Iggy Rules Out Coalition

He's taken my advice:

"Whoever leads the party that wins the most seats on election day should be called on to form the government," Ignatieff said in a statement.

"If that is the Liberal party, then I will be required to rapidly seek the confidence of the newly elected Parliament.

"If our government cannot win the support of the House, then Mr. Harper will be called on to form a government and face the same challenge. That is our Constitution. It is the law of the land."

Although I'd like to think I put it a bit more elegantly. And I don't mind helping Iggy out, but if he wins the cost is going to be two (2) Senate seats. One for me, and one for my wife. And I want them close to the aisle, for bathroom breaks, and a pass to the Senate cafeteria. I don't need a big office, as I'll sleep when the upper chamber is in session, like everyone else.

Anyway, he can email me for a full list of my demands.

And, by the way...was that so hard? Two years to prepare for this day and this question--Coalition or no, Iggy?--and it gets fluffed.

Tory MP Rodney Weston Says Word "Coalition" Without Sneering

From an interview on Halifax radio station CJNI-FM:

“Well one thing I will agree with Tom from your introductory remarks was that Mr. Ignatieff said that coalitions are legitimate. There can be legitimacy to coalitions, and we have seen legitimate coalitions rule this world, and we are seeing one today in Britain.

“If a coalition was required, I mean, the Conservative Party of Canada would have that opportunity to form that coalition.

“They are, certainly they are legitimate … legitimate coalition governments, Tom and… you know we see a parliament with as many parties as we see today it becomes a more distinct possibility, no question.”

Apparently, there's a seat in the HOC even further away from the floor than Helena Guergis': tomorrow, Rodney Weston will be sitting in that seat.

Also, the debate over possible merger only looks like a gong show. In reality its a secret Liberal plot to address the issue so thoroughly that, when it comes time to vote, the public is comfortable with...nay, bored by...the whole idea, thus pulling the sting in advance from any CPoC attack ads. I'll swear an affidavit to that effect if I can use a fake name.

And it doesn't seem to be harming Iggy and Co. in the polls. If anything, it may be helping. If we can get some eye-gouging and hair pulling going, a majority will surely be ours.

LiberalDemocrats.Ca

Contra the Hill Times, there is nothing I can see at Whois that suggests the Liberal party of Canada has registered http://www.liberaldemocrats.ca/. I've reproduced its Whois record below. Also Contra The Hill Times, Liberaldemocrats.ca does not redirect you to the official LPoC site, in any sense of the term "redirect" that I am familiar with.
Try the links yourself and tell me if I'm wrong. But for the time-being this seems to a case of fraudulinking to promote a bullshit rumour.

Coalition Math

As whomped up by some guy on the Blogging Tories forum and not checked by me. But in line with other estimates I've re the performance of a merged NDP/Liberal political entity. I've bolded the caveats.

Using Elections Data from the last elections and my rudimentary Excel skills, it seems like even a merged Liberal/NDP entity, running a single slate of candidates, cannot get to a majority, although a Liberal+NDP+Green combination potentially could.

The usual caveats apply, namely a 1:1 transfer of votes from the legacy parties to the merged party and no changes in voter turnout.

HoC seat distribution as of June 2010: Conservatives = 144, Liberals = 77, NDP = 36, Bloc = 48, Ind = 2, Vacant = 1.

EDAs where Liberal+NDP+Green vote >55% = 135
EDAs where Liberal+NDP vote >55% = 97

EDAs where Liberal+NDP+Green vote >50% = 166
EDAs where Liberal+NDP vote >50% = 129

Potential Liberal+NDP+Green Wins = 62
Potential Liberal+NDP Wins = 39

Drop the first caveat, and the merged entity performs even worse. Who knows how much of the Green Party vote would swing Tory?

Iggy Shows Flashes Of Gloriousness Re Coalition

He's dead on, as far as I'm concerned:

...the right way to do it is to run your flag up, (opposing parties) run their flag up, you fight like crazy, you put your choices clearly to the Canadian people, they make their choices and then you play the cards that voters deal you.

And a point I hadn't thought of:

Liberal strategists don't want to give ammunition to Harper's Tories, who so successfully demonized the 2008 coalition attempt.

And they don't want to make it harder for Liberals to win enough seats to make a coalition, much less a majority, possible. Strategists reason that New Democrats who want to defeat Harper would have little incentive to vote Liberal if they felt the Liberals would inevitably invite the NDP to join a coalition.

