An Assembly of Statements and Resources

Wow, can I first say I'm flattered to find myself quoted and referred to, even in a small way, for being a competent information source for this. I am far from an expert and know only a fraction of what there is to know about this current situation, but I am making a huge effort right now to be sure of my facts, and avoid the mudslinging and rhetoric that so many bloggers and commenters are falling to right now.

I would refer you (those of you who didn't arrive here FROM there) to Ms. Stephanie Pearl-McPhee's post today, about the best citizen's primer I've seen on the reality of this situation. I have a few minor quibbles with how she phrased a few things, but she is essentially correct and very insightful, one of the key reasons I'm a fan of hers (the entertaining knitting stuff is bonus, but she is foremost an informed and insightful writer).

Second, here is a web site I've been using to check some numbers: http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/results.html. Good data if you really want numbers and breakdowns, bring your own calculator.

Third, given how little most of us seem to know about Canadian Parliamentary process, the web site of the Parliament of Canada, despite having a veneer of the present Conservative party leadership, should be a valuable resource. Given that politicians, and most of the sycophantic media hackery following them, all put their spin on it, something I have found particularly interesting is The Hansard, an obscurely-named but spin-free transcript of what was actually said during debate in the house. You can read the statements of all members and decide for yourselves what is being said. Frankly, it is not hard to find our MPs telling self-serving untruths, half-truths and spun truths where it suits them. I'm finding it increasingly hard to dismiss some of these where they are doing so to launch attacks not only on other elected members, but on the Canadian public and its understanding of our democracy. (I think that more than anything is really what has galvanized me in all this).

Now, a few (mis) statements that every Canadian should be examining very closely right now, in no particular order, and not just parroting glibly to hear themselves mouth off:

That a coalition government is "undemocratic", "unconstitutional", "illegal" or any such thing. Members who have made such statements in our House of Commons have lied, in the House of Commons. To the House of Commons, and given the public records of Parliament, to the Canadian people.

That this is a "Constitutional Crisis". No, no it is not. It is a political crisis, for at least the Harper government, the Conservative Party of Canada and its members, probably for the other parties, but this is NOT a Constitutional Crisis (which would imply that one or more parties are acting to alter the nature of our government in defiance of our Constitution). Our Constitution is quite secure in all this. The options are clear. I suppose it is arguable this could become a constitutional crisis if the current Prime Minister is granted a prorogue as he is expected to request, as that would be an unprecedented response to these circumstances and outside of Constitutional convention, though not letter.

That the Coalition is a "separatist coalition" or that the Bloc is a party to the proposed Coalition (implying that the Bloc Members of Parliament would hold ministerial positions and form the Government of Canada). The Bloc has agreed to support the Coaltion, but it is a Coalition of the Liberal and NDP members of the House of Commons. And it has no separatist agenda whatsover. Nor will it support a separatist agenda - it will dissolve first, because it will flat out have broken the unity that formed it.

That, as Mr. Harper stated in his speech this past hour (I took notes) a Coalition government is a threat to Confederation. That is utter crap. The WORST POSSIBLE result of a coalition government is that it fails a confidence vote and we are back facing an election - something we will be anyway if Mr. Harper's current government fails a confidence vote and the Governor General declines to offer the chance to the Coalition. If she defers on an election and gives the coalition a chance, we will have had a chance to allow a legal and democratic Coalition government a chance to govern with a primary focus getting Canada through the current economic situation (not crisis. Note that it is also not, yet, a crisis, though it is suiting the current government and opposition to style it so).

That anything about this is "overturning" or "invalidating" the results of the October election. If you think so, you need to review my previous post about what we voted for, and what we actually elected. Every elected Member of Parliament will remain the elected Member of Parliament representing their respective ridings, unless they resign or die. That is all they were elected to. Nothing about this can overturn the result of the election because nothing about this can remove any member from their seat in the House of Commons. We did not elect the Prime Minister, we did not elect the Conservative Party of Canada, and we did not elect the Government of Canada (formed of the appointed Prime Minister and his hand-picked Cabinet). We only elected 308 Members to sit in the House of Commons, and how those 308 form the Government is not a matter of election. The fall of this particular assemblage of the Government of Canada does not overturn any election result. I have degenerated into redundancy but this point is vital.

Finally, because I received such a considered compliment and question from a web-wandering reader, I would like to respond to Heather t from yesterday's comment. She asked: "Are people annoyed that the Quebecois party is involved when they don't even want to be part of Canada? "

Heather, I need to disclose here that I feel this issue is a smokescreen being wafted around by the Prime Minister and those seeking to undermine the Coalition for political reasons. I also disclose that, due to my first statement, I'm not so deeply and recently researched into the current policies and platform of the Bloc Quebecois. I do know that the Bloc Quebecois (lets go with BQ for ease of typing) is not, in fact, part of the proposed coalition though they have agreed to support it for a set period of time. Thus, they will have no seats in a new Government of Canada (the PM and Cabinet) thus their platform and policies will not be part of the coalition's platform and policies. They do, however, need to be heeded as they can prevent the coalition from proceeding on anything by voting against its legislative proposals. Well, this is the same as they, and any other party in opposition to the sitting Government, can do now.

