If you were a supporter of the coalition, than the lunchtime announcement that the Governor General had consented to proroguing parliament likely deflated your lust for change, at least somewhat. The success of the Conservatives in avoiding a vote will likely mean the eventual failure of the coalition, due mainly to Liberal leadership squabbles. However, the coalition might fail for a simpler and more fundamental reason–the Bloc doesn’t need it anymore.
Are we having fun yet? The past week has been filled with reproach, rebuke, rhetoric and, some say, revolution. The opposition parties, in a seemingly magnanimous response to Jim Flaherty’s economic update, have prepared a accord detailing their intent to replace the government of Stephen Harper. The Conservatives, rightly seeing an end to their governmental (if not political) lives, have stopped just short of accusing the Liberals, NDP and Bloc Quebecois of staging a coup d’etat. In this morass of politics and nonsense, what major issues should one consider when deciding whether or not to offer moral support to the proposed coalition?
Out of this whole mess, there are 4 points which I think shape this debate.
So there you have it. We’re back with a Conservative minority. As it’s late and the analysis of this election will begin in earnest tomorrow morning, I’ll mention only a few key points regarding the outcome.
Low Voter Turnout
WIth the elections stacking up so close to one another, a slight drop in voter turnout is to be expected. However, the total lack of a key issue in this entire campaign certainly contributed to voter apathy. When all the data comes out, I’d look to young, city-dwelling men and women as the largest absent group.
The Stephane Dion experiment is over. He was a mistake to begin with and it took a terrible election result (the worst in the party’s history) to confirm the party’s folly. I would look to a Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff or Ken Dryden leadership within the next 8-14 months. As it’s caused the replacement of a bad leader then this huge Liberal failure may yet reap benefits.
As I mentioned in this afternoon’s article, the Harperites cannot get outside of their fortress. This was, for the most part, true. They made some gains in rural Ontario, but were shut out of Quebec. Without Quebec there is no majority. For those of you that look upon a Conservative majority with scorn, then send a thank you note to Gilles Duceppe. This also calls Mr. Harper’s leadership into question. If the parliament lasts more than 24 months he may step aside before the next election.
If they’d run as an opposition party, they would have done better. Obviously that’s just conjecture. But I stand by it.
The 40th Parliament
Runs like a majority. If the NDP is smart, they can act like the Opposition while they watch the Liberal implode and the BQ take long lunches.
So long for tonight. Remember, it cost $300 million to run an election but the alternative is goose-stepping past the Fuhrer, but suck it up and pay the bill.
When standing in the voting booth today, a fair number of Canadians will be voting against a party, regardless of their feelings on the severity of the financial crisis, the validity of our action in Afghanistan or the plight of the environment. Supporters of Prime Minister Stephen Harper will be voting against the hard to understand (read: French) academic, the smug Communist and the woman. Voters for one of the leftist parties will be voting to “stop” the Harperites and their evil agenda, whatever it may be. This trend of anti-support has been demonstrated in some of Canada’s higher profile elections. The dramatic defeat of Kim Campbell had more to do with Canadians flipping the bird to Brian Mulroney (whom they had elected with a record majority only 5 years earlier) than an outpouring of support for the little guy from Shawinigan.
Not every part of the country acts this way. Western voters have been consistent in their strong support of rightist parties and the Reform Party, Canadian Alliance and new Conservative Party have greatly benefitted from ideological clarity. It may be dismissive to suggest that this base was created by playing off the more simplistic needs of rural voters for whom taxation and patriotism seem to be the key issues, but one need only watch the line-up of Conservative election commercials to see the proof. Early in the campaign, Mr. Harper’s team successfully played off Liberal leader Stéphane Dion’s inability to explain his Green Shift plan, painting it as a tax grab. This may not have convinced urban voters, but people in the West, who hate taxes almost as much as they hate the Liberals (read: French people) were sold. Within the first day of the campaign, the Conservatives solidified their base in the West—as well as their minority—and could focus on everyone else. This was not so much as strategy as a foregone conclusion and although Mr. Harper is likely to be returned to power, his inability (and the inability of his predecessors) to gain substantial ground outside of the Western fortress has to be seen as a failure.
The good news for Mr. Harper is that the Liberal Party doesn’t currently have a base upon which to build. Even electing another Quebec native as their leader has not assured them dominance with in their old fortress of Quebec. Westerners don’t get a man in the big chair very often and they are right to relish its preservation. The average Quebecer, on the other hand, would have to look a long way back to remember a time when one of their “countrymen” wasn’t the current or recent ex-Prime Minister so the promotion of a Quebecer in the Liberal party is the norm and doesn’t carry with it a boost in support. As his cultural background doesn’t necessarily score him points inside Quebec and is arguably a massive debit in the West, the Liberals have been forced to put their fortunes in the hands of the truly conflicted; Ontarians and Urbanites. Leftists used to think it was funny to watch right-wingers eat each other in the days when the Conservatives and Reformers used to split each other’s vote with extra help from the Bloc in Quebec. The contention at the time was that if “those guys” formed an Alliance we (leftists and urbanites) would all be screwed. “Those guys” not only got together, but created a new political reality where leftists that are splitting a smaller share of the vote into more pieces. The big loser is of course the Liberal Party which is being forced to fight its ideological ally for the urban vote.
