Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Ottawa isn't Hollywood for ugly people...

Norman Spector, October 6, 2008 at 8:30 PM EST

...And neither should be Washington, where this quip originated — but that's their problem, of which there's no shortage.

Now, our economic problems, too, are mounting. And with reputable economists forecasting that we're about to enter a serious recession, it would be hard to think of a worse time in our history to elect a weak minority government — be it Liberal or Conservative.

Based on current trends, these are the two most likely outcomes of an election campaign which has been highly entertaining for some people, but has spilled too much ink on poopin' puffins and Dipper dopesters for my taste. And, as you'll see in the post below, a minority government is to the taste of some strage bedfellows.

But I'm of a generation that is worried sick about the capital we've built up over a lifetime of work, and whether we'll end up eating cat food in our retirement. And while we don't know much about Facebook or Twitter, we do vote in disproportionate numbers. Which is why I'm hoping that, in the last week of the campaign, Canadians will understand that we have no birthright to political stability. And that — heading into hard economic times - we'll manage to escape the horror movie of the Bloc Québécois holding the balance of power in the 40th Parliament.

  1. Brian Smith from Ottawa, Canada writes: I couldn't agree with you more, Norman.

    I trust that you will make this argument forcefully in one of your French laguage columns, although I fear that no one in Quebec is listening.
  2. Michael Sharp from Victoria BC, Canada writes:

    You got that right, Norman.

    Please let Canada wake up and give the CPC a majority.
  3. Ricky for a Centrist Canada from Canada writes:
    Yeah, sure, Spector, you con hack.

    To heck with representing the public will - which is clearly shifting away from a Harper majority as election day nears.

    We must give Harpercrite a majority, so he can go about his priority of destroying the Liberal Party - a priority confirmed by his closest political friends.

    There's a reason why Harper has no plan - it's because he didn't get into politics to build Canada - only to destroy political opponents.

    He's waiting to release his "platform" seven days before voting day. That's like the pathetic kid in class who avoids going in front of the class for presentations until there is no one left but he. And then he goes about parrotting bits and pieces of everybody else's presentations.

    Buy another sweater, loser.

    A PM like that must be voted out - or held in check.
  4. Emerys Abolferd from Canada writes: Yes that would be a real crime, if the "Not going to release their platform until days before the election, a majority of MPs are obstructing our minority agenda so we are going to break our own law" party, got given an even weaker minority but as they say "you made your bed, now you have to sleep in it"! Maybe this experience will teach them something about democracy, consensus, and compromise. That would be nice.
  5. Michael Behiels from Canada writes: Hello Norman,
    My oh my how a financial/economic crisis can focus the mind.
    Let's all hope that every Canadian voter will think very seriously before casting his/her ballot this time around.
    There is far too much at stake for voters to exercise the luxury of single issue protest voting.
    Canada's Parliamentary system, one in which the executive controls power and therefore policy and legislation, works best with a majority government. Rarely do minority government's work in favour of Canadian citizens. Pearson's minority government was the exception to the rule and this was only because there was a centre-left consensus in the country which allowed Pearson to pass progressive legislation. The Pearson government floundered on the Quebec Question and Canadians gave the Trudeau Liberals a majority government to handle the crisis.

    The Harper minority government was a clear demonstration of a dysfunctional parliament, one fueled by Harper's decision to make it dysfunctional. The fact that there was no possibility of the opposition parties forming an informal coalition enabling the Liberals to select a cabinet emboldened Harper's Cabinet and caucus to behave the way they did.
    If Harper wins another minority he will have only himself to blame. He decided to call a snap election catching the Liberals off guard. Harper decided to campaign on his government's very few accomplishments. He turned to old fashioned retail politics - small financial promises to designated special interest groups that were potential Conservative voters.
    Harper played down his over-arching vision, that is, his plan, already underway, to dismantle Ottawa's taxing and spending powers. By hobbling Ottawa's taxing and spending powers every province will be left to fend for itself. Asymmetrical federalism by stealth. Joe Clark's community of communities. This conception of federalism may be acceptable ideologically in Quebec and Alberta but not in the rest of Canada.
  6. P. Frederick from Vancouver, Canada writes: A minority government this time means another election within 12 months, maybe six.

    We'll be as bad as Italy very soon.
  7. Fungal Fred from Canada writes: 1. Harper has studiously, rigorously avoided using the M (majority) word throughout his lackadaisical campaign. Perhaps he should have told people what he was asking for (even if it introduced a risk that he would have failed, if he didn't get it). It's a bit late now.

    2. If there is to be a minority government, let it be a Liberal one. Dion has withstood two years of attacks, has stuck to the high road, and has focused his campaign on what matters: the economy. The Liberals have governing experience and are much clearly more likely to govern in cooperation with other parties than Stephen Harper.

    3. The BQ holding balance of power? Haven't we had two minority governments already in which they held the balance of power? What's new or more threatening?
  8. Norman Spector from Victoria, Canada writes: The BQ has not held the balance of power in the last 2 Parliaments. After the 2004 election, the NDP did. After the 2006 election, no single opposition party held it, which explains, in part, the government's longevity.
  9. Missa A from Toronto, Canada writes: Fear mongering much?

    All we need to see us through hard economic times is a strong majority government... it doesn't matter what that government's policies are, just so long as they're strong...

    Uh huh.

    The Bloc is gaining in support because Quebec prefers left-wing policies, and Ducepp is the most charismatic and effective leader. Every time voters in the Rest Of Canada see Ducepp in debates a lot of them say they'd vote for him if they could. The Bloc isn't gaining in support because seperatist sentiment is strong, and they know that. The trump card of "breaking the country apart" that you imagine Ducepp using simply doesn't exist.
  10. Chris Sigurdson from Canada writes: No evidence to support this but one can imagine that Harper saw this economic downturn coming and hoped to have an election wrapped up before it hit. How else can anyone explain him breaking his fixed election law. Having the Liberals defeat the government after proping it up would have been seen as weak and ultimately would have worked against them. To profess that we need a Majority government now when we could have had a sitting Parliament right now to deal with this financial mess doesn't create any sympathy for Harper. Dion could statistically emerge with a minority if the present trends continue. The question is would Harper be able to function effectively as leader of the opposition in this case. My answer is NO. He has put his fortunes and the fortunes of his party first in this election. Canada doesn't need a majority - Harper does- for his own selfish reasons. History will not be kind to Bush and Harper and this ecomomic fiasco they have brought about by professing right wing ideology- and deregulation. History will also not be kinf to Western countries that do not take significant measures to stem Global Warming. Harper has no vision for Canada other than a supportive ally for Bush's America. Vote strategically. ABC

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to Spector Vision

Back to top