Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

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://www.TennisVagabond.com Big Dave S

There you go again, Wells.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Did "framework legislation" have to be passed for the maritime version of the HST to take effect? Did "framework legislation" have to be passed for Ottawa to hand over federal GST collection to Québec?

If yes, then it's not exactly gamesmanship. If no, then it most certainly is.

http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisInKW ChrisInKW

According to the legislation passed as Bill C-70 in the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session, the Finance Minister, through an Order in Council, has the power to enter into a harmonization agreement with a provincial government. That's my interpretation, I'm open to debate.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publicat…

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Thanks, Chris. If you're right, then pure gamesmanship it is. Since the beginning, I thought, indeed the federal GST was supposed to harmonize with ideally every sales-taxing province there was. It just didn't catch on much under Wilson & Mulroney.

So shame on Harper for playing silly games. But. If Ignatieff comes back with some stupidity about harmonization deals should not be done with the provinces province-by-province, but rather some sort of nationally imposed nonsense, well, he'll have deserved whatever messing-with PMSH throws at him.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

"Just to make the guy in charge sweat"? Wouldn't the so-called "Harper Sales Tax" eventually face a vote in the House of Commons anyway, whether it happens before or after Christmas?

http://twitter.com/bgrice @bgrice

No. Like the Home Renovation Tax Credit vote a few months ago, the Government does not need to pass any more legislation in order to impliment the HST. They have already been given the ability to impliment the HST in the budget and other bills. This is an attempt to force an election, or force the Liberals to back down, plain and simple.

wilson

It is not a confidence vote,
this is not a money bill.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

My view of this is — look, Mr. Harper decided to push sales tax harmonization in the middle of a recession. He got two provinces to agree. The right way to do this is to get a national plan with a harmonized sales tax proposal that makes sense for all the provinces. Instead, he’s playing one province against the other.
Michael Ignatieff, Sept. 21 2009
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

"If the framework legislation is rejected before Christmas, we will not revisit the issue. Not next year. Not after the next election.”"

Compare and contrast with party financing — the per-vote subsidy — which Harper has already declared he will revisit after the next election. I actually don't have a big problem with that. But we see the difference between a Harper who wants to get something done, and a Harper who wants to shift blame.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

It sounds like all the "pathetic gamesmanship" is contained in that single sentence – the Conservatives won't revisit the issue if Iggy decides to defeat the bill. Presumably, this is intended to prevent Iggy from being coy. Otherwise, Iggy might prefer to defeat the bill the first time round and allowing himself to be coaxed into supporting it on the second go-around, after winning some token concessions.

In other words, Harper is "playing games" to prevent Iggy from playing games.

Ted

So the Prime Minister of Canada is not expected to lead? The purpose of government is to… keep the public eye squarely focused on what the opposition leader does or does not do???

It's even more juvenile gameship from Harper because he doesn't in fact need Ignatieff to do anything. He can get the HST through without the Liberals: either by order in council or with the support of the Bloc who presumably don't care one way or another and upon whose support Harper has been happy to rely previously.

wilson

Why 'buy' the BLOC vote?
For BLOC support, they want to be 'reimbursed' for their semi-harmonization of taxes from years gone by.

Anon Liberal

Yep, no guiding principles. He might think the HST is good public policy, but that places a very distant second to his overriding priority: screwing over his political enemies.

Style

Are you talking about Harper or Ignatieff?

Ted

There is only one Prime Minister, Style.

Only one person who is trying to pass the buck.

Just look at the way they introduce the legislation: trying to make it all about Ignatieff and not governance.

Style

Does Ignatieff think the HST is bad public policy? He hasn't said so. However the legislation was introduced, it is needed to implement the HST. We have a minority parliament, so the opposition plays a role in passing legislation. There's no way for Ignatieff to avoid that fact.

