If Harper wins a minority, Iggy might still end up as P.M

[Very_Boring_Name]

he's been signaling recently that he will ask the G.G to give him a chance to form the gov't, with the support of the NDP and Bloc. Not a coalition (unfortunately), but hopefully the NDP and Bloc will accept and we can get rid of Harper.

[shockedcanadian]

1. That is not democracy if the elected party does not rule.

I think it's an absurd suggestion to think a party can lose but still have the P.M in their party and I don't think that was what he was suggesting in the literal sense. His comment I think was meant as a warning to Harper that even if he wins, if it is a minority, he had better be prepared to play ball with the other parties. If not, the Liberals would but heat on them.

I don't vote, but if I did I would expect that the elected party would lead the country. I would fully expect the opposition parties to provide an environment of "check and balances" (except the Bloc who are obviously committed to the end of the federation).

[RedSock]

2. it is completely legal and democratic

it is completely legal and democratic -- that is why harper talked about it seven years ago and why the three parties proposed it in late 2008.

**I don't vote, but if I did I would expect that the elected party would lead the country.**

but that is not how it works in canada. in 2008, i had been in canada only 3+ years and was shocked at how little life-long canadians knew about their own system of government (calling a coalition a "coup" and whatnot).

also, canadians do not vote for a prime minister. they vote for a representative in their riding. only people in harper's riding cast votes for him.

(there have also been rumblings that if harper does not win a majority -- and it seems highly unlikely that he will -- he will be replaced as party leader.)

[shockedcanadian]

5. Fair enough

I admit I am not the most educated in these matters. I suppose it does provide the widest voice possible when operating in this matter.

However, why would Ignatief assume he should lead in a vote of non-confidence? Because he believes the Liberals will be the official opposition?

[icnorth]

26. If Harper wins a minority

and he cannot form a coalition with support to govern, then other parties could agree to a coalition and request the G.G. to give them permission to form a government.

[Metric System]

3. Yes, this is how democracy works in the parliamentary system.

[laundry_queen]

4. It's totally democratic

If the 'coalition' wins 65% of the vote and the conservatives win 35% of the vote, how is it undemocratic that the coalition puts forth the PM? It helps to remember that a coalition is a temporary merging of the parties...
And why don't you vote???

[CHIMO]

6. Have a read

Through this article from the Globe and Mail.

Election to test Governor-General's constitutional know-how
With various minority government scenarios now playing out on the campaign trail, one man could emerge as the ultimate decider: Governor-General David Johnston.

Mr. Johnston, who was chosen for his constitutional knowledge and level-headedness, may now have to put that knowledge to the test: He could be forced to decide who governs Canada and when there will be another federal election – powers many Canadians may not be aware the Governor-General possesses.

“He has the advantages of a deep knowledge of our constitution and parliamentary conventions, access in confidence as required to the finest advisers in the country, and decades of experience in facing and resolving difficult issues,” said Rob Prichard, a friend and the former president of the University of Toronto. “From my perspective, the office could not be in better or sounder hands.”

Constitutional experts are not willing to speak on the record, on the grounds they may be called upon to advise the Governor-General in the event of a parliamentary crisis. But precedent both in Canada and in other Westminster parliamentary democracies will guide events.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/election-to-test-governor-generals-constitutional-know-how/article1993901/

It seems that Harper does not understand how our government is designed to work. His opinion is that he makes the rules and he may and can change them as he wishes.

[arikara]

7. Of course a coalition is democratic

its not democratic if a party who "wins" with only 35% of people casting ballots get to do it their way when the majority of the country is left of center. Unfortunately the left vote is split so Harper and his rednecks get to drag us into their cesspool of corporate giveaways and cuts to social programs... That is what's not fair.

[Posteritatis]

8. Welcome to the Canadian polity; here's your complimentary copy of the Constitution to read. (nt)

[Very_Boring_Name]

10. I'm shocked at your lack of knowledge about Canada's parliamentary system

I think I learned this stuff in like, 5'th grade. How is it there are adults who still don't understand such a basic principle of our democracy?

[Ken Burch]

11. There are MANY countries where the largest single party in parliament

is NOT in government. Sweden and Israel are only two examples. There are many more.

And the right-wing parties in British Columbia in the 1940's formed a coalition to keep the largest single party, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation(CCF, the predecessor to today's NDP), out of power, even going so far as to use a rigged electoral system in the 1952 election to put the Social Credit party in power despite the fact that it ALSO lost to the CCF in seats.

There's nothing sacred at all about the largest single party having to lead the government. It's simply not a requirement. And it's weird that you'd be repeating a right-wing talking point on a progressive talkboard.

[iverglas]

27. well, it isn't democracy

if we don't all cast a ballot on every single legislative initiative introduced by the government.

