Canada the victim of power-grabbing politicians.

December 2, 2008 12:31 PM

Canada is going through a bloodless coup less than two months after its last election. The world-wide financial crisis has proved too tempting a target for the three parties that didn't win the election and they have decided to overthrow the Conservative minority government based on the latest financial report. This hasn't been done in Canada since World War I.
posted by carmelita (47 comments total)

It's not a "bloodless coup", it *may* be a constitutionally-appropriate, procedurally-acceptable and completely legal change of prime ministers and other ministers based on where the confidence of the House of Commons lies.
posted by Rumple at 12:36 PM on December 2, 2008 [14 favorites]

Harper's attempt to cut public political funding (financially crippling the other parties) may have had something to do with things.

Context is fun!
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 12:38 PM on December 2, 2008

Come join the conversation still going on in the post on Friday.
posted by saucysault at 12:39 PM on December 2, 2008

> based on the latest financial report.

That that and the small matter of the Conservatives' attempt to financially gut the opposition parties and fire-sale federal assets in the name of ostensibly balancing the budget.

Someone is really going to reap what they sow here, and I hope to god it's the Conservatives.
posted by The Card Cheat at 12:43 PM on December 2, 2008

I often wonder what it is about Canadian politics that make them so chockful o' drama. This morning, while reading an Icelandic newssite, I came across an item about this and then spent a happy hour reading up about the latest crazy thing happening in the imperial dominion. I can't wait to grab a coffee my politically inclined Canadian friend to talk about this latest bit of drama.
posted by Kattullus at 12:46 PM on December 2, 2008

Stephen Harper's days as PM are numbered.
posted by orange swan at 12:47 PM on December 2, 2008

Parties don't win elections. Representatives win elections, riding by riding. The representative that holds the most influence over the house is asked by the GG to be the prime minister. Usually that person is the leader of the party with the most seats, but if the support of the house shifts it's entirely appropriate for someone else to become prime minister. Calling it a "bloodless coup" is a little extreme..
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:47 PM on December 2, 2008 [3 favorites]

The world-wide financial crisis has proved too tempting a target for the three parties that didn't win the election

So, it isn't that the Tories aren't going to provide a stimulus package to rescue Canada? Your post might be *slightly* biased for the Conservatives.

I think the cut in this coup was totally self-inflicted. I'm also no expert on Canadian politics, but I don't see how even if there is an election, that the Tories win. They looked like fools and they will have to promise people things they swore they wouldn't do (stimulus) if they want to even have a chance at winning.

Let's also be clear about what is happening. First, Canada appears to want a stimulus package that the Tories don't want to give people--the Tories wanted to cut the budget. The G20 meeting which Canada particicpated in involved the governments agreeing to provide that stimulus. Instead Harper dicked around and included a measure that would be lethal to the other parties, who hold a majority of seats. Much to his surprise, Stephen Harper just learned that when you threaten people, they attack back.

Also, let's really look at the facts regarding where Canada stands as a political party. The NDP, the Liberals and the Bloc got more votes than the Tories, who had the most votes as a party, but the Left appears to be more popular as a whole. Take the numbers. The Left got the following vote totals--Liberals won 77 seats, the Bloc 49, the NDP 37. You add those numbers up and you get 163. That's a majority of 20. Your party, the conservatives, won only 143. That means you don't have a majority or a governing mandate. Ergo, if the Left, which was previously divided, gets together, they have more seats than you do. That's democracy. The Tories keep acting as if they had the majority and that it would be "undemocratic" if they were to be booted from power. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I say good riddance to Bush Jr. up there.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:52 PM on December 2, 2008 [4 favorites]

This is a great topic for discussion but a lousy post due to the blatant editorializing. Get Your Own Blog.
posted by pascal at 12:53 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

Fear-mongering, you are.

It has been done in Canada later than WW1. There have been 5 votes of no confidence in the Federals since WW1, including Paul Martin in 2004. There have been coalitions before, notably the NDP/Liberal coalition in Ontario in 85. Putting them together is not that much of a leap.

But yeah, let's stay in the other thread. This one gets off to a bad start.
posted by Lemurrhea at 12:54 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

Adam Yoshida says it's all his fault. Thankfully he also has a solution.
posted by scalefree at 12:56 PM on December 2, 2008

"Bloodless" is so 20th century.
posted by Goofyy at 12:56 PM on December 2, 2008

"Bloodless coups" are so boring. Put the fuckers against the wall!
posted by wfrgms at 12:58 PM on December 2, 2008

Federal minority governments in Canada: votes of no confidence aplenty.
posted by zamboni at 12:59 PM on December 2, 2008

Wow, this is a bad FPP. Ditto Rumple. Also: two CBC links and a Wikipedia link? Really?

