And they're off...

As you will doubtless be aware by now, the Harper government has been defeated in a confidence vote, which means an election is coming. The situation is unfortunate, because at best we're looking at another Conservative minority government... but the latest poll looks much, much worse:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives begin an election campaign this weekend far ahead of their political rivals in public favour and would be poised to win a "comfortable" majority if Canadians cast their votes now, a new poll has found.

The national survey, conducted exclusively for Postmedia News and Global National, reveals voter support is declining for the opposition Liberals who have put forward a non-confidence motion that will lead to the defeat of the Conservative government in the House of Commons this afternoon.

The March 22-23 poll by Ipsos Reid found public support remains solid for the Tories despite recent opposition attempts to draw attention to such controversies as the government's treatment of Parliament and revelations that an ex-senior aide to Harper lobbied a department to get funds for his fiancée, a former escort.

The Conservatives are now supported by 43 per cent of decided voters -- up by three points from two weeks ago.

Just as important, the Tories now have a widening 19-point lead over the Liberals led by Michael Ignatieff.

The Grits, who have been trying to incite public fury over the government's ethical record and improve the public's negative impression of Ignatieff, now have the support of just 24 per cent of voters, down by three points.

Jack Layton's NDP, which put the country on the path to a spring election by announcing earlier this week it would not support the Conservative budget, are backed by 16 per cent of voters -- no change from the previous poll.

What's confusing, though, is the fact that another poll found that voters are increasingly skeptical of the government:

A poll conducted for The Globe and Mail and CTV by Nanos Research shows that 41 per cent of Canadians trust the Conservative government less than they did a year ago. Only 6 per cent trust it more. Forty-eight per cent feel about the same, and 5 per cent just don’t know.

What is going on here? One interpretation is simple - one (or both) of those polls is just plain wrong. But there's another possibility, and a disturbing one at that. It could well be that corruption and dishonesty in government tends to favour the political right, even when it's a right wing party that's being corrupt and dishonest. After all, people who have made up their minds that all politicians are crooks are going to be more inclined to give their (grudging) support to a party they believe will reduce the role of government... which is precisely how right wing parties like to market themselves. Notably, prominent Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella thinks the Ipsos poll is accurate, and that a Conservative sweep is coming.

I'm not 100% certain of this, of course, and I really hope it's not the case. If it is, our democracy is even more broken than previously thought.

Of course, one of the biggest problems in our democracy is first-past-the-post. Given this, some people are bound to advocate tactical voting (or, as it's become trendy to call it in this country, "strategic voting"). Now I'm a "never say never" kind of person, and I recognize that in extremis this might be necessary. However, most of the time it doesn't do any good, and you're simply wasting a vote on a party you don't even really like in the mistaken view that you're helping stop the Cons. That said, tactical voting might help if, and only if:

1) The national situation is such that the Cons are either on the verge of a majority (as they may well be now) or on the verge of being pushed into second place. The key, though, is on the verge. If things are such that a majority is inevitable - or impossible for that matter - there's no benefit for tactical voting (though there may be a benefit to the party that advocates tactical voting, which usually means the Liberals). Now this is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for this approach to help. The other is:

2) The situation in your own riding must be such that the Conservative candidate could credibly either win or lose. This rules out a riding like Winnipeg Centre or Elmwood-Transcona (where the Cons are a non-entity) as well as ridings like Provencher or Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette (where most of the population thinks they'll go to Hell if they vote for anyone else).

It's worth noting too that even in such a case, the best tactical vote might actually be for the NDP (especially in parts of BC or Saskatchewan) or even the Greens (in Saanich-Gulf Islands, for instance) but I doubt too many Liberals are going to point out subtleties like this. Myself, I'm kind of hoping a Liberal canvasser comes to my door and tries to sell me on the subject of tactical voting so that I can rub his or her face in this fact.

Milliken upholds supremacy of Parliament

Looks like a victory for the Opposition (and for parliamentary democracy):

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has lost his battle to keep documents related to the detention of Afghan detainees out of the hands of opposition members.

