Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Boy, it's a good thing this isn't a game

by Paul Wells on Friday, November 27, 2009 12:04am - 100 Comments

Government of Canada puts a decision about a pillar of its economic policy in the hands of an opposition party, just to make the guy in charge sweat. That’s not the kind of pathetic gamesmanship that reliably turns voters off the Conservatives every time they start to build a strong lead at all.

Tags: own best strategist, own worst enemy, Stephen Harper

More by Paul Wells

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

I'm not entirely sure why anyone is surprised that Harper is playing a game. I mean, we've heard this chess game thing before. Several times. I cite: [youtube kGzbMqOjRXg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGzbMqOjRXg youtube]
Lord Kitchener's Own

So, the theory here is that if the Tories introduce (redundant) legislation to implement a program they've advocated loudly for for years, and which they don't actually need this legislation to implement, that Canadians will blame the LIBERALS for helping to pass said legislation, and not the Tories for arguing for it for years, coming up with it, introducing it, and insisting that it be passed???

I'd love to see the Tory attack ads going after Ignatieff for supporting long-standing Tory policy by voting in favour of Tory legislation. Is the new Tory campaign theme going to be "Stop the Ignatieff Liberals! They support Harper and Flaherty's economic policies!!!" Are they really going to attack Ignatieff if he supports a measure the Tories have advocated for years, convinced the provinces to support, and introduced legislation to formally codify? What's next? Accusing the Liberals of wanting to get tough on crime???

And I agree with some of the commenters above. Why does every decision these days seem to come down to a referendum on where Michael Ignatieff is leading this country? Could we please just pretend for five minutes that Prime Minister Harper and his government are the ones responsible for the governance of Canada?

tobyornottoby

"Could we please just pretend for five minutes that Prime Minister Harper and his government are the ones responsible for the governance of Canada?"

I was able to suspend my disbelief for 17 seconds but then I started to turn blue ~ shudder ~
Mr. Irrelevant

If we want to assume crass political motives are the only motivating factor here (and it looks like we do) I think the agenda here for the Tories is to remove a weapon from the Liberals rather than gain one themselves. So they aren't hoping that the Liberals get the "blame", and attack them on it, only that it won't be a ballot issue at all because the alternative government has the same policy (see Afghanistan mission extension of 2007). Which will be the case regardless of what the Liberals do. If they support it, it's a done deal and any voter who doesn't like it can go vote for Jack Layton if he thinks it will do any good. If the Liberals oppose it, the government says it won't be revisited. They won't be running on it in the next election anyway, so it can't be used as a wedge issue (at least, not effectively). Which presumably means the smartest thing Iggy can do is just suck it up and support the HST.

Lord Kitchener's Own

I like Wells' reference to Ignatieff as "the guy in charge". I know he means "of the Official Opposition" but tactics like this really do make it feel like the Tories want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that Ignatieff is running the country, and if you don't like the direction the country's headed in you should blame him. Every issue these days seems to be about "what will Michael Ignatieff do?". The greatest trick Harper ever pulled is convincing the country he's not actually Prime Minister. He gets all the cool trips and face time with foreign leaders, but every piece of legislation that comes out of the House is the responsibility of Michael Ignatieff. Don't like Tory legislation A? Blame Ignatieff if it's passed. Don't like Tory legislation C? Don't look at us, we couldn't have passed it without the Liberals! Whatever you do, don't blame the Tories for legislation passed by the Harper government, it's not their fault.

It's a great gig the PM's made for himself.

jarrid

Last time I checked, we had a minority government.

Ted

Last time I checked, the "framework" legislation already exists. And Harper was still calling himself Prime Minister.
Lord Kitchener's Own

Last time I checked it was a Tory minority government and Stephen Harper was its Prime Minister.

Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

Alternately:
-Abstain, because this vote is meaningless and non-binding. Harper already has the authority to make inducements for provinces to harmonize. Whether or not the motion succeeds, the harmonization will occur, unless Harper changes his mind.
D-R

The thing that gets me is…if the government already has the authority to do this without another vote, can't Iggy flop and the Liberals safely vote AND campaign against it while it still goes through?

And can we stop pretending this is some kind of act of principle on Harper's part? HST represents a massive shift of taxes from business to indivuals. He's just taking care of his base. Doing the "right thing" is incidental.
Jason W

Abstain from voting, go to the media and explain the game being played. Enough of this three ring circus we call conservative governance.
Mike T.

Wouldn't hte best strategy be "While I support tax harmonization in principle, I will not support this legislation because it places an extra tax burden on Canadian citizens due to its clumsy, amateur implementation ? I give Harper 30 days to rectify this or his bill will fail."
wilson

Harper is NOT supposed to govern like he has a majority,
except when the Liberals don't want to make a decision.

