whipping their adherents into a violent anti-democratic frenzy. It's disgusting, and dangerous.

I urge Conservative supporters who disagree with these tactics, in fact I urge everyone, to make it known to their MPs, the PMO, the GG and anyone else who will listen, that the behavior of Conservatives is unacceptable. Don't let lies carry the day, whether you support or oppose the coalition.

Conservative Values

... don't include lying and bullying. It's un-Parliamentary.
The only reason he is afraid to put a vote in the House is his sure knowledge he will lose.

Harper failed to win the majority of voters.
Harper failed to win the majority of MPs.

Harper's tactics are anti-democratic and anti-Canadian.

I am writing to every Conservative MP to ask that they do the Right thing and depose this disaster of a leader.

Democratic Values

We just had a 300 million dollar election, called by a PM who broke his own law to hold it.

A parliamentary majority wants to form government. They should be given that opportunity. It is the democratic thing to do. If they lose the confidence of the House, there will be another election. It is really quite simple.

If the coalition forms government, the political careers of Harper and his cronies are over.

If Conservatives want to clean up their party and get rid of the disease that currently infects it, then they should support the coalition forming government. Then, once they've cleaned their party up, they work within our democratic framework supporting the coalition when they agree with its policies and making clear their disagreement when they don't. That is the job of responsible members of our democracy and of our government.

Spreading lies, and whipping up baseless fear is what people who have no respect for democracy do. Discarding all principle to cling to power is disgusting. It is the kind of behavior that cannot be tolerated, if we seriously want to have a democracy in this country.

James Burns

It is also within Canada`s democratic right for the GG to call for another election.
When the GG calls for an election and then the Liberals decide to back Harper will you still respect the Liberals?

There will be no coalition,there will either be another election or Harper will get supported.

That is the choice the three opposition parties will have to make.

Value Democracy

We just had an election.

The majority in parliament was elected by a majority of Canadians. There is no need to go back to the polls without giving that majority an opportunity to form government. If they fail, we will go back to the polls.

It is as simple as that.

Quarry bay, you base your assertions on nothing. Making an assertion that the GG will call an election, making an assertion that Liberals will support Harper, making an assertion that there will be no coalition when there clearly already is one, is simply foolish. Frankly, it looks like you are intentionally trying to be confusing.

Have you commented much on the Tyee prior to this governmental crisis, or did you suddenly appear?

James burns

Your right,I suddenly just appeared,I am not just making assertions.

What I am saying is the GG has the right to call an election.
What I am saying is that the GG will look at the three parties,bloc,liberals,ndp and come to the conclusion that they won`t get along.
I would be making the same claims if the coservatives tried to form a coalition.

The GG will be telling the coalition that if you CAN get along join as a super party and we will go to the polls and let the people decide.

There are many high ranking liberals and NDP that are totally against the coalition.

James Burns-if you are right Canada will send Harper packing after the next election.
The Next election everyone can join a super party,the greens,liberals,ndp.bloc,a total dream team,how could they lose?

I am just getting a little tired of everyone saying what the GG can do to form a coalition without acknowledging the GG can call for an election.

Being a political junkie I know that there is no way that the GG is going to have a tri-fecta goverment being propped up by separtists, you may or may not like my opinion.
That is my call,another election,which knowing the liberals are broke,leaderless,their green platform will be tossed,they will find a way to support Harper.

The coalition - Biting our noses off to spite our face

Part of Harper's platform was to increase representation of Westerners in Parliament to reflect population growth out here. Won't happen if coalition gets in. Quote from National Post:

"By signing the deal the Bloc also saves Quebec from a number of Tory initiatives, including plans to redistribute seats in the Commons, reducing Quebec's relative weight, and the introduction of a single national securities regulator, a measure widely seen as a needed improvement in the face of the market meltdown."

Angus Reid Strategies... And Public Opinion...

Would prefer other pollsters but I guess this will have to do for now.

Some tidbits:

1. Should the opposition parties get together and topple the Conservative minority government headed by Stephen Harper?

BC:

Yes: 35%
No: 45%
Unsure: 20%

2. "Do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? – “I am worried about the Bloc Québécois becoming involved in the federal government.”