The BQ is a few things. They are a legal and legitimate Federal party, but have the unusual attribute of being one which will field candidates ONLY in the Province of Quebec. However, every citizen of Quebec is a citizen of Canada and has the same right as we do in any other province or territory - to elect a Member to the House of Commons. Those members sit in the House of Commons representing their constituents from their ridings. It is entirely fair for constituents in the Province of Quebec to send members to the House who have the constituents' interests in mind. The fact that the BQ won a majority of the ridings in Quebec is fine. Good job. It's no different than an independent who supports a western secession doing so. The BQ is also a party which has had, with varying degrees of priority, an agenda including the renegotiation of the relationship between the Province of Quebec and the rest of the federation which is Canada. It has been at times unclear the exact model this would take, and I'm not informed as to the particulars, currently or historically. I am pretty sure that "separatist" is a quick soundbite spun by many that is inadequate to capture the true scope of all issues. I believe, in fact, they consider themselves "sovereigntist" which is semantically different. I do know one more thing based on repeated polls, commentaries, news stories and interviews: there are lots of BQ supporters who do not wish to see Quebec wholly separate from Canada, but they support the BQ as they see it as the party which best aligns with what they see as putting Quebec first.

We last broached the issue of Quebec renegotiating its position in Confederation in 1995 with a referendum, which was voted down, and Quebec achieved no change in status though it has received many acknowledgements since, with varying degrees of substance to them, of its position as a "distinct society", culturally and politically. Stephen Harper himself did this during his first term as Prime Minister though I would need to do the homework to refresh my memory of specifics. At that time he was courting them to support his first minority government. I think now there is a feeling that he has slapped them in the face with accusatory and hostile reactions to a coalition forming which is NOT in his favour.

As to whether or not people are annoyed that they have stated support for the coalition - I do not think I can speak for the collective people. I can speak for my point of view, and I'm not in the least annoyed. The Members elected from the BQ are agreeing to a limited term of support for a coalition which does not include them, but which they feel will be better for their Members (and by extension, the constituents they represent) than is the current Harper Conservative government. They are entirely within their rights to participate in this way, and they would have been within their rights to participate in 2004 in the coalition Mr. Harper was hinting at forming at that time. They are a valid voice composed of duly elected Members of the Canadian House of Commons and they are acting appropriately in how they are participating. The perceived "annoyance" is part ignorance, part fear, and part (big part) spin on behalf of the threatened government to discredit these elected representatives and perpetuate the ignorance and fear of the less informed. I've no doubt the Conservative upper echelons are entirely annoyed, for the support of the BQ does make the coalition proposal viable as it does still require the confidence of the majority of the House. I've also no doubt many citizens of Quebec, BQ voters and not, are very annoyed at Mr. Harper for the spin doctoring and fear mongering he is doing which is misrepresenting them as a Province and electorate.

One last thing(having concluded my comments on the Bloc participation, so to all readers): I've realized I need to follow my "finally" with something of a post script and I am going to resort to ranting here just because I would like to point out to everyone that CTV NEWS BLOWS DONKEYS. They hyped up a Special Report broadcast which was to include airing of the PM's speech and then Mr. Dion's response, but apparently couldn't dare pre-empt ETalk Daily and So You Think You Can Dance to respectfully wait for the Opposition Leader's response to be properly recorded and delivered, so they dropped it. I've been sitting here subjected to CTV drivel for over an hour after they promised they would pre-empt it when they got Mr. Dion's tape only to find Mr. Dion's address come and gone and posted on-line while they returned to regularly scheduled entertainment pablum. Our media is completely complicit in promoting one-sided spin of this issue and is utterly failing the people of Canada in presenting unbiased and unhyped review of this. They are ignorantly parroting the lies, spin, and half-truths issuing from the press offices of desperate politicians and letting the information fall through the cracks. CBC, our public national broadcaster, is only just a hair less complicit in this. Sensational headlines front and centre, with reasoned commentary and factual documentation buried in the web site with less profile than ignorant, vitriolic drive-by commenters. Everyone, again, I reiterate, get off your arse, turn off the tube, and start some reading and research of the facts to inform your opinion. This is not about partisan politics any more, it is about keeping enough of a grip on our understanding of democracy to have a foundation for keeping a grip on our democracy!