And Harper's already contested at least two elections with a harmonised sales tax in his platform. If it's blocked now that he's finally got these provinces on-side, what is wrong with admitting defeat?
Ted

Because of exactly that. He's made commitments, he's campaigned on it, he's pushed for the HST, he's reached agreements with the provinces, the provinces are relying on Harper… and he does not need to do this. The "framework" legislation already exists.

He is so clearly and transparently trying to avoid responsibility on this issue, to pass the buck to Ignatieff and avoid leadership.
wilson

Pass the buck?
It's a MINORITY Parliament.
Ted

The framework legislation exists.

He has no need to go to Parliament. Minority or majority has nothing to do with this.

It's like having a spending measure approved in a budget, then the public turns against it, and trying to have another vote on it.

Harper wanted the HST, he got the provinces to agree, now, at the crucial implementation stage, he is trying to pass the buck.

Style

Harper included the HST in his past electoral platforms. It took a lot of work to get the provinces to this point, and the premiers are taking significant political flak for their efforts. If Ignatieff blocks it now, it's fair to have him carry the blame.

Ted

When Harper does even need to put the issue to Parliament at all?

You call that leadership? Most would see that as passing the buck.

Who is the Prime Minister here?

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

In addition to myl's question, I have three questions (more, actually):

1. What if the BQ vote for it? Then it doesn't matter what Iffy does. And how would the BQ decide how to vote?

2. Why is it BC and Ontario have gone mad over the HST when several provinces adopted it without any incident or brouhaha whatsoever?

3. I don't see how this is a choice, it seems the obvious thing for Iffy is to vote against it. Who cares what the premiers think? They might not even be premier if/when Iffy wins an election.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

1. The BQ will vote against it.

2. Actually, there was a brouhaha in the other HST provinces, it's just that you didn't notice it because the national media doesn't pay enough attention to the maritime provinces.

3. It's probably not that obvious to Iggy that he should vote against it. He's under a lot of pressure from the Ontario and BC Liberals (two provinces that are home to a huge chunk of the Liberal caucus). He has already admitted that he supports the HST in principle. His anti-HST charade was purely a matter of political expediency.

burlivespipe

yeah he's under a lot of pressure, because none of Ignatieff's BC caucus or his Ontario caucus are interested in being re-elected. What kind of stupid analysis is that? Talk radio here in lotus land, especially the con-brand, is all up-in-arms about the HST. The NdP basically cleaned house in a byelection primarily because they made it their cause celebre… Harper has given Ignatieff an issue that will not only define him against Harper, but also leapfrog him ahead of Layton. Does he have the political smarts to take it, is the question…
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Do you want to change answer number 1?

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/11/27/behold-the-awe…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Andrew_not_PorC Andrew_not_PorC

Isn't this easy? Abstain, and say it's up to the provincial governments that are harmonizing?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

You're right – there are definitely some advantages to abstaining.

There are also some disadvantages. By abstaining, the Liberals would essentially be passing the buck, which would make it very hard for them score political points using the HST as their "sword".

This means Harper wins. After all, the whole purpose of today's announcement was to prevent the Liberals from owning this issue.

Ted

I think that is my biggest problem with Harper. Well, one of them.

This is significant legislation and a very significant tax change that will affect about half the population of the country. He and his government have been pushing for this and stated quite clearly how good this would be.

But then for purely political reasons, he turns it into a political game instead of showing some leadership.

jarrid

Ignatieff's not playing games?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

Well is Ignatieff the Prime Minister? Is it not the job of Harper to get thigns done; do or not do, and deal with the opposition's reactions the best he can?
But that's Harper's way, take the focus of the slipshod way he performs as PM and manufacture an onus on the opposition.
Harper may be the PM, but he has never gotten over his 'opposition mentality'. He is nothing but a gamesman and does not deserve the office. Canada deserves better.
wilson

It's a minority parliament.
The Opps accuse of Harper acting like he's got a majority.
But when he tables legislation, needing opp support, he's accused of being devious.