BC:

Agree: 66%
Disagree: 22%
Unsure: 11%

3. Do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? – “I would be comfortable with Stéphane Dion becoming Canada’s Prime Minister.”

Agree: 26%
Disagree: 66%
Unsure: 8%

Not exactly an overwhelming endorsement for the purported coalition here in BC.

And in Quebec:

Do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? – “I am worried about the Bloc Québécois becoming involved in the federal government.”

Quebec:

Agree: 36%
Disagree: 47%
Not Sure: 17%

Even in Quebec, the BQ's involvement in the purported coalition is viewed with suspicion.

http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/2008[1].12.02_Coalition_1.pdf

The poll results Luke didn't want to mention

Bobb999 already posted the results of that poll 18 hours.

As Bobb999 said :

-35% of Canadians believe the Conservatives deserve to remain in power.

-40% believe the Conservatives do not deserve to remain in power.

-37% want the Coalition to take power

-32% want a new election

I'm with Ed ...

Former NDP leader Ed Broadbent speaking in Toronto Wednesday. (CBC)

To save his own government, Stephen Harper is deliberately trying to deceive Canadians about the facts surrounding a proposed Liberal-NDP coalition, former NDP leader Ed Broadbent said Wednesday.

In an interview with CBC News in Toronto, a furious Broadbent had harsh words for the prime minister, saying Harper was also trying to pit English Canada against Quebecers in his attempt to discredit the proposed coalition to replace him if the Conservative minority government falls.

"I've never seen the leader of a Conservative party, certainly not Bob Stanfield, certainly not Joe Clark, lie — I choose the word deliberately — the way Mr. Harper has," Broadbent said.

The former NDP leader, who helped negotiate Monday's deal between the New Democrats and the Liberals with the support of the Bloc Québécois, said Harper also lied when he said the three opposition leaders refused to sign their agreement in front of a Canadian flag because Gilles Duceppe, a Quebec sovereigntist, objected.

In fact, there were at least two flags present at Monday's signing ceremony, as well as a painting of the Fathers of Confederation.

Broadbent said Harper is conducting a "shameful operation" by trying to turn certain defeat in the House of Commons into a national unity crisis.

"I'm concerned I have a prime minister who lies to the people of Canada and knows it," Broadbent said. "It's one thing to exaggerate. It's another to deliberately tell falsehoods."

The former NDP leader also accused Harper of lying about the details of the proposed coalition, including his charge that the Bloc Québécois is a formal partner and that six Bloc MPs would be offered Senate positions under the coalition government.

The Bloc has said it will support the Liberal-NDP coalition for 18 months in the House of Commons, but none of its members will sit in a cabinet led by Stéphane Dion as prime minister and a Liberal as finance minister.

"They make it up," he said of Harper's Conservatives, who have been quick to label the proposal a "separatist coalition."

"They lie. They pay people to destroy things."

Clark, Stanfield 'would have done the proper thing'

Broadbent said he understood how some Canadians are furious to watch politicians fighting while the economy continues to be battered.

"I have no doubt that is how they see it in the short run, but we are doing what should be done in a parliamentary democracy," he said.

"They're trying to turn a serious economic situation into a political crisis. We will say we objected because there is a serious economic situation for Canadians."

The opposition's proposed economic stimulus package, Broadbent said, contains similar measures to ones planned by U.S. president-elect Barack Obama in the wake of the global economic crisis.

"Other countries are doing it and we should be doing it here," he said.

[continued next post ...]

I'm with Ed ...

He said Harper was betraying the honourable legacy of past party leaders by continuing to delay a confidence vote in the House of Commons. The prime minister pushed back the confidence motion brought by the opposition parties until next Monday and could delay a vote indefinitely by proroguing Parliament.

"I had, my predecessors had a sense of integrity. Bob Stanfield, a Conservative, Joe Clark, a Conservative, had a sense of integrity," Broadbent said.

"They would have done the proper thing. If we lost the confidence, then we would accept that and have to resign."

