The opposition has every right to defeat the government but Stéphane Dion does not have the right to take power without an election.
-Prime Minister Stephen Harper gives the nation a lesson in parliamentary democracy from the foyer of the House of Commons (November 28, 2008)
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)
(Many thanks to an ITQ reader who shall remain nameless, but deeply appreciated for her elephant-like memory, for the tip.)
UPDATE FROM THE COMMENTS: Robert McLelland dredges up this absolutely fascinating CBC interview with Stephen Harper from the same time period, in which he goes on at (what is, in hindsight, I’m sure deeply regretted) length on the need for minority governments to cooperate with the opposition, and repeatedly states that he and his party are ready to provide an alternative government, should it be necessary.
Print
Comment
Canadian Business Network 
madeyoulook wrote:
” [quoting Harper] ‘The opposition has every right to defeat the government but Stéphane Dion does not have the right to take power without an election.’ I submit that Harper is wrong on both counts. Dion has no moral authority to collapse the House so early…”
Harper did not say that Dion can ‘collapse the House’. He said that he can ‘defeat the government’. Harper is exactly correct (at least on that point).
FB wrote:
“OF COURSE the constitution requires that the GG seek a coalition among the opposition…”
That’s not at all clear.
In 1979, Joe Clark’s Tory government was defeated after the House Commons had been sitting for only two months. The Governor-General granted his request for a fresh election without first consulting with the opposition leaders.
Russ H – The NDP were in power in Sask when they became a have province.
The opposition has the right and responsibility to oppose bad policy. Doing nothing while tens of thousands of Jobs is bad policy, Selling assets in a buyers market is bad economics AND bad policy.
A coalition by definition moderates the individual ideals in order to achieve a common goal. That being to protect Canadians at risk of losing their jobs etc.
IF Harper cared about Canadians he would have discussed and achieved his own coalition but he is to autocratic.
The opposition has the right and responsibility to oppose bad policy. Doing nothing while tens of thousands of Jobs are lost is bad policy, Selling assets in a buyers market is bad economics AND bad policy.
A coalition by definition moderates the individual ideals in order to achieve a common goal. That being to protect Canadians at risk of losing their jobs etc.
IF Harper cared about Canadians he would have discussed and achieved his own coalition but he is to autocratic.
While the letter to the GG may _imply_ what some are suggesting, it certainly does not say so directly. Vague wording like “give you cause … to … consider all of your options” is far cry from “we want to take power without an election”
While the letter may at least imply such, the CBC interview says — nothing. “Alternative government”, like “government in waiting” is a term commonly used to refer to the leading opposition party as the logical alternative that voters could turn to should they desire to elect a different government.
How can you have a “government in waiting” when the Liberals can’t even decide who there leader should be? Or will they just turn the PM position over to Layton or Duceppe?
Harper’s Folly!!!!
Funny is now CTV says there is a story that proves Layton was planning a coalition with the block before the last election.
Also to a comment about a one Party state, isn’t that what was going on for 12 years of Chreatin calling election almost 3 years apart because the conservatives/reform were scattered?
Plus overtaking the government is the only way Jack will be able to get a cabinet post as leader of the NDP.
A fact of truth is that none of the opposition parties even showed a fiscal plan at all during the election and Conservatives just said slow and easy. So it is see what is happening in the market and govern accordingly on spending. Remember most of the world is still waiting for the swearing in of the american president because his decisions will also effect the economy.
Oh, oh. The latest speculation/rumour is the Tories may be planning to prorogue (suspend) parliament this week, until “cooler heads” might prevail (good luck with that), and won’t reopen it until budget day in January! Will this only serve to enrage and embolden a determined coming coalition?
Harper brought this on himself as “he” chose to put women’s pay equity and minorities regressively back to the 1940′s pay rates which is very unfair. While the US elects their first black President -Harper’s plans bolster white male jobs, how transparent his racism really is in Canada a multi-cultural country.
His second major focus for the first session of his minority govt., was to cut off funding for his opponents. Was this based on logic, or his arrogant dictator qualities?
Harper’s third blunder is his lack of focus on the real problems and his lack of an economic stimulus package that all other countries are doing for reducing the damage of the recession which will last at least another 4 years, and it was not on his agenda.
Harper has to go and now, before our country dips into a depression. I support the coalition because it is the will of the majority of voters that did not vote for Harper which is 60 percent of the votes.
Harper in his second minority try, should have shown leadership not vidictiveness, and a vicious attack on women and minorities. Clearly Mr. Harper cannot command a majority in the electorate nor Parliament and has failed on both counts.
Fighting the coalition will be fruitless and will further divide the country now that Harper has insulted the quebec voters, and he himself sought a coalition with the Bloc when the Liberals were in power.
It seems the dictatorship of Harper reads ” do as I say, not as I do” and he did it to himself by showing a lack of leadership and a lack of attention to the real issues Canadian face in this recession.
Harper can postpone parliament? Not really, that shows he is unwilling to govern and the Governor General cannot accept that as a solution to his lack of ability to govern at this point.
No, not this time – postponing the inevidiable will not work for Canadians. Why should we wait for him to postpone attacking the economic problems, is that how little he thinks of Canadians?
That we should wait for relief while people are losing jobs, investments and our economy flounders?
Not.
Teriss,
Harper proposed to cut off funding for ALL parties, including his own, which would have taken the largest hit. The fact that the other parties rely on the taxpayer for a higher % of their total funds is their own problem.
And all those “other countries” that are rushing through stimulus packages are doing so because they are in much worse shape than Canada.
I wish I could speak to the pay equity issue, but I really haven’t seen much written about it (other than the Cons recant). But you say it involves some sort of time machine?.
In our Parliamentary Democracy, as a minority government, Harper must seek confidence from the House of Commons. His polices presented last week (econ. stimulas, retraction of $1.95 per vote, right to strike, etc.) shows that he does not appear to have the confidence of the HoC.
The G-G has the right to call an electio or call on another party (or coalition of parties) to govern. This is perfectly legitimate in our demcoray.
I agree Regina Guy “his policies presented…..” but the real question is did he want the
confidence of the HoC in the first place?