If Harper slips the legislation into the budget, he'd be accused of playing games.
If Harper makes it a stand alone vote, he's accused of playing games.
If he gets BLOC support, he's accused of buying votes (they want $$$ promises first)
Ted

Boohoohoo, poor Harper. He gets elected by Canadians to be Prime Minister on promises of leadership and then Canadians have the audacity to expect him to act like, well, Prime Minister and show leadership.

Um, Wilson, since you clearly haven't been following too closely, Stephen Harper is the Prime Minister.

He doesn't need any new legislation. The framework legislation already exists. This is merely implementation of the sort specifically contemplated in that legislation.

Harper pushed for the HST, he got the provinces to agree, and now he is trying to duck responsibility and leadership. Prime Ministers are supposed to face tough decisions and make the tough decisions, especially ones of principle which Harper claims this to be, regardless of the criticism they may get.

If he can't handle the leadership requirements of being Prime Minister, then I know someone who would gladly relieve him of the responsibility.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

Because Harper ONLY plays games.
If he slips it into the budget, it's because the budget includes an onerous element along with a couple of worthwhile morsels, which he can accuse the opposition of defeating if they defeat the omnibus legislation. Witness the Home Tax Credit.
If he makes it a stand alone vote, it's because he wants to corner the opposition (witness the current HST bill).
Don't get me wrong; these are standard political tactics, tried, tested and true. But this is ALL Harper ever does.

Blues Clair

Take the low road Ignatieff… why not.

I'm on a black elevator
Goin down
Little Joe from Kokomo
It rattles to the ground
The dice is laughin at the
man that he throwed
Your rollin over to the
Lowside of the road.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

[youtube aoQSOkoa4ng&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoQSOkoa4ng&fe... youtube]

jay

Take the low road why not, indeed. If I were Iggy I'd ask, what would Stephen Harper do? He'd turn on a dime and bring the government down on their tax bill and let them run on it. As Iggy's old roomie once said, they always thrown the ball for your head. So why not you?
Brian

Dear Liberals: oppose it.

I'll support you 100% if you do and it forces an election.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'll support you 100% if you do and it forces an election.

Actually, it doesn't force an election. That's the whole point. No excuses.

Neil from Calgary

I wonder if Alberta will ever adopt a sales tax. That would be nice. Alberta Primetime had the U of C's (fmr president of C.D. Howe) Jack Mintz on the program a few weeks ago, following his publication that suggested that Alberta adopt a sales tax of 8% to reduce the income tax to 5% from 10%. Needless to say, the polling conducted for the interview was not very supportive of Mintz's idea. Which is a shame, because if Alberta had a sales tax, I can only imagine the uproar that would have occurred had they attempted to harmonize it with the GST. It would have been BC's reaction times 1000.

1000 BC. Coincidentally, that's where the voters would send the guy who'd propose the idea.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Quite true. Sales taxes aren't popular with Albertans. Hence the Reform Party.
shouldIsellyourwheat

Ottawa would raise income taxes and reduce sales taxes, and other provinces would reduce income taxes and raise sales taxes if Alberta implemented a sales tax and reduced or eliminated its income taxes. i.e. The rest of Canada would change their tax rates to soak more money out of Alberta with higher federal income tax rates.

Alberta can only make the sales tax for income tax switch if there were constitutional limit to the top federal income tax rate.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

Is this some weird Albertan conspiracy theory or something?

Why would the rest of Canada ever need need to impose taxes on everyone in order to get more money out of Alberta?
A federal tax 'soaks money' out of every Canadian – no matter where they live (or if they are pro-Canadian or anti-Canadian).

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

“We feel strongly [about] this notion of him being an ideas guy,” a senior Ignatieff strategist says. “It made him interesting in the first place and in recent months it was kind of ignored because I guess they [his old team, which was recently replaced] got scared by the ‘just visiting’ stuff. … They kind of hid his light under a bushel.” Jane Taber, Nov 25 '09

This is good politics, Cons are calling Iggy's bluff again. Cons want to find out if Iggy is a big ideas guy yet or his light still under the bushel.

