Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

The Commons: 'Sir, did you make a mistake?'

by Aaron Wherry on Friday, November 28, 2008 6:34pm - 63 Comments

The Prime Minister gave himself a half-hour window to appear in the foyer. Somehow still he managed to arrive eight minutes late. Not that one should read into that any indication of his office’s relative state at this point. If anything was to blame it was probably a malfunctioning teleprompter which had various techies sweating and muttering in the moments before Mr. Harper arrived.

While they fiddled, an official from the PMO handed out a piece of paper filled with months-old quotes of Stephane Dion’s, each seeming to dismiss the idea of a coalition with the NDP. The title at the top of the page—”Just the Facts”—mirrored the heading of each missive sent out by the Tory war room during the last election.

Mr. Harper emerged from the House of Commons, the grand theatre of our democracy lit for the occasion, and gazed, for a moment, up at the second floor balcony above. Looking down from just outside his office were Jay Hill, John Baird and Patrick Muttart. None of whom, one hopes, having told the Prime Minister this vote subsidy thing was a great idea.

Once at the podium, Mr. Harper spoke as if a military coup were imminent. The opposition, he said, sought to “overturn” the results of October’s election. They would, he warned, “install” Stephane Dion as prime minister.

He was surely tempted to invoke the War Measures Act. Slightly cooler heads having prevailed he opted instead for a slightly less authoritarian tact. The opposition would, he explained, be allowed to vote against his government. Only not next week. Perhaps the week after.

As his spokesman explained to reporters beforehand, the government will simply prevent the opposition from moving forward with its confidence motion on Monday. Apparently they can do that. Canadian democracy is wonderfully flexible that way. Though not flexible enough, mind you, to tolerate a coalition government comprised of three parties representing more than 60% of voters.

Anyway.

Mr. Harper spoke quietly. He sounded small, even a bit nasally. The foyer was quiet and dark, a massive Christmas tree gleaming in the middle of the room, perhaps ten feet in front of the Prime Minister’s podium. 

He came to the end of his prepared remarks and wished the assembled journalists, political aides, rivals and onlookers a good weekend. He then turned towards the House and made his retreat. A few reporters dared shout questions at the back of his head.

“Sir,” asked one, “did you make a mistake?”

The Prime Minister kept walking, appearing to shake his head and mutter to himself as he turned the corner.

Bookmark and Share
  • DR

    “He sounded small”

    He always does.

  • mit

    Harper is bankrupt of ideas – this is what policy wonks usually are. They only see black and white and operate like a chess game where the game is played by tricking your opponent in to believing you will go one way and you move another or manipulating your pawns to force your opponent to move in a direction they do not want to go. In the end it is either a draw or one leaders dies. The chessboard is empty of life but the winner gets the carcus. This is real life we are dealing with – not charts and statistics. Mr Harper – stand up and make a difference in our lives.

  • Josh

    Your math is wrong. Those 3 parties do not represent “more than 60% of voters”. It’s actually a fair bit less than 60%. Check again.

  • Bridget from Durham

    The Conservatives have been acting since 2006 as if they had a majority government (true – with the help of the Liberals). Perhaps this will shake them into the reality that their mandate was not a majority endorsement – rather the wish of the right wing percentage (37%?) of Canadians. There is absolutely nothing undemocratic about these events. This is how our democracy is supposed to work. The government must have the confidence of the House of Commons. The Conservatives were trying to destroy the Liberals and their greed and malice galloped ahead of themselves. Stay strong Liberals, NDP and Bloc. How about a uniting of the centre-left ? The Liberal – Democratic Party!! And please – do not demonize the Bloc. Anyone who does does not have a deep understanding of the history of North America. Disagree with the Bloc – but learn about the history and why there has been a need for this party in Quebec. (I am not a separatist)

  • Francien Verhoeven

    Jack Mitchell

    “The man [Harper] has zero shame.”

    Yes, and what’s wrong with that?