There's more, including comments on to what extent a Liberal-led coalition could work with the BQ. Kind of sounds like compromise between the advice given by Rob Silver and Scott Reid.

More Merger Talk

You've probably already read this one, but Dan Arnold's plea for a LPoC/CPoC merger is probably the best and funniest thing written on the topic this week:

Believe me, I too see how bleak the future looks for the Liberals. After all, we have been out of power for four years, while Harper sits with a towering 34% in the polls. I cannot imagine a more hopeless situation.

My own opinion, similar to Dan's, is here. And another reason it ain't gonna happen (I mean a merger of Canadian progressive parties)--at least not before the next election--is: you can't go dancing without a partner, and I have not heard a single NDP blogger/politician in favour of a merger. And why should they be? How could the NDP faction within a Liberal-New Democrat coalition be anything but the juniorist of Jr. partners. Look what's happened to the old Progressive Conservatives within the new CPoC. Poof! Gone without a trace...except for a few brave souls up in the Senate!

So let's put aside the unseemly panic, shall we?

Update: X Sask. NDP Preem Roy Romanow is down with a coalition. Missed that previously. And a fairly authoritative figure too, in my book.

Coalition Now? No!

Its time to throw some cold water on talk of an NDP/Liberal Coalition. Lets start with blogger Dan Arnold, expanding on pollster Frank Graves' claim that an NDP/LPoC merger would not be "perfectly efficient"--that is, not all NDP or LPoC supporters would migrate over to the new political entity:

I'd say "not perfectly efficient" is a gross understatement. When the Alliance and PCs merged, they managed to keep a whopping two-thirds of their 2000 vote (from 44.3% combined in 2000 to 29.6% in 2004)...this, despite being given the gift of Adscam. And remember, that was a reunion - this ain't. By Graves' own numbers, just 37% of Liberal voters list the NDP as their second choice, while 35% of NDP voters list the Liberals as their second choice.

Let's run a quick experiment on the 2008 vote totals. Let's say 80% of the Liberal vote decides to vote for the new Liberal Democrats and their catchy Red and Orange colour scheme, 10% votes Conservative, and 10% stay home and watch American Idol. For NDP voters, I doubt the transfer would be quite as fluid - after all, the new party would be led by a Liberal and if NDP voters really cared about stopping Harper or being in power, they'd just vote Liberal in the first place. So, maybe half of them go along with the deal, a quarter vote green, and a quarter stay home. In terms of popular vote, that would actually work out to a 73% vote transfer to the new party...above the Alliance-PC merger rate.

Another point: negotiating a merger would be a long, fraught process. A race for the new party's leadership would be required, and a convention, and etc. etc. Lots of money, lots of of time, and no reason for Harper not to drop the writ at an inconvenient moment. If you worry about preventing a CPoC majority more than you worry about the fact that after a mere four years on the outside, some Liberals are jonesing uncontrollably for a return to power, then this is a mess to be avoided. Remember, the Reform/Progressive Conservatives occurred in the shadow of a majority government; they had plenty of time to get their act together. Our new entity would not have this luxury.

Crafting an NDP/LPoC working arrangement should our next election give these parties the largest block of seats in the HOC would be something I could get behind. But why worry about it now? People talk about the recent partnering between the U.K.'s Cameron and Clegg; remember, however--this did not become a viable option until several weeks into that particular election campaign. None of the major U.K. parties were willing to assume and prepare for their own defeat in advance.

Finally, lets assume (and its a pretty good assumption given the current state of the polls) that our next parliament looks pretty much like this one. That is, a Tory minority, probably with a few less seats than they currently hold. What happens then?

Well, most likely Stephen Harper retires. Jack Layton too; he's been NDP head for a long time, and the party's support with him in that position has most likely peaked. He has also been fighting cancer. Most intriguingly, there have been rumors that, should Elizabeth May not win a seat in the House (and she won't, given that her opponent is Garry Lunn), she will step down as Green Party Leader. That leaves Michael Ignatieff as the last person standing (assuming Liberals don't panic and dump him, or he doesn't quit and retreat into academe) and the other parties in some turmoil. Green voters would be especially ripe for plucking because, lets face it, after Lizzy May they're back to a gang of aging hippies raising money by selling dream-catchers and holding salmon bakes.

In short, for the Liberal Party of Canada, patience may bring opportunity. Panic inevitably precedes a rout.