As an aside, if I was Iggy I would fire anyone who talked about lights/bushels within me hearing.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Well said. FWIW I'm in favour of the HST, but if I were Machiavelli I'd tell Iggy to run on an anti-HST platform pronto. This could be a huge gift from Harper. (It would be evil, of course, since Ignatieff knows as well as most that the HST is a good idea, but let's leave that aside.) The rationale: the public actually notices almost nothing about what goes on in the news, and it cares even less. But one thing they genuinely care about is taxes, especially sales taxes, as Harper's own BS anti-GST gambit proved once and for all. There's enough misinformation out there right now to push the public strongly against HST in Ontario and BC, and somewhat so in the ROC — a sort of sympathy tax-phobia, if you will; the Liberals could gain seriously in Ontario, somewhat in rural BC, and a few seats hither and yon. Of course he would have to fear the wrath of Andrew Coyne.

Anon Liberal

Hmmm, I follow your Machiavellian logic Jack but I still see a risk with voting against the HST. Reporters will ask him if he is committing a future Liberal govt to not supporting HST. And how will he respond? Probably equivocate like Tim Hudak did this week. It seemed to me that was a turning point in the Ontario debate and exposed the Ontario Conservatives as just being opportunists.

At the end of the day the HST is good public policy and the Atlantic Canadian experience demonstrates that it actually lowers prices and helps businesses. Yes, Ignatieff but it would harm the party long-term (the same way it did when Chrétien said he would scrap the GST while in opposition then reversed himself after being elected). Hopefully, with Donolo there now, the Liberals are thinking about the long game a little bit more.

Also I wouldn't discount the importance of pissing off the provincial Liberals in Ontario and B.C. There may be some very close races in those two provinces next election and the ground game will matter.

If he is going to take my advice though announce it now. Don't wait. The longer he does the more the focus is on what Ignatieff will do and not on the Conservatives who are the co-architects of this policy after all.

To Wells' main point though, yes. Harper remains as despicable as ever in always placing partisan game-playing over the higher interests of the country (especially when he is under political heat like he is this week over the Afghan detainee issue). What a small-minded, mean little man.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Very interesting. I should follow Ontario news more closely. So Hudak lost ground on that, did he? Well, looks like the voters are smarter than I thought. If so, what's right and what's practical are nicely aligned, and Ignatieff should come out firmly in favour of the HST — and quickly, as you say.

Anon Liberal

I haven't seen the latest polls in Ontario but he got nicely hosed by all the editorialists and opinion-makers.

A sampling:

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/hst/article/7…

http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e…

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/andrew-steel…
Anon Liberal

On the OTHER hand, if Ignatieff decides not to support it, he should simply state that while he supports tax harmonization in principle a recession is the wrong time to introduce a new tax. Therefore, since the Conservatives have abdicated responsibility over the issue to the official opposition, the Liberals will be voting against it.
Ted

There's some promise in that.

Harper has been pushing for this, has already reached agreement with BC and Ontario on this with the negotiated transition pay-out, provincial planning has been made based on his commitments, he has all the powers he needs to implement what he said he would implement… and now he tries to weasle out of responsibility by making it about Ignatieff instead of his own leadership and decision-making??

A day after he flip flopped and is shown to be a follower on the environment, this does not look good on Harper and his leadership abilities.

burlivespipe

…"Also I wouldn't discount the importance of pissing off the provincial Liberals in Ontario and B.C. There may be some very close races in those two provinces next election and the ground game will matter.