    Let the others opperate without shame.
    Let Ignatieff take over as PM knowing that he has never won a party leadership race,
    has never subjected himself as party leader to the voting public,
    has never before agreed with the NDP suggestion that proposed business taxes should not be cut, has not lived in Canada for most of his adult life,
    had agreed to the war in Iraq,
    has praised Obama who has been declared president elect by means of running on private donations,

    I predict that this very same man, Mr.Ignatieff, will not feel any sense of shame within his plans for handing the Governor General a plan of action soon, and neither will he feel shame when he expects her to appoint him as Canada’s next PM.

    The real question then becomes: will the Governor General prove to her subjects that she still possesses some sense of shame?

  • Anon

    “Next you will hear stories that Harper asked John Baird to pray with him in the PMO.”

    That’s the problem with you libs. It’s always about sex, isn’t it? When Harper “prays” or with whom is none of our business.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Unfortunately, Francien, the GG doesn’t have any choice in the matter. Otherwise we could summon the ghost of Judge Jeffreys and teach Michael Ignatieff a thing or two about shame, human rights, and national security, not necessarily in that order. I couldn’t agree more that Iggy lacks shame, but sadly it’s not a zero-sum game. Anyway, Iggy hasn’t had the opportunity yet to demonstrate a profound contempt for our most ancient and sacred parliamentary traditions, whereas Harper has flunked utterly.

    I am not one of Iggy’s firmest supporters, for the record.

  • Francien Verhoeven

    Jack,

    “Unfortunately, Francien, the GG doesn’t have any choice in the matter.”

    How is this for game theory, trying to predict the Canadian political short term future:

    the GG will be asked to approve the formation of a new government, cobbled together as NDP, Lib and ‘unofficially’ BQ.

    GG: who will be the leader of this new government?

    they: Ignatieff

    GG: is Ignatieff currently leader of any of the participating parties?

    they : no

    GG: then how will I be able to appoint him as PM, as representative of which party?

    they: the Liberal party.

    GG: but he is not their leader.

    they: the Liberal party will make him their leader as soon as you have given the go ahead for the installation of this new government.

    GG: but would it not be unconstitutional to appoint a new government without an elected leader

    they: but he will be elected in a hurry after you’ve given the approval.

    GG: I see, so Mr.Ignatieff being elected as party leader will be as result of appointing him PM first?

    they: yes.

    GG: and that would be as if acting within a constitutional responsible manner.

    they: Yes, (maybe).

    GG: what if I do not appoint him PM prior.

    they: then Mr.Ignatieff will not be elected as party leader now but perhaps will be elected later when he’s earned it by having run in a well fought race,

    GG: I need some more advice on this, I think.

  • Andrew

    “but would it not be unconstitutional to appoint a new government without an elected leader”

    No. It’s perfectly constitutional. Thanks for coming out.

  • Francien Verhoeven

    Andrew,

    are you talking about an elected party leader or a voter elected PM?

  • Francien Verhoeven

    Some more game theory:

    Dion: the GG will go ahead with appointing a new government if I stay on

    Ignatieff: Yes, but Stephane, we had agreed that you would step down, in fact you have so promised

    Dion: perhaps, perhaps I have been pushed out a bit too quickly,

    Ignatieff: perhaps a bit too late.

    Dion: given the chance, I might make a good PM

    Ignatieff: but if you would serve as PM, then this second Liberal leadership race will look foolish

    Dion: perhaps so, but hasn’t it always looked silly?

    Ignatieff: that might mean that my turn may not ever come to be (I am getting older but wiser)

    Dion: But Mike, didn’t you say during the last election, that I was a very capable man to become PM. I could be the best PM ever! I will be the best PM ever. Hey, this seems to work! (And they were thinking I wouln’t get the last laugh)

  • T. Thwim

    It’s always easy to make your side of the argument look good when you’re the one putting the words into the mouth of the other side.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Francien, how did you get onto this idea that Ignatieff is the candidate for coalition PM?

From Macleans