Thoughts on a Canadian Coalition Government crisis

Post Reply New Topic

It is matter of the political culture a country had developed. Germany is here an extreme example where not just coalitions governs since 1949, but the Federal Republic is in a way constructed that also the 16 states have their strong say in federal issues, so decision making is lengthy process in which building compromises is part of the institutions, otherwise the country would come to standstill.

Even more Off-Topic: What post war Germany did was orienting back in its internal structures close to the system which served Germany from end of the rule of the House of Hohenstaufen in the 13th century till the French Revolution in which government was a matter of shear endless consents finding processes.

I would like to see a rise in power for premiers, implying a loss of power to members of parliament. I think we are over governed, and the fact that we use the term "back benchers" kind of proves this.

Premier power topic

This is a conservative position, Fuzzy. I for one am a federalist, in that I prefer one central prime minister who is strong enough to unite the premiers and they all work together. For this reason I do not support coalitions, nor the sort of government Dussel advocates. For example, Canada is too large and diverse a land for the sort of coalition of which he speaks. In addition, Germany has a different history, and is not multicultural in the sense that Canada is. (I know Europe is changing, and has citizens from all over, but there is still the history and culture/language of singularity. North America has a history of being culturally diverse for well over 150 years.)

So why does the US work with the state/president system? This is complex and would take millions of pages to explain. Suffice it is to say that government evolves over time and gets to a point of stability, if there are no major problems from within and without. Improvements/changes are always considered, though not always adopted. Government change is slow, and democracies can have more than one form and still work. I suppose to be fair I could say for Canada to try the coalition, but for Duceppe to be included may be fair yet somehow wrong, because of what he represents.

But what is great about democracy is that people have a say in government, and can talk freely about their differences, as we do here.

Edit for the 64 billion dollar question! The Budget will be handed down, the megadeficit, on January 27. It was not clear to me previously whether it would be the 26th or 27th. Too many people changing the date!!

We are good to go now, I hope.

Speech from the Throne Day on Parliament Hill topic

Toilet trash talk from Steve. Stay tuned. I will be reporting later.

A six-point budget topic

This can be summed up in two general points (spending and tax cuts), according to the Speech from the Throne delivered yesterday by our Governor General.

It sounded great with her voice. Had Steve done it someone would have thrown one of Flaherty's new shoes!

The Pool Table Budget: What else is going into the side pocket?

Will Ignatieff bring down the Government? Layton and Duceppe are all ready!

I think Iggy will topple the government later. I do not think Canada needs a Coalition government, and frankly I do not think Iggy wants to share power.

The Queen has spoken. Life is short for the King.

From the Hill topic

The Budget is on the table. Survival Tactics Here are a few highlights from Flaherty's Blue book:

$1.9 Billion in tax cuts (personal income tax)

5 extra weeks of EI premiums

EI payroll deductions frozen for 2 years

Personal Income earnings: $10, 320 before taxing

Home renovations: $1,320 tax break for one year only for fix-ups worth $10,000

$34 Billion deficit forecast 2009

$30 Billion deficit forecast 2010

Creation/maintenance 0f 190,000jobs

Infrastructure incentives (matched dollars) for repairs/building in municipalities/provinces. Worth $billions

6 billion in housing starts for seniors/First Nations/disabled

Will Iggy make the government fall? Layton and Duceppe are ready. He is going to meet with his Caucus and then tomorrow (January 28, at 11AM) and the Liberal Party will make the decision.

Comments are polarized, either way. Stay tuned.

Coalition is DEAD topic

Just heard form Jack Layton. thankfully, no new election. Now the King and Queen are facing each other alone on the same board. Duceppe and Layton are off the map.

Iggy does not want to share power with the other two. I can see him doing that.

Iggy and Steve are going to be working on other tactics. Steve has been propped up by his worse enemy.

I guess I can be a threadkiller now!! !

This thread, like the coalition, is DEAD!! !! !

Hey sartresue! The offspring of the king and queen will be a lot more viable than that of the offspring of the queen and the Jack, or that of the knave(Duceppe)!

Not dead yet? topic

Hey, Fuzzy! I like the use of the JACK and the KNAVE!! Perhaps things are not down and out. I was just thinking...Iggy si supporting the budget with strings attached. One goof by Steve and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

The offspring? or offstring? Maybe we'll stay tuned after all!!

You made me think of it with your terms king and queen! Thanks!

topic

President Obama is coming to Canada to meet with Steve!! !! A working metting, not a state visit, but it is a start.

I wish I could be a fly on the wall in Harper's PMO office. (Hopefully I would not get swatted!)

Edit: In my haste I forgot to add the date Barack is coming: February 19, 2009.

The main different between a "state visit" and a "working meeting" is the protocol - The protocol at a "working meeting" is low level, while at a "state visit" the great show is made (state dinner, guards, etc.). Because of the great protocol so-called "state visits" is so time-consuming they are normally less productive (and need more preparation).

---

According to my knowledge the idea has been born when Emperor Josef II made a visit to Versailles in 1777 to see Louis XVI (and his sister Maria Antonia): Both agreed prior that the emperor will travel incognito as "Count of Falkenstein" to avoid the big protocol, which otherwise would apply for a formal meeting between the Holy Roman Emperor and French King. After 1945 this "working meetings" became standard in Europe - e.g. the German Chancellor and the French President meet at least four times a year, meeting of similar frequency are common between other heads of government or/and state in Europe too: If they would be run a formal "state visits" the heads of government or/and state were so busy with the protocol that they couldn't do any work any more.

Backgrounder topic

Thanks for the historical perspective, Dussel. I had no idea there was a precedent like the one you provided.

There has been an explanation for Barack's choice of working versus state visit: He wants to be home in time to tuck his daughters into bed!!

There has also been talk that Michael Ignatieff (Iggy) wants to meet President Barack Obama. As official opposition leader, there may be ten minutes to squeeze him in!

Steve is less on formality, and more on getting down to business than many of Canada's Prime Ministers. And he had better work hard to stay true to the Budget 2009 protocols, as he is on probation, according to Iggy.

To good to be true? topic

Now I know what Barack and Steve will be discussing: Trade protectionism.

Barack wants to limit certain materials entering the US from Canada. He wants the US to make its own materials, thus saving money and jobs.

Problems: This works both ways. As US barriers go up, so will ours. There is a Nafta Treaty in place and I for one am anxious to see what happens. How can the two sides come to agreements when a meeting is only a few hours at the most.

Stay tuned. I am a little worried here.

Obviously they can discuss things at a distance as well.

I'm not too worried about the US making their own materials. They use far more than they export already. Exports will have to drop for them to gain an advantage, which hobbles their economy as well. The fact is.. they have to import.

Desirable materials to limit: grain, wood, petroleum. Uranium, beef, fish. Shall we discuss the possibility of each of these being subjected to restriction?

The Import-ance of the US topic

That makes me feel better, Fuzzy. I was getting a little alarmed. I remember reading what FDR did in the thirties which made The Great Depression in the US even worse.

I like that list of desirables. There is leverage here !