Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The Challenge

Andrew Potter writes:
In a recent Coyne column, Derek Lee appeared to draw a line in the sand, saying that Parliament would not allow itself to be dissolved. Coyne obviously concurs. Is that the Liberal plan, or was Lee just freelancing? Is the opposition serious about Harper being a despot? We have a way of dealing with despots in this country, it’s called a vote of non-confidence. Happily, there’s a speech from the throne coming up not two months from now.
I am not sure how serious Mr. Potter is in issuing this challenge, but it is one the opposition parties, particularly the Liberals and NDP should seriously consider. Harper is punking you and he doubts you have the stones to call him on his challenge to the authority of parliament. Your only recourse is a vote of non-confidence. You have two months to work out the details of a new coalition between you, I suggest you use the time wisely, and very, very quietly.

I suggest you start by reading Chantel Hebert's column from a little while back. It outlines a solution to a coalition that I could accept. I think you should agree, for the good of the country that the NDP runs candidates west of the lakehead, the Liberals in Ontario and Quebec and the NDP runs in Nova Scotia and Liberals in the other Maritime provinces and Newfoundland. Incumbents would run unopposed in their riding regardless of the region. I would also propose that both parties agree that this will be the last FPTP election and if elected as a coalition, would introduce legislation to change the electoral system to a proportional system.

There should be no question that this be done very discretely, as you all know what the Conservative attack machine would do if they caught even a whiff of this. However, the country and the viability of our democracy are at stake here. You must seize this time and use it for the good of Canada. We must get rid of this odious regime.
Recommend this Post


  1. Musings about riding-splitting.

    Okay, I think you've gotten up to 1999 or 2000 now...

  2. I imagine there'd be a nasty backlash against such blatant strategic candidacy and you've ignored a vital part of the equation, the Bloc. For my dollar, I'd like to see a coalition formed beginning with the Bloc and NDP coming to the table as majority stake holders. They have more seats than the Liberals and an Ignatieff led government is pretty much as useless and ugly as a continuing Harper run. It is evident that Ignatieff hasn't got the nuts to actually perform the job of leader of opposition so he certainly hasn't earned the confidence to run the government.

    I'd like to cast my ballot for the Bloc Canada. If friggin' Iggy wants an alternative to Harper, well, there it is.

  3. In order for the Bloc to be included, they would have to put water in their wine as well. They could advocate for better treatment for Quebec, but would have to remain out of any referenda, should they come up. I am not sure they could accept that and that's why I did not include them in my proposal.

  4. I honestly don't think it would be that hard a sell for the Bloc. I don't recall them advocating for separation in the last decade or advocating for anything but a strong regional and cultural voice. They are by far and away the party with the best policy platforms outside of the mulit-cultural arena. Duceppe is the only leader of a party that presents as anything even resembling a statesman.

  5. Okay, now you've moved from Greg's decent idea (which is merely academic, b/c it wouldn't fly with the Liberals, who think they can get back in eventually on their own) to December 2008 redux.

    Seems to be the only thing that moves Harper up into majority territory, so I welcome it. :p