It looks like Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority
Conservative government is going to fall today.
The Liberals have introduced a motion of non-confidence in
response to the federal budget that was submitted earlier this week
by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. If the government falls,
Canadians will elect a new parliament sometime in May.
Frankly, I don't understand why the Liberals have decided to
topple the government now. After all, a poll that was released last
weekend by Nanos Research had
the Conservatives leading the Liberals by double digits (38.6%
to 27.6%). Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff is also the least
trusted of the three major national political
leaders. Ignatieff is well behind both Harper and New
Democratic Party (NDP) leader Jack Layton on that score. As late as
yesterday,
an Ipsos-Reid poll had the Tories ahead of the Liberals by nearly
20 points (43% to 24%).
It is also worth noting that according to another Ipsos-Reid
poll, half of
all Canadians do not want an election at this time. Indeed, if
the Tory government falls it will be the third election in a little
over five years.
Now I could understand Ignatieff doing this if the Liberals were
up in the polls by double digits and if he was the most popular
leader in the country. But it seems to me that if half of all
Canadians don't want an election a lot of them aren't going to vote
Liberal. Now I realize that a week in politics is a lifetime.
Harper could make a mistake and Ignatieff could capitalize. But
unless Ignatieff becomes Prime Minister in the next 60 days or so
then his political career is done.
So methinks Stephen Harper will remain Prime Minister. The only
question is whether Harper will lead another minority
government or if he and the Conservatives will be given a chance at
majority rule.
If only we could do the no-confidence thing on Obama and force
an election.
The Man| 3.25.11 @ 2:49PM
I suspect that the timing of this election is driven more by the
need to spend the $40 million that the Liberals stole in Quebec
more than a decade ago than it is to the current political fortunes
of the Liberal Party of Canada. The longer the money lies hidden in
the pockets of party supporters the more likely it is to be
converted into a personal asset of the holder rather than used to
support the party election machinery. At some point, it makes sense
to fight an un-necessary elect with a slim chance of success
instead of just flushing the cash down the toilet.
Steven| 3.27.11 @ 6:34PM
Its been 3 years since the last election. Americans have
elections every 2 years. We would have had to have had an election
next year anyway (there must be an election every 4 years). Now
isn't any less convenient, or any more "too soon" than if we'd
waited a year, and the opposition parties are hoping to use
Harper's government's breach of parliamentary privilege to their
advantage, for whatever it's worth.
Remember that the past two elections were brought on the
Canadian people by Stephen Harper, in order to grab power for
himself. Each of these occurred within only 2 years of the previous
election. And Harper didn't really do anything to avoid this
election, since he's hoping he'll finally get his long-sought
majority. Make no mistake, Harper wants this election, and he
doesn't care if the Canadian people want it (as demonstrated by the
past two). He's only using this rhetoric to confuse the weak
minded. And unfortunately, it seems to be succeeding, along with
his anti-coalition scaremongering which he continues to use despite
all evidence against it.
Anommynous| 3.25.11 @ 12:53PM
If only we could do the no-confidence thing on Obama and force an election.
The Man| 3.25.11 @ 2:49PM
I suspect that the timing of this election is driven more by the need to spend the $40 million that the Liberals stole in Quebec more than a decade ago than it is to the current political fortunes of the Liberal Party of Canada. The longer the money lies hidden in the pockets of party supporters the more likely it is to be converted into a personal asset of the holder rather than used to support the party election machinery. At some point, it makes sense to fight an un-necessary elect with a slim chance of success instead of just flushing the cash down the toilet.
Steven| 3.27.11 @ 6:34PM
Its been 3 years since the last election. Americans have elections every 2 years. We would have had to have had an election next year anyway (there must be an election every 4 years). Now isn't any less convenient, or any more "too soon" than if we'd waited a year, and the opposition parties are hoping to use Harper's government's breach of parliamentary privilege to their advantage, for whatever it's worth.
Remember that the past two elections were brought on the Canadian people by Stephen Harper, in order to grab power for himself. Each of these occurred within only 2 years of the previous election. And Harper didn't really do anything to avoid this election, since he's hoping he'll finally get his long-sought majority. Make no mistake, Harper wants this election, and he doesn't care if the Canadian people want it (as demonstrated by the past two). He's only using this rhetoric to confuse the weak minded. And unfortunately, it seems to be succeeding, along with his anti-coalition scaremongering which he continues to use despite all evidence against it.