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/03/coalition-broadbent.html

355 people "recommended" the following comment:

sailordavid wrote: Broadbent is one of our most respect Canadians not only here in Canada but around the world....Ed may have worn NDP colours but he was and remains a Canadian first and all members of Canada's political system from the ground up stopped to listen and learn when he spoke on National Issues... and on this one is 100% correct... did you, I or the MSM expect anything less.

... and more ...

A Heartbeat Away

Sources say that Jack Layton is to be Deputy PM is this contraption flies.

Not bad for a guy that didn't get, what 85% of the vote!

I hear too that there's work being done on Parliament Hill to enlarge the back door so that the Three Wise Men can squeeze in ensemble.

Stockwell Day's secret deal with the Bloc to be PM

"The separatist Bloc Québécois was part of secret plotting in 2000 to join a formal coalition with the two parties that now make up Stephen Harper's government, according to documents obtained by The Globe and Mail.

The scheme, designed to propel current Conservative minister Stockwell Day to power, undermines the Harper government's line this week that it would never sign a deal like the current one between the Liberal Party, the NDP and the Bloc.

Bloc officials said that well-known Calgary lawyer Gerry Chipeur sent a written offer before the votes were counted on election day on Nov. 27, 2000."
...

"“We agree that we will support Stockwell Day as Prime Minister of Canada,” said the draft agreement, which would have hinged on Bloc support.

The plan fell apart as the final result of the election in 2000 saw the Liberals win a clear majority with 172 seats. By comparison, the Alliance, Bloc and PC Party only had a total of 116 seats. The NDP won 13 seats."

To read the entire article in the Globe :

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
servlet/story/RTGAM.20081203.
wquebec1203/BNStory/National/home

G. G. Will Convince Canada To End Monarchy

Now that an impasse has severed the current parliament, the weakness in the nature of Canada’s political structure is exposed.

The G.G.'s decision regardless how it goes, will result in severe reaction.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/
article/263011#tab=article&sc=
0&newsindex=&events_comments=
&topcjs=&events_articles=

The Crown in Canada

Harper could avoid a confrontation with the GG (if he wanted) by not evading the vote of confidence or accommodating himself to opposition.

As for the GG; there are lots of ways to find a Head of State but two are most common :

- through accident of birth ; an anachronism
or
- by election

The benefits of a non-partisan neutral GG couldn't be better illustrated by this political mess.

An elected head of state would be deeply compromised.
It's not possible to popularly elect a non-partisan neutral political figure.

Partisan elections are the best way to populate a legislature but the worst way to choose a Head of State.
After all, have we nothing but respect for our elected leaders, no?
The Japanese in 17th century understood the benefits of separating Emperor and Shogun. The British learned the same lesson ; the Queen Reigns but the PM Rules.

The symbol of GG must be a unifying force. Look around the globe at the divisiveness of elected Presidents. Even our next door neighbours can't do it right.

We need a non-divisive method to select this critical position. Here are a couple options :

The longest lasting institution in the western world is neither hereditary nor popularly elected: the Pope.

Another ancient well-tested institution is critical to our legal system : the randomly-selected jury.

Canada - stand guard against an election fetish.

Then again it could be a trap.

If Harper is as shifty as you like to think he is then that is always a possibility. To misquote some ancient Greek maybe its a case of 'unite and conquer.'

Tieleman

Bill, Bill, Bill:

I took you for a smarter pundit than you have demonstrated. Maybe you should look into taking a constitutional law, or philosophy class on say, political ethics. Jack and Co. did exactly what any sensible person should do when backed into a corner by a thug: band together and FIGHT!

Bill's a bit mixed up

Like so many Canadians, Bill doesn't understand how our parliamentary system works.
The conservatives DIDN'T get the most votes, which is why they are in the situation they are in.
Harper's request to prorogue parliament shows in glaring light what cowards he & the governor general are.
Do you want a coward sending our troops to far away wars?
I don't.

For interested readers

There's an excellent refutation by Tyee commenter 'FRANK' in the comments to another story here at Tyee - have a look

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/12/03/ProCoalition/