What a ridiculous thing to say. In a multi-party Parliament, where no party holds a majority of seats, THERE IS NO "elected party". Did you miss the point somewhere?

I don't particularly care what Iggy said, or might have meant.

The fact is that in the Westminster form of representative democracy, the person who is able to form a government that secures the confidence of the House is entitled to govern.

And it simply does not matter how that confidence is secured. (Oh, yes, all right, if it's secured by outright corruption, that doesn't count.)

And what's this "checks and balances" nonsense? For one thing, that's a USAmerican turn of phrase and doesn't belong in discussions of the Canadian system of government. For another, it has nothing at all to do with the workings of the legislative branch of government itself.

How the hell do opposition parties "check and balance" the exercise of power by a government with a minority of seats in the House other than through the prospect of bringing down the government?

And the plain fact is that a government that has been brought down does NOT get to choose what happens next, any more than it got to choose what Parliament did while it was in place. It is up to Parliament to determine that, in both cases. If Parliament expresses confidence in someone else's ability to form a government and govern, then that person is entitled to do just that.

In every minority government situation we have ever had, it is ridiculous and in fact false to talk about the governing party having been elected (even in the inaccurate sense of that word we're using -- we don't elect governments, we elect members of Parliament).

In every case, a majority of electors has voted against that party/government.

You don't vote? Hmm. Odd you have opinions about what the outcomes of the votes cast by those of us who do vote should be.

[CHIMO]

9. Harper questions right of opposition parties to form government

“There’s only one requirement for being the government and that is you must enjoy the confidence of the House of Commons,” said Franks, professor emeritus at Queen’s University.

“It’s not a constitutional debate. Constitutionally, there’s absolutely no question. There are ample precedents both in Canada and abroad to support it.”

Franks accused the Conservative leader of trying to rewrite the Constitution for his own end.

“He’s trying to change not just the Constitution in terms of what confidence means, he’s also trying to change it in terms of how governments are formed,” Franks said.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/978759--harper-questions-right-of-opposition-parties-to-form-government?bn=1

[murphyj87]

12. Coalition Government

Apparently the only coalition federal government in Canadian history (since Confederation) was from 1917-1920 and involved the introduction of conscription.

[Metric System]

13. Introduction of conscription? Don't give Harper any ideas if he wins a majority.

[murphyj87]

14. Conscription...

That was conscription during WWI in that case. The pro-conscription parties got together to take power from the anti-conscription party.

[shockedcanadian]

15. I think this is all a moot point

As I thought from the beginning of the election, the Conservatives will obtain a majority. It will be a tighter race then I expected, but it will happen.

[Metric System]

17. I'm preparing myself for the worst. I shudder to think of Harper with even fewer checks & balances.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Posteritatis]

25. To be fair, there was that whole Great War thing going on at the time. (nt)

[whosinpower]

16. Here is a funny Harper fact

According to Mr. Harper - only the party with the most seats can form government.....

well - what would he say if the Bloc won 75 seats
the conservatives won 73 seats
the liberals won 72 seats.
The NDP won 73 seats
The green party won 15 seats.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA......I know it would never happen - but the possibility IS there that a seperatist, regional party - could in fact be asked to form government - if it is as Harper suggests.....
and that would be HILARIOUS!

[Ken Burch]

18. IF anyone leads a coalition or non-Harper minority government now

is Jack Layton.

The Ekos poll released today has the NDP five points ahead of the Liberals and only six points behind the Tories. The Liberal Party is no longer entitled to claim to be the main alternative to the Tories.

[Arrowhead2k1]

20. This was unthinkable about a week ago, but holy shit.

This would be the best thing to ever happen in Canadian politics in my lifetime. Something exciting. An NDP led coalition!

I hope this isn't too good to be true.

I will happily vote NDP if they have a chance in my riding.

[Ken Burch]

21. Check out the last minute polls. What IS your riding, btw?

n/t.

[Arrowhead2k1]

22. Mississauga-Erindale.

It's basically neck and neck Conservative vs Liberal traditionally. The Cons won narrowly in the last election. This was also once the riding of the staunchly liberal yet "infamous" MP Carolyn Parrish. Perhaps you've heard of her? She was great! ;)

[Very_Boring_Name]

23. I loved carolyn parrish up until the second she voted against gay marriage

After that I realized she was just an opportunist.

[iverglas]

28. oh, gee, thanks for that

</sarcasm> ;)

Here I'd thought I'd found a Liberal I could like!

[murphyj87]

24. If Harper wins a slim minority...

If Harper wins a slim minority, Jack Layton could end up as Prime Minister..

[iverglas]

29. what would be nice, if that happened

would be if Harper decided to see the writing on the wall and NOT go to the GG and ask to govern.

The drama of another non-confidence vote and the Conservatives trying to instigate some sort of constitutional crisis ... or even whine a whole lot ... is precisely what the country does not need, Mr Harper.