If Liberals are this resistant to make a decision on something that could hurt them in the polls,
somebody remind me why they want to govern at all.

Someone remind me why Harper should not be given a majority if the Official Opposition squirm ever time they have to make a critical decision.

Is this an HST if necessary, but not necessarily HST thing?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

The question is, is the HST the best vehicle to deliver the desired outcome, does the proposed implementation provide a cushion so that it's shock isn't too large for the provincial economy, etc. Of course people don't like it, but people have this funny desire to have their cake and eat it too, and this is nothing new. As much as I will grumble wth everyone else, we in Ontario have to realize we aren't a "have" province any more, and that means we need to bear some pain as our maritime counterparts have been doing.

Also, what kind of Federal leader would say "this is unacceptable for these provinces, but I don't give a damn that those provinces have had it for years". Leading the country means leading the country, dammit, not your "base"!
jarrid

People here seem to forget that the Conservatives don't have a majority government. They need the co-operation of the opposition to govern.

Is the opposition going to sink this responsible legislation or not? In a minority government, we're all in together.

Lord Kitchener's Own

I'll commit to keeping in mind that the Tories have a MINORITY government if you'll commit to keeping in mind that it's the TORIES who are in government.

Mr. Irrelevant

You bet. The Tories are in government. Sounds good to me. But two things:
1) When the government proposes a bill and its passage or failure depends on what one heretofore undeclared party decides to do, we are all free to enjoy speculation as to what that party will do and What It Will All Mean.
2) When that party ends up supporting the legislation (as it invariably does), it loses all right to credibly attack the government on what is now a collaborative effort.

Ted

They don't need any co-operation since the framework legislation was already passed by Parliament.

Why bring it to a second vote?

Does Harper think HST is responsible and "crucial to the prosperity of Canadians" as he has claimed or doesn't he? If he does, why is he playing games? Why is he trying to pass the buck? Why is not showing leadership and just implementing the deals he negotiated with the provinces and upon which they are relying?

Is he deliberately trying to sink his own efforts?

Style

The "Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act" does have a section on harmonizing sales taxes (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-8/index.html). However, the Globe reports that the new legislation is a " “technical legislative change” will end uncertainty about the ability of provinces to proceed with an HST if they choose. But if the bill fails in Parliament, it would make it impossible for the federal government to enable the blending of the GST with the provincial sales taxes in Ontario and B.C." It seems to be valid legislation, although it would be interesting to hear whether it is absolutely necessary.

It's still not clear why forcing Ignatieff to take a clear position on the HST is a bad thing. The Conservatives have actively campaigned for this for several mandates. Why should they have to win a majority governmen to implement it if the Liberals aren't absolutely opposed to it?

Ted

" The Conservatives have actively campaigned for this for several mandates. Why should they have to win a majority governmen to implement it if the Liberals aren't absolutely opposed to it?"

That's just it. He doesn't need a majority to do it or new legislation. And yet he chooses to try to "put an ultimatum" on the Liberals instead of standing behind his principles. Instead of governing for Canadians, he seems more interested in making Ignatieff the issue. Ignatieff isn't PM.

In the process of playing games instead of governing, Harper has jeopardized years worth of work with the provinces, the trust they have placed in him and his commitments. Maybe this makes Iggy look indecisive maybe not; but this makes Harper look very very bad.

Because he pushed so hard for HST, he's kind of damned if does and damned if doesn't at this point. But he would have been much better off to show some leadership on a tough thorny issue and earn respect from Canadians for having done so, instead of trying to pass the buck and play games.

Earl Riley

There is a vote on the HST because money is being provided to BC and ON to implement the HST. When the other provinces implemented the HST there was no Federal money provided. There has to be a vote before the money can be given to BC and ON, otherwise Harper would simply hand over the money.

The Maritime provinces all lowered there PST rates when combining with the GST. ON and BC will not do this. Instead it is using one time cheques paid for with Federal Money to try and bribe the electorate. It is unlikely to work. On July 1, 2010 Ontarions will see gasoline prices rise by 8%, they will see a thirteen percent tax added to their water, heating and electricity bills and they will be as mad as a hornets nest disturbed.

This was a bad idea for Mr. Harper and an even dumber idea for McGuinty. Iggy now has an issue that should play well in BC and ON and while it might not even get him a minority it will get him a lot more MPs and set him up for the next election which will follow closely. Mr. Harper will finally be gone as leader of the CPC replaced by some unknown All is all a rosy senerio if one Liberal and if Iggy seizes the moment.