In this leftist civil war, the biggest loser will be the NDP. The New Democrats share of the left-wing vote is a roadblock to a Liberal government, thus enabling a Conservative one and Jack Layton’s refusal to acknowledge the possibility of a coalition has made his oft repeated contention that removing Mr. Harper is of dire importance to Canadians seem disingenuous. Worse for the party is that their leader, arguably the best one they’ve had since the great Ed Broadbent, is still perceived to be smug or “elitist”. Rural voters rarely support an urbanite, hence Jean Chretien’s aforementioned referrals to his quaint upbringing. Mr. Layton is undeniably urban for that reason may never be able to connect with rural voters without whom he can never hope to govern.
The mere existence of the Greens on the national stage is a sign that the NDP has lost the plot, so focused on the impossibility of governing that they are no longer communicating with their “base”; students, unionists, Communists and “average working families”. This might be a small and fickle base, but after spending decades gaining supporters, abandoning them now in the quest for populism is a grave and tragic mistake that will haunt the party, possibly forever. While Jack Layton is trying to be more appealing to all Canadians, the Greens wandered onto Canada’s campuses and found a hungry and relatively untapped group of people were being underserved. As the NDP are trying to eat the Liberal’s populist lunch, the Greens find themselves gobbling up the leftovers of the NDP. Although their strategy is correct, one must become move towards the centre if one wants to fully govern. (Mr. Harper has consistently ignored this fact.) The New Democrats have moved too fast, seeing weakness in the Liberals as their chance to govern instead of what it really was, their chance to be the Opposition. This puts the NDP in the position of having to “lead, follow or get out of the way”; either uniting as a party behind the Liberals for the big win (unlikely), getting the Liberals to unite behind the NDP (really unlikely) or slowly but loudly fading into irrelevance.
If defeating the Conservatives is the goal of both the Liberals and NDP, they must unite to form a coalition. This will not be easy, but if they have the maturity to hold it together, then can reap equal rewards. The NDP will get the political legitimacy they’ve always wanted while skipping the Opposition step they seem loath to take. Stéphane Dion gets to be Prime Minister and prove that he’s more than “worth the risk”? As the Liberals will likely have the most seats in this coalition, they should form the government. However, they would be very foolish to exclude the NDP from the cabinet. There is substantial risk is forming a coalition. If the leaders cannot contain their egos and the government does not last more than 18 months, the electorate will obliterate both parties in the resultant general election.
Should the Conservatives win a larger than expected victory today, pundits will be debating the effect of negative advertising on the Liberals. This unfairly credits the Conservatives for their “clever” ads and the voting public for being rubes. The 2008 election should rather go down in history as a collision of terribly run campaigns. For their incompetence the Conservatives will be left with only their fortress, the Liberals with the scraps, the NDP with the cities and the Greens with legitimacy. If the left can’t find a way to play nice with each other you can expect to see parliament looking the same way for a long time.
October 9th, 2008
To whom it may concern,
As we enter the final days of the 2008 Federal Election, I would like to offer you some perspective on arts funding in Canada and what you and your party must to do to reaffirm the government’s commitment to culture.
It’s wonderful that arts and culture injects a good deal of money into the Canadian economy, but a country that funds (and later defends) arts primarily based on its economic impact is missing the point. The Harper Conservatives aren’t cutting funding because they don’t see the economic value of arts and culture; they’re cutting because they don’t see its political value. This is political opportunism, an attempt to appeal to rural voters by making urbanites seem gluttonous and wasteful. We can never surrender to these forces of cynicism. Cuts to culture and the arts are an attack on the heart of Canada and we should be enraged.
Any political party looking to capitalize on this folly must promise a full restoration of funding to all effected programs. Furthermore, a party that wishes to prove that it’s interested in more than scoring campaign points should institute a program of regular increases to arts funding each year. Oversight bodies (such as the Canada Council) already exist to ensure that monies are well spent and these bodies must also be overseen to prevent the formation of cliques or closed communities.
This is the moment where a politician can separate themselves from the populists and stand with our greater leaders, people who understood that Canada’s potential cannot nurture itself. Without strong support from the federal government, our art, our culture and our identity will whither and die. You aren’t acting for short-term political advantage, but ensuring the long-term survival of our national identity. This is how legacies are made, both for your party and our great country.
