Thursday, April 30, 2009

Oh noes, not a coalition!!1!

I've written before about my feelings about using a dead coalition pioneered by Stephane Dion as a scapegoat for everything the Conservatives have been doing wrong since the last election.

So I took notice and was annoyed a few weeks ago when Tom Flanagan posited that, were Michael Ignatieff to get the NDP and the Bloc Québécois to vote with him to bring down the Harper government, he would, in essence, be "reactivat[ing] the coalition with the socialists and separatists against which Canadians reacted so strongly last fall."

So what, oh what, am I supposed to think about the Conservatives now looking for support from the "socialists and the separatists" to get their government through next winter?

This story has some commentary on the situation:

... didn't Stephen Harper once say something about the inadvisability of getting into bed with the socialists and separatists?

Like: "My friends, such an illegitimate government would be a catastrophe, for our democracy, our unity and our economy, especially at a time of global instability."

Why yes! I think he did.

To be clear: I don't think that this is a coalition, but if I actually believed the Conservatives' rhetoric on this stuff, I would. That's why it's so funny, and that's why I'm enjoying this way too much.

h/t: Ker

Cross posted to The Shotgun.


treb said...

And whats the point of this???If its good for Canada and the NDP support it,whats the problem.How do you keep them from supporting you??Doesn,t make sense to me to say if something is supported by the NDP,now PM Harper is a COMMIE and if the Blockheads support something,that makes PM Harper a separatist.Give us all a break for gods sake and let the world evolve as it should without finding shit in everything PM Harper does.In other words get a life.

Dave Hodson said...

I tend to agree with treb on this.

There is no organized cooalition here. We're talking about a governing party seeking support on a case-by-case basis from any 1 of the 3 opposition parties to support legislation. I'm not sure how much 'getting into bed' is required of Harper, as you don't need to win the support of all opposition parties on anything--only 1 party, or even just a handfull of MPs across parties. How the hell is that any sort of coalition?

Besides, that's what has to happen to pass anything in a minority parliament. Are you saying that unless Harper get's the support of the Liberals on any legislation, then he's in some sort of coalition with the rest, and therefore the legislation should be allowed to fail?

ian said...

No Deals! No deals! No Deals!
Common sense governing only
Are all three parties likely to want an election at the same time?I think not!

wilson said...

If it's a coalition government,
which Dippers did PMSH give a cabinet seat to?

Did Jack get Finance?

Did Duceppe put it in writting?

A coalition government would be where PMSH won a minority,
the opps form a majority coalition and SEIZE government.

Anything else is the MPs FINALLY making Parliament work,
nothing more.

wilson said...

What ian said.

paulsstuff said...

Iggy January 5th: "Bloc MPs are duly elected by Québec voters. They are not traitors, they are not the enemies of Canada."

Iggy March 12th: "I could be sitting here as your prime minister, but I turned it down because I didn’t think it was right for someone who believes in the national unity of my country to make a deal with people who want to split the country up".