Do you even know who does the ground game? It's not Campbell and McGinty robots. It's real people, and a majority of those real people are p-o'ed, especially regular supporters of both provincial parties, about this Harper Sales Tax. The BC Liberals are about 1/4 to at most 1/3rd federal Liberals — half the federal Liberals I know are provincial NdPers or sympathetic to them. No, the only bite-back of rejecting this is when Harper says 'No big novelty cheque for you Dalton and Gordo.' Then the provincial bandits may be fuming, but that still would partially tarnish Harper again… withholding funds that the taxpayers believe were theirs in the first place.
Anon Liberal

Sorry that was supposed to read…

Yes, Ignatieff might score some temporary political points but it would harm the party long-term (the same way it did when Chrétien said he would scrap the GST while in opposition then reversed himself after being elected). Hopefully, with Donolo there now, the Liberals are thinking about the long game a little bit more.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Hopefully, with Donolo there now, the Liberals are thinking about the long game a little bit more.

Yes, I hope so. It's been quite pathetic so far, hasn't it?
Anon Liberal

I think it's natural in a minority parliament – after all there could be an election at any time – but they need to resist the temptation to always be thinking about next week's poll numbers.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I guess we can use this issue as a rough litmus test to predict just how Macchiavellian the Donolo/Ignatieff team will be next year.

Anon Liberal

It's also a litmus test of how stupid they view regular voters. Do they trust that voters may be annoyed now but will recognize, over time, the public policy merits of the HST and appreciate the courage and vision it took to take this approach? Or do they figure, cynically, that voters only think in simplistic ways (i.e. tax = bad) and base their strategy accordingly.

Dion always struck me as someone who assumed voters were intelligent (hence his lengthy editorials when he Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs dismantling sovereigntist myths one-by-one; his "overly complex" Green Shift plan, etc.) Arguably he paid a price for placing too much faith in the intelligence and attention span of voters. Whither Ignatieff?

TedTylerEzro

I don't think the voters rejected the Green Shift plan as being too complicated because they couldn't understand it. It think they just realized that it was too complicated for government to impliment. After all, this is the same government apparatus that spends the majority of the money it gains from collecting the GST on administration. A carbon tax would be a similar consumption tax, but with Dion's plan you would have also had a wealth redistribution scheme designed to defray costs of the carbon tax to administer as well, more complicated than the GST rebate checks that get sent out.

I will agree however that party leaders aren't given the luxury of leading through persuasive argument or writing editorials and books about your political ideas and philosophy. We are just too partisan, distractable, paranoid, angry, and apathetic to pay attention to our civic duties as we should.
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

Not disagreeing, but in a more straightforward way, voters rejected the Green Shift because they believed the more simplistic – well, simple minded – well, lie – that "It's a tax grab!" I don't think it was too complex for government to implement, so much as it was simpler to argue simpler falsehoods against it.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

This is a first, but I strongly disagree with you, Jack.

Politics may be about playing games, but running the country isn't! Harper, with this lame move proves (as if we needed any more proof) that he is incapable of putting the game board away. I so wish Ignatieff would stand up and show himself to be a man who can conduct his efforts based on the good of the country–and polling firms be damned! The HST will or will not be around for some time to come, while any approval seen at the weekly polls will last a few weeks at best.

Continued . . .

http://www.TennisVagabond.com Big Dave S

Wonder if Campbell and McGuinty like Harper's knife in their backs for such an important cause as tweaking an opposition leader.

Style

Yes, especially with Ignatieff's knife already there for the same reason.

Ted

You could have a perfect storm created here for Harper. And not just in BC and Ontario.

Lots of people are quite p'o'd with the HST, especially during a recession. They know Harper and his government have been pushing for this and stated quite clearly how good this would be.

This is significant legislation and a very significant tax change that will affect about half the population of the country.

But Canadians will respect a leader for taking tough, sometimes unpopular positions. We know at least that someone is in charge and making decisions, not dithering, and has a sense of implementing what he or she thinks is right.

Instead, we have Harper abdicating leadership and responsibility. There is no need for him to invent the need for this "framework" legislation other than politics. So rather than lead, Harper is, once again (1) making a political game out of important policy issues and principles and (2) passing the buck.
Ted

Harper got elected on three primary issues: accountability, doing politics differently and leadership.

