These foolish games…

12.04.08

The inevitable result of the petty political squabbling has occurred: Parliament has been shut down to stave off a no-confidence vote that would have been scheduled for Monday, where the opposition was trying to take over the country in what essentially would amount to a bloodless coup.

Looks, it’s quite simple: You don’t have to like who’s elected, but you have to respect the will of the electorate. A power grab “just cause we can” is the last thing that the country needs.

Dion, Layton and Duceppe need to back off from the brink, cool off, and find a way to at least give the Conservative minority government a chance to work. For the good of everyone. Because Harper may have been elected by a minority, but that’s more people than the zero who voted for the proposed Liberal-NDP coalition.

Now that Parliament has been suspended, maybe it’s time to lock all four of them in a room together and force them to work out their issues and get back to the task at hand: Running the country.

{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Alexander Yu 12.04.08 at 9:26 PM

Well… Harper should've been smart enough to see this coming… and preempt this with his on coalition with one of the parties. <sigh> however I think it's all… all… SO CHILDISH AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! I want to abstain my vote but then I won't have the right to complain. :-p.Seriously… WTF. I know he did some stupid comments in his budget speech, but hey that would've been perfect timing for one of the parties to remind him, "minority!!!!" and ask them to make a deal.

Reply

2 red rabbit 12.08.08 at 12:17 AM

Sari! I’m surprised. I would have thought you would have realised that vote-splitting on the left was the only reason the Conservatives got their minority at all.

The coalition would have better represented the will of the majority, and just because Harper’s party got more votes than another single party doesn’t make him the leader: that’s presidential, not parliamentary.

He’s lost the confidence of the Parliament. That means he can’t run a government, and that means he is in reality no longer a viable Prime Minister.

It looks to me like this prorogue is more the demand of a petulant brat who has figured out that nobody wants to play with him anymore, so he takes the ball that doesn’t belong to him and hides it so nobody else can play.

Reply

3 Jonathan Benn 12.08.08 at 11:48 PM

I'd like to clear up a misconception here.A coalition is not a coup.Since we're in a _representative_ democracy and not a direct democracy, our representatives represent the people. They are the ones that choose a prime minister to govern the country, not us. We do not elect prime ministers. We elect representatives to the House of Commons. If the House chooses a new Prime Minister, that is (at least in principle) the will of the people.Aside from that I agree with you, Sari. Even though Harper's prorogation should have been refused by Ms. Jean since it is clearly against the spirit of what this rule is supposed to accomplish, the time off will probably be a good thing. It'll give us voters time to think and discuss the issue. And it'll give time for this coalition to either fall apart, or become stronger.

Reply

4 Jérôme Beaulieu 12.09.08 at 5:48 PM

I would have looked forward to a coalition government. Getting three parties to cooperate in running this country is laudable.First off, Harper was not elected Prime Minister, that's not how democracy works in Canada. We elect representatives of different parties for our ridding. Period. That's all we get to choose as electors.Even if you argue that in spirit, we vote for the head of the party, it still means that most people in Canada didn't vote for Harper. That's a problem in any first-past-the-post electoral system with more than two parties. On the other hand, that's why we have laws that allow coalitions. Many countries function with coalition governments. It’s not a coup. It’s constitutional democracy in action.Some countries that have coalition governments: Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Turkey, Israel, New Zealand, and India. In Germany, Finland, Japan (since 1990) and Switzerland, coalition governments are actually the norm. Canada has a coalition government in 1917.Speaking about the coalition, Harper couldn't say it was illegal because it isn't.He couldn't say it was unconstitutional because it isn't. Instead he went for the angle that it was illegitimate. Big problem there. If the coalition is illegitimate because of the Bloc, he's saying the Bloc is illegitimate. That was inflammatory coming from someone who's supposed to unite this country. By dissing the Bloc, he disses a large portion of the Quebec electorate and the opinion they have expressed democratically.It's also hypocritical coming from Harper, since he tried the exact same thing when he was in the opposition by uniting with the Bloc. Now the provincial elections reap what Harper has sown. The Parti Québecois is on the rise again. Thanks Harper.

Reply

5 Jérôme Beaulieu 12.09.08 at 5:49 PM

I do agree that we would all have been better off if everyone had backed off from their positions. However, Harper is clearly to blame for having brought us into this situation, and that goes to his ability to represent the interest of all Canadians.

Reply

6 Jonathan Benn 12.11.08 at 7:33 AM

Agreed, Harper's strong stance on not wanting to support the coalition on the grounds that it includes separatists is a big problem for Canada. I think it was his most bone-headed move so far. He just keeps making worse mistakes every week. Quebec was warming up to him and voting Conservative more over time. Now, this trend will reverse, I think, and Harper is out next election, grâce au Québec.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: