Politics: After two weeks full of sound and fury

What has the Conservative / coalition crisis meant, and where does it go from here?

| Commenting on this story is closed.

${image_caption}$

If nothing else, the tumultuous events of the past two weeks on Parliament Hill have confirmed the truth of the old adage attributed to former British prime minister Harold Wilson: a week is a long time in politics.

The reverberations of the political drama—or, depending on your political bent and grasp of how the parliamentary system functions, the “constitutional crisis”—sparked by the November 27 fiscal update presented by federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty continue to play out on the national stage, with each day bringing a new twist to an already convoluted saga.

The latest turn of events was the move on December 9 by Liberal leadership hopeful Bob Rae to bow out of the truncated race to replace the embattled Stephane Dion as leader of the Liberal Party, clearing the way for Michael Ignatieff to take the reins in preparation for a resumption of the standoff in the new year when Parliament resumes.

With Parliament on hiatus until January 26 following the decision by Governor General Michaëlle Jean to grant Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s request to prorogue the House, and with the internal machinations of the Liberals having played out, questions remain: what has this unprecedented series of events meant for the country, and what might happen next?

“The Governor General essentially acted like a referee in the early part of the championship game,” according to Duff Conacher, the coordinator of the Ottawa-based Democracy Watch. “She didn’t want to throw anyone out of the game, didn’t want to give out harsh penalties that would allow one side to score a winning goal. Both teams are weak, the fans are totally unimpressed with how they’ve been playing and the Governor General said, ‘Come back after the break between periods. Coalition, if you can hold together as a team you might still have a chance of winning.’”

Despite the uproar amongst supporters of the Liberal-NDP coalition about Jean’s decision to prorogue, which allowed Harper to dodge certain defeat on a motion of non-confidence, Chaldeans Mensah, the chair of the political science at MacEwan College, says that it was the most sensible move given the pace at which events were unfolding and the level of division in the country.

“The prorogation was a very important step, and the correct step, for a reduction in tension. It’s an opportunity for the parties to reassess their positions and also, I think, to meet the desire of Canadians for all the parties to really get down to the business of working together to deal with the economic downturn that we have,” he says. “So this is really a welcome cooling-off period.”

Mensah says that now that the Liberal leadership question has been answered, how events unfold when the budget is presented on January 27 depends on the actions of the two sides in the coming weeks.

“I think a significant issue for the Conservative Party is the extent to which they’re going to use this period to maybe sound a conciliatory note or adopt some of the policy initiatives introduced by the coalition,” Mensah says. “And from the Liberal front, one has to wait and see the impact of the leadership changes on the durability of the coalition. So I think both sides need to do a bit of a reassessment of their positions.”

Kenneth Munro, a professor of history at the University of Alberta who studies Canadian politics and French-Canadian history, says the coming weeks will likely see an intensification of rhetoric as both the Conservatives and the coalition try to strengthen their positions with the Canadian public.

“Certainly there’s going to be a propaganda war now for seven weeks in the country. The Conservatives are determined to hold onto power and they’re going to try to win the minds of Canadians. The coalition is going to retaliate, naturally, so there’s going to be a lot of misinformation and propaganda trying to win over the support of various groups of Canadians, which is most unfortunate, but that’s going to be the reality,” he says.

If the coalition can hold together—which Munro believes is likely in light of the public affairs battle that will be waged—the end result may simply be a seven-week delay in bringing down the government.

“If the coalition stays intact and appears to have a determination that they can make this work, [the Governor General] might well decide to give them an opportunity to see if they can govern. And the reason I say that is we had an election in October and to have one will only be three and a half months since the last election and I’m not sure Canadians want another election.”

But Conacher argues that the specifics of the situation mean it’s just as likely that Jean will send Canadians back to the polls even if the coalition is maintained and chooses to bring down the government.

“The Liberals and NDP don’t make up a majority of seats. When you look at the statement that was signed by them all, the Bloc is saying they’ll vote with the coalition on some things. It’s just not solid,” he says. “And even if Ignatieff is installed by the Liberals as interim leader to be confirmed at a convention, [Governor General Michaëlle Jean] is still going to say, ‘I’m not going to make someone prime minister who hasn’t even been confirmed by their party, given all the other factors.’ Essentially the Liberals’ election platform was no deficit, no coalition, they voted for the throne speech and they’re now in a coalition with another party where they don’t make up the majority of the seats together in the House. That’s not a sure winner.”

Despite the focus from the coalition side on whether the Conservatives enjoy the support of the House of Commons, Conacher argues that the reality of contemporary Canadian politics means public opinion plays a much more important role than it did during the much-referenced King-Byng affair of 1926, during which the Governor General refused a request by King to dissolve Parliament.

“That’s one of the things that the coalition missed. They and many commentators focused on whether the Conservatives had the confidence of the House of Commons—for the obvious reason that that’s what our constitutional tradition says. But in 2008 it’s really about whether the Conservatives or any party has the confidence of voters,” Conacher argues. “Part of the reason you’re seeing the splits in the Liberals now over the coalition is because they saw the initial polling numbers and the initial polling numbers were very bad. So you can talk all you want about ‘Oh, he doesn’t have the confidence of the House of Commons,’ but that doesn’t mean that the GG is going to install you, because she reads the newspapers too and she’s not going to make some move that just installs a prime minister. Not in 2008.”

Conacher says that the best strategy for a Liberal party in financial straits and with a newly installed leader may not be to bring down the Conservatives in January.

“The reason that Harper called an election in September was because he saw all bad news coming down the pipe for the next year. So let the next year run its course,” he suggests. “It’s almost for sure that Harper is going to blunder some more. He’s diminished himself enormously in the public’s eyes in terms of trust. Just wait until the fall at least.”

Munro says that no matter how the situation plays out in January, one result is likely to be more minority governments as a result of Harper’s focus on the threat to Canada posed by cooperating with the “separatists,” which has likely alienated Quebecers who perceive his rhetoric as an attack on Québec itself.

“This is a very delicate situation, because Stephen Harper has presented himself as the champion of national unity, and of course he’s doing nothing but sowing the seeds of disunity by taking this tack,” Munro says. “He has certainly given up on Québec. He wants to form a government—he thinks hopefully a majority government—without Québec. John Diefenbaker tried that in ’62; it didn’t work then and it won’t work now.”

Despite the rifts the political crisis has opened, Mensah sees a positive side in the nation-wide public response.

“It’s been a wonderful shot in the arm for Canadian democracy. People are engaged, they’re getting into debates, seeking out information. This is the type of political interchange that we required during the time of the election campaign, but one that was not forthcoming. So this unexpected crisis has really gotten people interested in the political process. I have no doubt in my mind that if an election is called anytime soon we’re going to see people come out and vote, because all of a sudden they realize that it’s crucial for them to be participants in this process of choosing the leadership of the country.”

Conacher, however, is less convinced there’s been much change.

“I think if you looked back at the blogs and the various issue stories that came out one issue after another during the most recent election and added up the number of different individuals who had made a comment you would find the same totals,” he says. “It doesn’t show that people who usually don’t participate are now participating in that grand conversation. When they go out and do the streeters, of course people would have seen it, it was front-page news. That doesn’t mean they were engaged, most of them said they were disgusted.

“It’s easy to have this illusion, and I think it is an illusion. You’ll see in the next election whether it’s actually true.” V

Politics: After two weeks full of sound and fury

What has the Conservative / coalition crisis meant, and where does it go from here?

Most recent comments