A Buncha Lawyers In Support Of The Coalition

And they've sent a letter to the GG and cranked out a news release on CNW!

OTTAWA, Jan. 23 /CNW Telbec/ - Academic constitutional experts are publicly advising the Governor General to call on the leader of the opposition to attempt to form a government if the Conservatives are defeated on anon-confidence vote.

The list can be found here, as well as a dummied down explanation of how the Canadian government models works aimed at our bovine public. My favorite bit:

While, in our parliamentary system, as it is the case in the Commonwealth in general, the Governor General (or the person fulfilling a similar role in other jurisdictions) may offer the opposition leader the opportunity to form the government in such circumstances, other parliamentary systems give the opposition the right to form a new government (i.e. Spain's and Belgium's constitutions) and, in the case of Germany, the constitution even makes it an obligation in certain circumstances.

Such rules are meant to avoid creating an incentive for minority government Prime Ministers to make successive calls for elections until one party gathers sufficient support to form a majority government. Successive elections can be quite disruptive, if only because without a functioning Parliament to vote on matters of supply, unelected officials are forced to adopt special measures to pay for the operations of government.

As for the list of "constitutional experts" cited, while they come from all over the nation, their numbers seem fairly heavily weighted towards Que. and Ontario law schools. I don't know if that is a worrying sign or not.

And as for me, even though one recent poll shows the country more receptive to the idea of a coalition government, I am hoping that the mere threat drives the Tories to produce a budget that Ignatieff and crew can support. For non-political reasons, because whatever the details of the stimulus package, the country needs one now and not after either another election or at the end of a no doubt long and painful series of negotiations among the various coalition partners. And for political reasons, because I fear that even with these most recent poll numbers, if the bid for a coalition fails and we are all tossed into another election campaign, the result will be another Tory victory, perhaps a Majority. The populace will opt for "stability" and the Coalition partners will be labelled "troublemakers".

A Coalition If Necessary, But Not Necessarily A Coalition

The Tories are shifting bodies around in advance of their auto-sector bailout package:

Newmarket-Aurora MP Lois Brown has been named vice-chairperson of the Conservative Party's auto caucus.

The committee is responsible for meeting with representatives of the Canadian auto industry and bringing forward recommendations to Industry Minister Tony Clement.

So my question is: if, as many people seem to be suggesting, the Tory's January budget contains something substantial in the way of an auto-sector bailout and general stimulus package (and none of the economic update's poison pills), where does that leave The Coalition?

My personal opinion is that it will have served its purpose, and should at that time be abandoned. What would its ongoing rationale be? Merely to take power away from the Conservatives? Such a strategy may well lead to electoral disaster down the road, esp. if the government falls in, say, mid-Febraury and the GG decides that enough time has passed for another election to be a preferable option to coalition rule.

No. It is far better for the opposition parties to let the government of the day implement the opposition agenda. That is what this is about, right? What policies are operative, not who gets to put them in place.

The Shock And Awe Is Just Getting Started

From the Rally For Canada Facebook Site.

As a coalition supporter, I am already feeling the pressure from the vaunted Tory spin machine.

Threats Against Coalition Supporters

You knew this was going to happen. Pro-Coaliton MP. Nathan Cullen has had one of his signs fire-bombed, and they're talking armed insurrection over at Free Dominion:

Start sho-ting the bastards Ed.

[...]

They don't obey our English Common Law Rights that go Back 1,000 years. Piss on them. Find out their names and everywhere they go, have the lads, pull a nylon stocking over their heads and put them in the hospital. Give them a time out to reflect.

[...]

Ed you sound like a good man, and if you lived in Alberta I would love to have you as a neighbour. But you are very PC. These bastards need a good beating. They need some time in the hospital. They need to know that when they cross the line they are going to be going on hospital food for awhile. Get a backbone. Couple of hundred bucks should get any of them a damn good beating. And let it be known. That is the old Canadian way.

They even mention me.

[...]

In the good ole days this is the way scum were kept in line. If this was in practice now, do you think scum like swillella or BCL would be defaming good people?

Of course, Mr. Harper is to blame for this.

Angus Reid Poll: 44% Support Turning Government Over To Opposition

If the Conservative minority government is defeated, what would be your preferred solution?

