PunBB
How Long Will This Government Last? - Printable Version

+- PunBB (https://punbb.in)
+-- Forum: General Discussion - Hipbase.com (https://punbb.in/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Non Tragically Hip Discussion (https://punbb.in/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: How Long Will This Government Last? (/showthread.php?tid=7670)

Pages: 1 2 3

How Long Will This Government Last? - das_hips - 01-24-2006

I've posted just a few comments on politics, much to the disagreement of Skippy, and others who didn't (and don't) support the Liberals. But now the argument over platforms, and pre-election promises have come and gone...

There is a new Prime Minister, a new Government, and I'm curious as to how long the Hipbase members think this Government will last.

The Liberals did better than expected, the Conservatives didn't get the majority they needed. With no political ally in parliament for the Conservatives, and essentially a much more fragile minority than the last Government, I'm not sure how long this Government will last.

The Liberals will have to develop a new leader, the Bloc isn't sure they want to wait too long to force an election, based on gaining federalist support, and the NDP have experienced a 50% surge in support.

How long will this Government last?

- clearlyentranced - 01-24-2006

Isn't there a minimum amount of time that the Tories have before other's can call an election?

- j-monster - 01-24-2006

clearlyentranced Wrote:Isn't there a minimum amount of time that the Tories have before other's can call an election?

I don't know that for a fact.

But I do think the Conservatives can govern issue by issue and make this minority government work for a relatively long time (i.e. 2-plus years). There is common ground to be had with the NDP (and probably the Bloc) on accountability and cleaning up government, consensus can be found for some of their other main planks in the platform (cutting GST, reform laws on crime, fixing the fiscal imbalance with provinces, etc.), and so on.

2 other things to consider:

a) There is certain to be election fatigue... if the opposition parties risk bringing the government down within 6 to even 18 months, I think many Canadians will be angered by this and will punish the opposition parties even further for pulling such a stunt instead of trying to deal with the issues Canada faces.

b) The Liberals need a new leader, given Paul Martin's decision to step down. In addition, however, a lot of other things need to be done by the Liberals (i.e. reforming the party's culture to it's past glories instead of it's corruption-laden present, paying off the sizeable debts the party faces, etc.), so they're going to need time to deal with these things... at least 2 years I would think, if not more.

Of course, this is just my best guess, I could be wrong.

- Coneycat - 01-24-2006

clearlyentranced Wrote:Isn't there a minimum amount of time that the Tories have before other's can call an election?

I don't think so. In '79 Joe Clark's government lasted about eight months before being defeated on the budget.

I don't think that'll happen this time. Not unless they want a lot more ballot boxes run over:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060124/ELXNBRIEFS24-2/TPNational/Canada">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... nal/Canada</a><!-- m -->

- skippy the wonder dog - 01-24-2006

j-monster Wrote:There is certain to be election fatigue... if the opposition parties risk bringing the government down within 6 to even 18 months, I think many Canadians will be angered by this and will punish the opposition parties even further for pulling such a stunt instead of trying to deal with the issues Canada faces.

I wouldn't count on that. The electorate didn't punish the opposition parties for taking down the Liberals, and 64% of the population is opposed to Harper. Depending on how Harper governs, many people could soon view defeating his government not as a "stunt" but as the only palatable way to "deal with the issues Canada faces."

It will last at least 18 months, unless Harper does something disastrously dumb, because the Liberals need time to dispose of Martin's rotting cadaver and elect a leader. We're in a holding pattern until then.

Don't let's get confused about what just happened: both Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are political failures, and Canadian politics is in a holding pattern until one of them is replaced. This election was about which party gets to retool and win a majority in two years. In a strange sense, the Liberals actually won: they get to dispose of Paul Martin.

- Sam - 01-24-2006

Quote:I don't think so. In '79 Joe Clark's government lasted about eight months before being defeated on the budget.

