A Canadian Coalition Government: My 1.5 Cents' Worth (Written in Exile)

Big things are astir in the normally sleepy arena of Canadian politics. As some Americans and nearly all Canadians are aware, the Liberal Party--the opposition party in Parliament--along with the NDP and the Bloc party, have decided to form a coalition government which would in effect overturn Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government and install a new Prime Minister. I won't get into the gritty details here (that's what Wikipedia is for), but I do note the polarizing effect this is having on the Canadian electorate. Or at least my facebook friends. So I would like to use this platform, as I so often do, to come out on one side of this debate.

I didn't want to react in knee-jerk fashion and so I've waited, consulted the interweb, and followed some online debates. At least anecdotally, it appears that most people I've run across, regardless of political persuasion, are against the coalition, or the idea of it. So naturally, I'm coming out in favour of the coalition.

Besides my distaste with Stephen Harper and his do-nothing government, what is prompting me to support (at least from afar) a group of three losers (in the political sense of the word) in their attempt to overthrow a legitimately-elected government? Is it not a betrayal of democracy to have the opposition usurp the proverbial throne? In a word, no. At least not democracy the way Canada practices it.

In Canada, we elect local candidates to be our members of parliament and to represent our interests and the interests of the common good, in Ottawa. Contrary to how many people vote, or how the current system is perceived (no doubt as a result of our proximity to American voter ethos) we do not vote for a party; we vote for an individual. This individual may form and reform parties or cross party lines however s/he sees fit. As an example, the parties, and never the Canadian electorate, choose party leaders and, as a result, the Prime Minister. 

So temporarily gerrymandering the party lines in order to obtain the effective government that Canadians deserve as the world hovers on the edge of a catastrophe is, in my view, perfectly acceptable. And it is perfectly legal. Consider these points:

-There is a legal precedent for coalition governments in Canada, including Prime Minister Robert Borden who formed a coalition in 1911. Of course, those weren't dramatic times. He only oversaw the government during a little skirmish known as the First World War. Maybe that's why he was elected in 1917?

-The combined opposition parties, with 62% of the seats, more than represent the interests of the electorate.

-The Bloc separatists will hardly pursue a separatist agenda while brokering a power-sharing deal. Sometimes you have to deal with the devil. It's pragmatic.

-The Conservatives (nee the Canadian Alliance), who have not played nice with the other kiddies in the sandbox these past few years, had talks with the Bloc in 2000 about forming a coalition government. My how times have changed.

-Stephen Harper seems more interested in retaining power and surviving his Prime Ministerial post, than acting in the best interest of the country. (That's not really a fact, it's more of an opinion, but I thought I'd throw it out there).

-Finally, calling another election because of (ANOTHER) no-confidence vote is a waste of taxpayer money, and a waste of precious time, when Canada needs a strong government.

It's a shame that Canada has to call on three parties and three separate leaders in order to make one strong leader, but maybe that's what makes our country strong. We are not governed from the top down as a one-man operation; we are governed by many, elected to represent our interests, in an atmosphere of rigorous debate. So debate.