The first two are long long gone. Now his leadership quotient is significantly further eroded by actions like the Fiscal Update last year, H1N1, flip flopping on Copenhagen for optics, stimulus to Tory ridings, and now this.

Harper's "leadership" is being defined by his actions: pass the buck if you can and make it political if you can't.

The great leaders in our history are those who rose above politics when it came to decisions on significant issues.

terry1

I think the libs simply need to find a way to let it pass while blaming harper for it and hope to defeat harper just before the HST comes into effect so there is an election with HST as its centerpiece in those two provinces.

This just needs a little more thought within the Lib war room and an aggressive strategy once thye have their plan together.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

I'm sure the CPC will find a good way to blow their lead between now and the next election, but I doubt that this particular move will accomplish that for them. This is just making the Liberals take a stand the way political parties (or at least MPs) are supposed to do.

The fact that the LPC hates taking a stand on anything that doesn't show clear political consensus is their problem (some would say it's their fundamental problem).

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"The fact that the LPC hates taking a stand on anything that doesn't show clear political consensus is their problem"

'Iggy has to make a tough decision? Not Fair!' cry Liberals.

I think it is hysterical that so many liberals think it is diabolical of Harper to want Iggy to make some choices. Liberals seem to think the whole world should be set up to make it as easy as possible for Lib leader to do/say nothing of concern.

Ted

Possibly. But why is governing for Harper all about the Liberals. Shouldn't it be about Canadians?

Conservatives seem to think the whole world should be set up to make the Liberals responsible for everything of concern. I think it is hysterical that so many Conservatives think it is diabolical of Canadians to want Harper to make some choices and not pass the buck, to lead for us and not play games, to govern for us and not make everything about the opposition.

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Harper is leading. Cons are trying to pass complicated tax scheme that is not popular with the electorate. NDP and Bloq are opposed to HST. Every party has taken a position but one, Ted.

Ted

No, he's passing the buck, looking for political cover.

He's been pushing for HST since he came to office, saying it is a good thing, pushing the provinces, signing up deals with them, making commitments to them.

And now, when push comes to shove, he doesn't want to lead, he wants the issue to be about the opposition. If he was a leader and not passing the buck, he would implement the tax changes. The "framework" legislation is already there and was approved long ago.

This is passing the buck to save his own political skin. Yet again. Politics over principle for Steve-o. Yet again.

Cdneh

HST: right idea; wrong time; wrong rate.

Hey Libs, kill this sucker and I'll pledge one-half of the annual hit I would have taken in Ontario to the LPC each year – that should take me to roughly the annual contribution limit. Bonus: that also means no more for the CPC from me.

Deal?

Iggy. Iggy? Are you there?
John W.

It's a mystery to me . The Conservatives and particularily Flaherty had managed with Hudaks help, to duck responsibility for the HST and pin it all on McGuinty.
It is becoming a a big issue in Ontario and is hurting McGuinty. Hudak has been staking his whole career on fighting it. I can't understand why Harper and Flahertyy would want to stick their heads above the wall when they had worked so hard to get out of the line of fire. They had successfully avoided responsibility for this very unpopular measure. It was the Cons spin doctoring at its best, and now they are reversing field.
I would think avoiding responsibility for this in Ontario as they have done and pinning it on McGuinty as Hudak has done is a better play than inflicting another little embarrassment on Ignatieff.
shouldIsellyourwheat

Because a previous government in legislation technically gave the Government of Canada the authority to implement further harmonizations without going back to Parliament to seek the consent of the people, it is inherently democratic to go back to Parliament to seek approval for further harmonizations.

Chretien took us to war several times on his own personal whim without the approval of Parliament in a binding vote. Martin took us to war in Kandahar on his own personal whim without seeking the approval of Parliament in a binding vote. Harper could have done the same in extending the Kandahar mission, but he chose to set the precedent of actually asking Parliament to approve extending the war in Canada.