A quick note on the idea of strategic voting, especially in regards to city dwellers…
If you think that buying pushing a Liberal candidate over one for the NDP or the Greens is going to keep the Conservatives from winning the election, you’re plain wrong. Look at the voting history in your city, if the Conservatives haven’t won a seat there since your parents were as young and dumb and you, then you’re not helping anything. All you are doing is robbing an earnest NDP or Green candidate that will care about the city from sitting in the house.
And don’t be afraid to vote Green. If the Conservative are to win this election (and they will) then we’re going to need all the ecos we can get in the House.
If you still want to feel like Julius Caesar, then look at the race between the NDP and the Liberals. It might be time for a new “2nd Party” and I think, despite people’s reservations about Jack Layton, that the NDP is an ideal party to be the Official Opposition.
You have to feel for provincial politics. They have all the practical issues and none of the passion. You’d think that people would be more interested in discussing health, education and crime, so why then does this provincial election seem like such a none event? What do municipal and federal elections have that the provincial doesn’t? Simple. It lacks philosophy.
At the federal level we’re always talking about “what kind of Canada” we want to leave for our children and discussions at the municipal level tend to run along a similar line. But what about the province? Ontario is a rich province but not so rich that it can define our identity. We are also not so culturally distinct (I think of the Newfoundlanders here as much as Quebecers) that we require our leader to be a defender of uniqueness. We are just Ontarians, reviled for our central location and dominant history yet also somewhat plain. As a result, Ontario’s leaders have the benefit of not being burdened with such nebulous dilemmas and can focus on managing the basic and important facets of our lives with which they are charged. Yet, there is so little public interest.
The leaders in this election have tried to bait us with the ultimate philosophical debate, religion. Specifically how to fund religious schools, if at all. Although the media dug into the bait with greedy fangs, the public seemed to pick their side and quickly become bored. Proof that religion is too polarizing to be the prominent feature of an election campaign. The real tragedy is that there didn’t seem to be any other meat that the 2 front-running leaders cared to chew. John Tory continues to run around pretending like Mike Harris never existed. The Premier and Howard Hampton try to dig up other issues only to find out that nobody cares. Where are the concerned voters of Ontario? Where is our democracy? I can only imagine that we’re going to see a lower than expected voter turnout.
It seems that even the prospect of a significant change to the way we elect our representatives can’t create a little fire in the people. I suppose that’s because most people I talk to don’t understand the referendum. I wonder if that’s how the voters in Quebec felt? Probably not, they gave a shit.
A strong democracy really needs people to be engaged and with the greater than normal number of elections we’ve had in the last 5 years I suppose I expected a upsurge in interest. But it would seem that either the people are just more interested in the issues that are less tangible, though equally important. It’s likely the blogosphere wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t a greater interest in talking about the big topics rather than dealing with the daily ones.
I tried to create some angst for myself by becoming temporarily interested in the PC candidate here in the heart of Glorious Parkdale. Alas, it was never to be and I shall vote for the candidate and party that is best suited to our depressed, yet eager neighborhood. And as for the referendum…anyone who believes that democracy can evolve should be in favour of MMP. Maybe it isn’t perfect but if this election is any indication what we have is surely broken.
Nothing like an old school council dogfight, eh? But I ask you, fellow bloggers, when will someone really throw down??
I’ve been fairly critical of the Mayor on issues of leadership leading up to, and following, the tax votes and I still consider him to be far too diplomatic. What I would really like is for the Mayor, or anyone, to throw down their hat and take each deferring councillor to task for every single cut proposed today. Or better yet, offer the deferrers a chance to balance the budget. Maybe Minnon-Wong has a really great idea that no one has thought of yet. Perhaps we can bottle his hot air and sell it to Goodyear for their blimp. (SNAP!!) It is in town this week, you know…
Where is the staunch opposition from our buddies on the left. And I’m not talking about opposition, I’m talking about major head-bashing. This is the kind of thing that Howard Moscoe used to master, but recently he’s been fairly reticent. Maybe he’s wishing he was still running this TTC…maybe not…
It’s always easy for the righties to take the louder position on any matter. Their brains are smaller and as a result they don’t have much bandwidth to spend on functions like vocal moderation when just speaking is such a challenge. (Now that’s a dig!!) Anyway, real “ham and eggers” (Another dig!!) like Minnon-Wong are always going to have something stupid to say about their vision of the city; a vision governed by their desire to ensure the city has a sufficient amount of things to complain about. (This is starting to get mean!) Who on our side will be there to slap them in the back of the head? Maybe someone is doing this now, if they are I would encourage them to slap harder, with an open palm, because I can’t hear the smacking sound.
The person that will do that is the person I would vote for…and vote for often. And you’d have to, because lefties are expected to be smart not smart and tough. So if you got a real lefty bulldog on council he probably wouldn’t last long. But then again, Howard did…