In other news:

AMERICA OVERTHROWS BUSH IN BLOODLESS COUP
New Leader Takes Charge With Unprecedented Alacrity — Begins Systematic Purge of High-Ranking Government Officials — Partisan Opposition in Total Disarray
posted by sixswitch at 12:59 PM on December 2, 2008 [12 favorites]

All stranglings?
posted by Astro Zombie at 12:59 PM on December 2, 2008 [3 favorites]

Canada is going through a bloodless coup

That's the Alberta take :)
posted by bigschmoove at 1:00 PM on December 2, 2008

What a terribly written FPP.

This is not a bloodless coup. It is how our Parliamentary Democracy works.
posted by futureproof at 1:01 PM on December 2, 2008 [4 favorites]

Wow, question time is going crazy up there. I love watching the Tories founder so totally and suddenly. High drama.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:01 PM on December 2, 2008

Not to mention this:

As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government’s program. We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority. Your attention to this matter is appreciated.


-From a letter to then-Governor General Adrienne Clarkson signed by all three opposition leaders: Gilles Duceppe, Jack Layton and Stephen Harper (September 9, 2004)
posted by Rumple at 1:03 PM on December 2, 2008 [3 favorites]

Flagged as interesting news wrapped in ranty rags using links better deployed in a fully relevant still-active thread.
posted by ardgedee at 1:04 PM on December 2, 2008

I had a poorly handled drunken argument with an uncle over this the other night, I should have been more patient with him but I was just floored by his contempt for democracy. He's been voting Conservative lately, which perhaps I should forgive as he appears motivated by decades of disgust I can't fathom (still unforgivable given how they ran their last campaign). Essentially, he was playing this all as some cheap stunt by the opposition parties, and he was dead convinced that our public party funding scheme was just some valueless Liberal boondoggle (because 28 million out of a 212 billion budget is a critical sum). The linchpin of his rational which I couldn't dislodge him from is that public money, our money (*my* money he'd say) is going to support a separatist party! For him this was akin to delivering nukes to Al-Qaida or something. I could not convince him that we are supposed to live in a democracy, those are the votes, deal with it. I just really can't believe these people voting Conservative, my very family and neighbours. Do these people not read the newspaper, or ever look to the south? I really hope this coalition can hold it together (do they really disagree on much of anything anyways?) and ride out this ludicrous Liberal backlash the Conservatives are riding, I don't know what our electorate is thinking (it can't just be Alberta).
posted by kaspen at 1:07 PM on December 2, 2008

Canada the victim of power-grabbing politicians.

Would that be the coalition-to-be, or the current ruling party that's lost the confidence of the legislature and the electorate?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:07 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

This is an awesome interview from Harper in 2004 in which he basically outlines the role of the Opposition in a Minority Government, presenting pretty much the same constitutional and procedural arguments that the Lib-NDP coalition are doing now, including presenting all the reasons why the leader of the opposition (as he then was) needs to be prepared to form a government without an election should they government fail a confidence vote:

http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/harper.html
posted by Rumple at 1:15 PM on December 2, 2008

Canada the victim of power-grabbing politicians.

You know, if anything, this past week has proven that most Canadians are as clueless about the setup of their government as most Americans. carmelita's just helping show it.
posted by oaf at 1:17 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

A Canadian friends explained to me that Canada's current government is falling.

Having never heard "government" used to mean "the current group in charge of the government", my first thought was that Canada was in much worse shape than I had realized.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:18 PM on December 2, 2008

Less editorializing and more discussion over at PoliticalFilter (self link).
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:19 PM on December 2, 2008

Canadians have politics? That's cute.
posted by Joe Beese at 1:20 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

It has been done in Canada later than WW1. There have been 5 votes of no confidence in the Federals since WW1, including Paul Martin in 2004.

It's not a vote of no confidence that hasn't happened, it's that there hasn't been a change of leadership at the federal level without an election since 1926. I presume that's what she's referring to.
posted by Adam_S at 1:21 PM on December 2, 2008

Hi, Carmelita.

I notice this is your first post - it's a shame it hasn't gone well. As you might have gathered from the reaction, MeFi doesn't really go in for overt editorialising. Try again later with more links and less commentary. Perhaps you could expand on the historical aspect of the post?
posted by zamboni at 1:21 PM on December 2, 2008

I just noticed the title of this post:

Canada the victim of power-grabbing politicians.

As opposed to the other kind?

And Harper was clearly being a douche.
posted by delmoi at 1:22 PM on December 2, 2008

PoliticalFilter is still going?
posted by Artw at 1:22 PM on December 2, 2008

Marisa Stole the Precious Thing: Would that be the coalition-to-be, or the current ruling party that's lost the confidence of the legislature and the electorate?

While the PM has definitely lost the confidence of the majority of the house, it is specious to claim that the PM has lost the confidence of the electorate. The last federal election delivered the Conservatives a strong minority, since then the electorate haven't had a chance to deliver a verdict regarding their confidence.

