Do the Conservatives Realize what a Minority Means?

[drunknsubmrnr]

Won't any party voting in favour of killing one of their primary platforms be punsihed for it by their supporters in the next election?

And if they abstain? Or have only enough members show up so that it just narrowly passes?

The Opposition parties will be paying off debt and raising funds for a while. They've gone through two very expensive campaigns in a year, and have had their ability to raise funds slashed through the fundraising limits.

Kevin

 

[EnviroTO]

All parties would be in the same boat though wouldn't they? With similar financial pictures each party would have similar reductions in campaign strength thus making it the same playing field.

 

[Observer Walt]

Enviro: With all respect, the negotiating scenario you describe is a bit oversimplified. Some govt. policies may go through with minimal opposition. For example I doubt that the government will have any problem getting the GST cut through. It's an easy one to "sell" to the public as it benefits literally everyone.

Some other things may require negotiations and tradeoffs, but this is certainly do-able. Subsidies to parents of children (Cons. policy) may go through in return for some but not all of the daycare spaces previously funded (Lib. and NDP priority), or something entirely unrelated may be traded off (increased military funding??) In particular, the Bloc may "give" a good deal, in return for increased funding to the provinces in certain areas that they see as important and which they could take some credit for. The Conservatives and the Bloc share interest in pushing power down to the provincial level.

No opposition party will want to be seen as obstructionist. If they pick their spots they can successfully oppose some things, but if they just oppose most things and don't appear to be cooperating in getting business done, they will attract the anger of the voters.

 

[BrianHawkins1]

Here's a scenario:

Harper spends the first few months of his term cultivating the image of being a moderate by easily getting various non-controversial pieces of legislation passed. He also works to create the impression that he's no Bush toady and that he'll stand up to the Americans by occasionally snarling things similar to what he just said about the arctic. Then budget time rolls around, and in closed door sessions with the opposition parties, he proposes stuff far more extreme than any of them could possibly accept, while refusing to negotiate. Harper emerges from the meetings claiming that all the other parties are engaging in 'obstructionism' or some such thing, and are refusing to permit the enactment of the mandate given to him by Canadians for petty reasons of self-interest. Being a new PM with a quickly established reputation for being pragmatic and reasonable, he is able to control the story and frame the issue as being a conflict over what the others perceive as excessively generous tax cuts. The media buy it, Canadians are annoyed by this, and the opposition all look bad and hysterical. Harper then submits a budget to the house that superficially seems acceptable, but which is actually riddled with radical fine-print measures that are too confusing for most people to understand, and are also guaranteed to get it defeated. It is defeated, and Harper plays the part of the betrayed and deceived victim who was only trying to do what Canadians sent him to Ottawa to do, but was unexpectedly brought down on a confidence vote. A snap election ensues, which the Liberals are unprepared to fight due to their empty coffers and very green new leader (if they even have one yet). Canadians hate being dragged to the polls again so soon, especially because of apparently baseless opposition antics, and reward Harper with a majority.

Shorter version: Harper takes quick advantage of the Liberals' current disarray and deliberately orchestrates a non-confidence vote in order to grab a quick majority. I think this may be a smarter strategy than waiting 2 or 3 years until the reborn Liberals have a stable and confident new leader, more $, and their act generally back together.

 

[blixa442]

All parties would be in the same boat though wouldn't they? With similar financial pictures each party would have similar reductions in campaign strength thus making it the same playing field.

Of course, except the Conservatives have far more donors than the Liberals.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Of course, except the Conservatives have far more donors than the Liberals.

Far more small donors rather than a few large corporate donors. The Liberals are in real trouble.

Kevin

 

[bizorky]

A prominent U.S. right-wing commentator has welcomed the election victory of Stephen Harper and the Conservatives, expressing hope that the prime-minister-designate will work to eradicate the "cultural Marxism"

There are many people who are well-read.



Weyrich is not one of them.