Let's not forget the Meighen Conservative gov't of 1926 - 3 months in office, from June 29 to early September. But to answer the question, there is no minimum amount of time that a gov't can stand. They could be defeated on their first order of business. It's doubtful that the other parties want that though.

I doubt that Harper's biggest challenges will come from the other parties.

Harper is going to have to navigate a pretty treacherous course within his own party. The Conservative and Reform Parties might have amalgamated but now we'll see if they re-unified. He has social conservatives that are going to expect some movement on social issues (eg. same-sex marriage, abortion) but he has fiscal conservatives that don't want those issues touched. You can make fun of Belinda Stronach all you want (I'll probably join in) but she reflects a real attitude among conservative Canadians. Government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.

I think the question will be 'how long can Harper hold the Conservatives together' rather than 'how long until the gov't has a no-confidence vote.' I don't know how good a statesman he is, but I'm not hopeful.

- cferneyh - 01-24-2006

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:Don't let's get confused about what just happened: both Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are political failures, and Canadian politics is in a holding pattern until one of them is replaced.

What makes you say Harper is a failure? Maybe I saw too much rah rah Conservative coverage last night but I was under the impression that he's the reason that the Conservatives have gone from complete shambles to being back in power. Since I pay little to no attention to politics I'm curious to know why you hold this opinion.

- skippy the wonder dog - 01-24-2006

He's had some success, in that he has managed to pull the conservatives together, present a united front, moderate his party's policies and become prime minister. To give Harper the credit he deserves, he was dealt a shitty hand by the legacy of Reform and still did a good job.

However, look at the campaign he just fought: his opponent was completely lacking in charisma, laid low for much of the campaign, was dogged by a series of scandalous revelations during the campaign, committed numerous gaffes, and was actively undermined from within by a faction of his own party.

And out of this, Stephen Harper won a weaker minority than Martin held, when he should have had a landslide victory.

That's why I say he's a failure.

- sean.bonner - 01-24-2006

cferneyh Wrote:What makes you say Harper is a failure?

Harper is a failure. We did not make this up. We're not allowed to make stuff up.

- skippy the wonder dog - 01-24-2006

On the other hand, Harper has some notable successes on his record. Although he will be only an interim PM, when Prime Minister McKenna wears out his welcome and is handed his head by a Conservative landslide under Gurmant Grewal, well, that'll be on the basis of what Harper built.

Hmmm.... maybe not Grewal ... my crystal ball gets foggy when I look that far out....

- tigerthelion - 01-24-2006

I would give it at least a year, maybe two. Nobody knows for sure but I do share the view with j-monster that Canadians don't want to be having election after election so soon. Elections cost money. But I could be completely wrong about this. Maybe they'll want Harper out as soon as possible, but I'm leaning towards a two year run for the Conservatives.

Skippy, I don't know why but I got a kick out of, "because the Liberals need time to dispose of Martin's rotting cadaver and elect a leader." Nice wordsmanship!

- prz - 01-24-2006

I think we will be going back to the polls in June or October of 2007.

My reasons are this. First, the Liberals will not have a leadership convention until the summer. That means the new leader will not have a chance to sit in the house until the fall or whenever a by-election can be called. That gives the new leader the end of 06 and the spring of 07 to get time in the house and go on the attack. Then drop the government in June of 07.

- clearlyentranced - 01-24-2006

Wait...why isn't beanmedic in this thread yet? Where is he? Harper better be careful lol.

- skippy the wonder dog - 01-24-2006

prz, doesn't Ontario have a provincial election for 2007? That's likely to delay a federal election.

- prz - 01-25-2006

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:prz, doesn't Ontario have a provincial election for 2007? That's likely to delay a federal election.

You are right and I was thinking about that too. So then that may give all the reason to push with a Spring 2007 vote? Do you really see the Libs waiting till 08? If they do wait ill the first chance in 08 the election will not come till the spring of 08.

At the same time, what if the conservatives fall and then the Liberals and NDP attempt to form a coalition government. That could happen too.