Holding a new federal election 32%

Allowing the opposition to form a coalition government (two or more parties are represented in the cabinet) 37%

Allowing the opposition to govern by accord (a party is supported by one or more parties that do not have representation in the cabinet) 7%

Not sure 24%

37+7. A little more definitive when looked at this way.

Dean Del Mastro Rally Brings Out Dozens Of Really Old People

The Sun put the crown at 150, but if you look at these photos and watch the video I would guess it was considerably less than that (My Kawartha gives a figure of "more than 100").

Furthermore, given the crowd demographic, if Harper succeeds in proroguing Parliament today, most of them won't be here to see it return in the new year.

Where The Premiers Stand On Coalition

A nice round-up from The Shotgun:

Ed Stelmach of Alberta wants the opposition to back down to ensure stability.
Danny Williams of Newfoundland says he'll work with the coalition but he's not taking sides. (From Mike Duffy)

Brad Wall of Saskatchawan wants the opposition to at least wait until the budget to bring down the government. (From Mike Duffy)

Gordon Campbell of British Columbia wants the same. (From Mike Duffy)

Dalton McGuinty of Ontario wants things to end quickly so he can sooner give incompetent auto executives public funds.

Gary Doer of Manitoba is expressing no real opinion.

Jean Charest of Quebec wants things ended quickly.

Shawn Graham of New Brunswick is refusing to comment.

Rodney MacDonald of Nova Scotia blames everyone for the instability and fears potential Bloc influence.

Robert Ghiz of PEI...I honestly could not find any public statement that he's made. If anyone knows of one, let me know.

(Ghiz has now said that

"Regardless of which party or coalition is in power in Ottawa, as premier of this province I am going to work with whoever is there." )

And--just because everyone loves Bill Casey--Bill Casey is down with the revolution.

The Only Thing That Bothers Me Is...

...should the unthinkable occur, and the GG turn down the coalition's offer to form a new government, are the opposition parties ready to fight another election, and are the Liberals in particular ready to fight another election behind Dion?

Just asking.

Interesting To See How This Pans Out

These guys are planning demonstrations against the "Separatist led coup" on Saturday. More information at their Facebook page. Seems to be organized by a lady named Andrea Walker, who I have never heard of.

Interesting to see what kind of numbers they can draw.

Quebec Is Down With It

76% support a coalition if the Conservatives are defeated, while only 9% want another election.

62% would support BQ representation in cabinet, while only 33% are opposed, as is Gilles Duceppe.

56% do not want Stéphane Dion to be Prime Minister in the coalition government, while only 38% do.

The Bloc québécois now is at 36%, the Liberals at 28% (an increase of 5 points since the election) 15% support the NDP and 15% the Conservatives (a drop of 7 points).

Finally, some real polls on the issue. I would expect to see similar drops in Conservative levels country wide, with the possible exception of Alberta. Although maybe, given the tortured response to the crisis at Project Alberta, there too. Lots of peoplethere seem to think Harper tossed this one down the well.

In any case, the Tory strategy--hoping Canadian's are too stupid to understand that a Coalition government is constitutionally legitimate--does not appear to be holding up.

CBC Still Running Craptacular Poll On Subsidies To Political Parties

You can vote in it as many times as you want if you just "delete cookies" between casting each ballot. I did 7 times before realizing that it was beneath my dignity.

Honestly? Why would CBC want to run such an easily manipulated survey? Sure, you claim you did a poll and its cheap, but you get what you pay for.

Easier to see why, as has happened here, a gang of young Tories might want to spend the day drumming up fake votes. CBC will, if they announce the results at all, include some caveat such as "this is not a scientific survey". Writers from other media outlets may not be so scrupulous, and it will get printed and broadcast as though it were actually news.

Tory Talking Points Same For MPs And Yokels!

Here's a list of what the Tory War Room wants its MPs to say re the looming Liberal/NDP coalition government while giving radio interviews. Here is a list of what the Tory War Room wants its grassroots to say when they call their local talk radio station.

They're the same list! Or, more specifically, many of the talking points are the same word-for-word in both lists. Its gonna feel like deja vu all over again in radio land by the end of the weekend.

This struggle is really going down-market, but how will the Torys communicate with those who don't follow talk radio? High school graduates, for example.

Why A Coalition Government Might Last Longer Than You Might Think

Harper is finished. If not on Dec 8, then not much longer after that. He knows it. Mackay knows it. Prentice knows it. And, of course, Flaherty knows it.

Because the Tories might be in the midst of a leadership race of their own.