So he might have the authority to do further harmonizations without a new vote in Parliament. It is better for Canadian democracy if he does seek the approval of Parliament. Generations of Liberal governments have taken power away from Parliament and given it to the Government and to the Courts, rather than have to deal with the inconvenience of legislation.

This is just Harper making Parliament more relevant again, just like he did with actual binding votes on the Afghan mission.

This is a good thing. It also happens to be good politics.

Ted

Right, Mr. Prorogation to Save His Job cares a whit about making Parliament relevant. He wrote a manual on how to undermine it and make it dysfunctional.

Harper is just not capable of making the hard decisions. He wants to pass the buck on anything that might lose him a vote.

He rode in on the horse of accountability, doing politics differently and leadership. He has tossed out all three by now with his record breaking promise breaking and flip flopping.

Good governance and leadership is not about whether you can force the leader of the opposition to make a decision or not. Good governance and leadership is about your own governing and about leadership.

Half the population of Canada is affected by this and Harper can't help himself but pass the buck and play games.

Loraine Lamontagne

You can indeed say that Chrétien and Martin took us to war. They are indeed responsible for the decisions taken by their government.

Harper on the other is not responsible for anything. It's not his government's deficit, it's the Liberals', it's not his extension of the mission in Kandahar, it's Parliament's (if memory serves, the vote was not binding on the governement); it was not his decision to call an election, it was dysfunctional parliamentarians' fault, etc.

It's certainly good politics for those who don't have the courage to be held responsible for their decisions.
Anon

Harper is a wimp. This is a money bill. Why isn't this a confidence matter? If you're going to put the screws on Iggy, do it properly.
Richard

This is a no-brainer, and I think the Government and the media have really misread the Liberals here. Of course the Liberals will support this bill. They're the ones who came up with harmonization while in government. (Ironically, back when the Jim Flahertys and Ernie Eves of the world were against it)

So this will be a bit of a yawn. It's not even a confidence measure, so Ignatieff isn't even being forced to go back on his Sudbury commitment of voting non-confidence. So on two fronts, it's real easy on the guy.

What Harper hopes is that this will put some wind in the sails of Jack Layton, his electoral bff.

One really cute thing the LIberals could do is propose an amendment that gives Nova Scotia the same latitude as the new HST provinces. Then we could see Jack Layton and Darrel Dexter fight each other in public over the "job killing" effects of this tax. That would be fun.
Jesse

It seems like legitimate gamesmanship to me. Iggy wants to oppose the tax in principle, thereby garnering votes, and support it in practice, thereby garnering revenue. Since there is not a real difference between the Cons and the Libs on this issue, Harper wants to make that explicit for the next campaign, instead of allowing Iggy to make anti-tax noises on the hustings.

Ted

If Harper believes the HST is "crucial" to Canadians as he has claimed, and the framework legislation is already there, and he's campaigned on this before and it was in his budgets, and he's already reached agreements with the provinces covering about half the Canadian population and the provinces are relying on Harper's commitment, then why is any gamemanship tolerable on this? Why is gamemanship more important than leadership and good governance? Does Harper stand behind his own words, principles and commitments, or not?

He is so clearly and transparently trying to avoid responsibility on this issue, to pass the buck to Ignatieff and avoid leadership. That has become Harper's hallmark.

Dan

I think its a pretty smart political move and Harper will gain in the polls from it (or at least the Liberals will slide further)

If you take it to its logical conclusion it's kind of dumb. Essentially the Tories are saying that 'If Michael Ignatieff doesn't agree with us we are going to permanently shelve an idea that every one of our budgets and Fiscal Updates has called crucial to creating a Canadian advantage.'

So either they were lying about how important tax harmonization is for the last four years, or they were telling the truth about its importance but don't really care about creating an Advantaged Canada unless the Liberals are on board.

Either way, the Opposition Leader now has a real conundrum on his hands. And that fact alone will make Mr. Harper ten times happier than let's say… increased prosperity for Canadians.
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]