Canada's Governance Crisis

By BJ

While watching the continually unfolding drama of parliamentary manoeuvrings here in Canada, I suddenly realized that there was something rather significant missing from the coverage that I had gotten used to in watching US politics. Polls.

I mean, it is now close to a week since the Conservatives released their economic update that triggered the current crisis and there are a number of significant questions practically begging for analysis.

Do Canadians support a continued Conservative government or do they prefer the idea of the coalition taking over?

Do they think an election should be called, or are they willing to accept the parliamentary rules allowing such a transfer?

Would they support or punish the Conservatives for proroguing parliament before the confidence motion is settled?

How happy are they that for the most part, the above decisions rest mainly in the hands of the unelected, nominally-ceremonial, rarely-thought-of-outside-of government-waste-of-money-attacks position of Governor General?

Were this south of the border, I'm sure by this time there would be at least a half-dozen polls telling us what we all think about each of the above questions. As it is, I haven't seen any publicly reported poll on any of them, forcing us all to ask the questions of ourselves and come up with our own answers, (well, or wait for our partisan masters to tell us the answers for those so inclined).

Anyway, it appears we'll get to hear from the Prime Minister himself this evening, probably repeating in more polite terms what his supports are calling an act of sedition by the parties holding a majority of the seats in parliament and supported by a majority of Canadians in the last election, and calling the already-planning-to-step-down leader of the opposition Stephane Dion a big coward for not wanting to go to the voters over the coalition idea.

That decision wouldn't be Dion's even if he was planning on sticking around, and it is in going forward that we'll see who truly is afraid of facing the voters right now.

The current situation has three possible outcomes. The first is for Harper to request the Governor General prorogue parliament, as some are suggesting he's planning to do. This would suspend parliament until the end of January when the Conservatives are to hand down their budget, likely tweaked to include everything the opposition wants to do right now in an attempt to pretend that that was their intention all along. If Harper does this, it will make clear that he's the coward not looking to face any votes.

It is theoretically possible that the Governor General would refuse the request to prorogue parliament, but such an act would be even more unprecedented than the coalition Harper and the Conservatives are trying to save themselves from.

If Harper doesn't choose the prorogue route, we have the vote of non-confidence on Monday, which barring a miracle, the Conservatives will lose. That sets up the final two outcome options. Once defeated, Harper will go to the Governor General and request parliament be dissolved and an election held. The opposition parties will present the Governor General with their coalition option. The critical choice here is with the Governor General, and current consensus is that she will allow the coalition a chance to govern, but there is no reason she can't accede to Harper's (assumed) request to hold another election. That's why I said above that if Harper goes the prorogue route, we'll know who the real coward is, because he will effectively be denying any chance for Canadians to actually vote on the issue.

We still may not get the chance should he stick around and take his licks in the non-confidence motion should Michelle Jean accept the opposition's proposal, but at least that way he'll be able to say he tried to give Canadians a voice rather than making his own play to hold onto power.

All that, and I still can't help but wonder what the polls would be saying?

Comments

[geoff]

BJ I can't figure out if you like or don't like our parliamentary democracy - maybe you are neutral.

I like it.

I like that we have limited the none sense of corporate or wealthy individuals funding parties and all parties get a federal cash input based on the number of votes they get per election - the real issue behind the Harper mess.

I'm sorry that Harper and his, I have to say it, thugs have put us in this disaster.

Fuck polls and the MSM horse race crap, that's the American way.

We still, I hope, have the Westminster tradition and an actually constitution that will work - unlike the dimly recognised constitution mess of our - I'm assuming you are to the North - friends to the South.

If it, tradition and the constitution doesn't see us through, then screw them all, for a minute or so, before we get back to throwing out the bastards.

[Saskboy]

I like that there are not a lot of real polls being distributed yet. It makes people decide for themselves rather than act like sheep.

[BJ Bjornson]

Geoff, I very do like our parliamentary system, though I do think there are areas for improvement. Currently topping the list is the ability of the PM to prorogue parliament and thereby suspend any action the Canadian government might take to deal with the world-wide economic crisis which will keep wreaking havoc across the country for another two months as the Cons fire up the propaganda machine in a desperate attempt to cling to power a little longer.

I'm also not too happy that the only way to avoid that is to have an unelected, Liberal-appointee tell the elected Head of Government to stuff his prorogue where the sun don't shine, even if there is some justification in noting said government head has already lost the confidence of the house.

Ah well, I'm sure I'll have more thoughts should the prorogue becomes official this morning as I expect.