So, the majority of the electorate's chosen representatives (MPs) have lost confidence in Harper's government. The electorate, on the other hand, has not been given an opportunity to voice their level of confidence in Harper's clan since the election.
posted by brandonjadams at 1:23 PM on December 2, 2008

I think you can change the title of this to "<> the victim of power-grabbing politicians"
posted by never used baby shoes at 1:24 PM on December 2, 2008

It would be good to point out that according to the CBC, there are many conservative supporters who are quite angry with Harper for having blown this one pretty badly. This whole situation can be described as Harper bulling the other parties too much, counting on them not forming a coalition because they would need the support of the separatists (which they now have ...)

All this business of saying that the opposition does not have the right to form a government without an election is just bizarre.
posted by TheyCallItPeace at 1:25 PM on December 2, 2008

Oh, dagnabit. "$anycountry"
posted by never used baby shoes at 1:26 PM on December 2, 2008

So, the majority of the electorate's chosen representatives (MPs) have lost confidence in Harper's government. The electorate, on the other hand, has not been given an opportunity to voice their level of confidence in Harper's clan since the election.

Aren't legislators supposed to be that voice?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:26 PM on December 2, 2008

it is specious to claim that the PM has lost the confidence of the electorate. The last federal election delivered the Conservatives a strong minority, since then the electorate haven't had a chance to deliver a verdict regarding their confidence.

I think its specious to claim that the PM at the head of a minority government has the majority of the electorate's "confidence."
posted by Ironmouth at 1:27 PM on December 2, 2008

Four years ago, Harper supported exactly the thing that he opposes today, and even signed on with Layton and Duceppe.

Now, the Tory sycophants whine that this is undemocratic. They seem not to understand that a majority of Canadian voters voted for the coalition parties.
posted by oaf at 1:28 PM on December 2, 2008

This isn't so much a coup as Harper attempting suicide-by-Parliament. He's given himself a week, can he, will he prorogue? Will G-G Michelle Jean deny him another election and give the nod to the new coalition? Will Harper dismiss Jean and appoint his own G-G who will do what he says? Is Canada's next government going to depend on how we interpret the Magna Carta?

This would be amazingly cool if it weren't so important.
posted by bonehead at 1:29 PM on December 2, 2008

Yeah, the wording of this post is kind of silly. Unless Harper's talking points are how we are going to define a coup now. And the title is classic also.

Anyway, this post is more or less a double. There is a thread on this topic a little further down the page. You can post your new and exciting links there, no?
posted by chunking express at 1:31 PM on December 2, 2008

it is specious to claim that the PM has lost the confidence of the electorate. The last federal election delivered the Conservatives a strong minority

Quite right. By your own definition, the PM never had that confidence in the first place.

Seriously, for a Canadian the poster displays an embarrassing lack of understanding about what a representative democracy is. I wonder which party she blames for her lack of a decent education about how her country works.
posted by genghis at 1:32 PM on December 2, 2008 [1 favorite]

@Marisa Stole the Precious Thing:

Legislators REPRESENT voters, they are not (last time I checked) the voters themselves. To say that both legislators and voters have lost confidence is spurious--voters chosen representatives have lost confidence (for some good reasons I might add) in the ability of Harper's government to govern effectively.

From what I have seen, the outcry hasn't been from Joe Canucks but MPs. MPs are registering their lack of confidence, not voters. Acting like MPs always act in the exact interests of voters is silly--I've voted for sometime now, and none of my representatives (MPs or MLAs) have represented me 100% on every issue: there is always some of their opinion and agenda involved. Let's not forget that.
posted by brandonjadams at 1:33 PM on December 2, 2008

Will Harper dismiss Jean and appoint his own G-G who will do what he says?

Shades of The Whitlam dismissal, though I must admit that The King-Byng Thing is more fun to say.
posted by zamboni at 1:34 PM on December 2, 2008

Also, Harper and the Conservatives over played their hand. They should have presented a more palatable budget to the house of commons, and not tried to sell of government assets and remove the government subsidies to political parties based on votes. That last point is why everyone freaked out, rightfully so I suppose. I think it's pretty hilarious that Harper has got the NDP, Bloc, and Liberals working together. Exciting times.
posted by chunking express at 1:34 PM on December 2, 2008

Will Harper dismiss Jean

He can't without approval from Her Majesty the Queen of Canada.
posted by oaf at 1:34 PM on December 2, 2008

From that CBC interview above, from when Harper was in the minority:

Solomon: Okay well let's skirt around the issue a little bit - are you preparing, do you have a plan in the event the government falls to form a government instead of calling an election?

Harper: No such plan. Our plan is always to be ready to be an alternative government. But my assumption is the Liberals will make the compromises necessary to be a government in this Parliament.

Solomon: Now I've known you for a while, chance favors the prepared mind, no one would accuse you of not being a prepared mind. You're telling me you don't have a plan B in the event this government falls to a confidence vote - you haven't talked to other parties - Layton, Duceppe, anybody - about forming a government?

Harper: I'm telling you that I've always my responsibility is to be prepared to form a government so we're always working at that.


I don't know how much more self-damning one can be . . .
posted by Ironmouth at 1:36 PM on December 2, 2008