In a precedent-setting ruling Tuesday, Speaker Peter Milliken said the House of Commons has the right to request any documents it needs and that the government must turn them over or risk being found in contempt of Parliament.

Mr. Milliken gave both sides two weeks to reach a compromise. If none is obtained, the House of Commons could vote to find the government in contempt of Parliament.

From the Globe. And given the latest Harris-Decima poll, the Cons are likely a bit worried about a vote of no confidence.

The Afghan torture scandal -- the plot thickens

Looks like another confidence vote could be in the works:

OTTAWA -- MPs headed off for their Christmas break Friday discussing the unmerry possibil­ities of everything from a court battle to a confidence vote that could bring down the Conservative government over the Afghan detainee issue.

The House of Commons adjourned late Thursday leaving a political cliff­hanger. The opposition parties voted to force the government to release all documents related to the detainees file -- uncensored -- to a parliament­ary committee. The parliamentary law clerk backed up the move, underlining the primacy of the chamber over laws passed by the government.

But a string of cabinet ministers dismissed the parliamentary motion, saying laws governing the classifica­tion of certain documents will govern their release. "We follow the law and the law is very clear that if there are elements of security, elements that could affect the security of our sol­diers or civilians, then information will be protected," Trade Minister Stockwell Day said Friday.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson add­ed: "Officials have and will continue to provide all legally available infor­mation, and officials are following the laws that Parliament has passed."

It leaves the country potentially in the grips of another constitutional melee over which body should reign: Parliament or the government.

One NDP source said the Commons might be forced to rule the govern­ment in contempt of Parliament, which would eventually entail a con­fidence vote.

From the Winnipeg Free Press.

Liberals going to bring down the government... again

Again, you say? Well, it's worth remembering that this isn't the first time:

“Our party is united in its determination to face Mr. Harper down.” – Michael Ignatieff to meeting of New Brunswick Liberals, Telegraph-Journal December 6, 2008

“We've put down a very clear marker. This government has to get the money out the door … If this government fails to meet these targets, it will not survive for long." – Michael Ignatieff, CBC.ca, January 28, 2009

“Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is looking to June as his first chance to defeat the Harper government over its handling of the economic crisis, according to his finance critic.” – Globe and Mail, February 27, 2009

"I want to make Parliament work but I don't write blank cheques. That's not what my voters sent me to Parliament to do," he said less than three hours before Liberals approved the fund. "If the government wants to make Parliament work, we can find a way to make it work. If they don't want to make it work, look out." – Michael Ignatieff, Hamilton Spectator, March 25, 2009

“Michael Ignatieff declared Thursday that federal Liberals are united, out of debt and "basically ready to fight an election" if an impasse is reached in Parliament.” – Canwest News, April 30, 2009

“The leader of the federal Liberal party has threatened to push for an election if the minority Conservative government doesn't support proposals to reform the employment insurance system.” – CBC.ca, May 3, 2009

“Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says the party will decide next week whether to try to bring down the Harper government and plunge the country into a mid-summer election.” – Canadian Press, June 3, 2009

From here (hat tip to Devin Johnston). Think it'll be any different this time?

Harper-Ignatieff deal to study EI averts summer vote

Again, not surprising:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff reached a deal on Tuesday to examine employment insurance reform, averting the possibility of a summer election following days of speculation over the fate of the minority Conservative government.

Earlier this week, Ignatieff had threatened to withhold confidence in a budget estimates vote on Friday unless Harper provided answers on a series of issues, including the Tories' unspecified plans for more EI proposals in the fall.

But after a series of face-to-face meetings in recent days, the political rivals agreed to create a working group on employment insurance that will have three members selected by the Liberals and three by the Conservatives.

Source. While I'm happy not to have to work on yet another election campaign this summer, I have to wonder what Iggy is actually going to get out of this. When Jack Layton cut a deal with Paul Martin to avert an election in 2005, Canadians got billions of dollars worth of investment in things that matter to everyday folks (housing, transit, education, etc). I have to wonder what's going to come of this "working group". Oh well, I'm sure we'll see soon enough.

Harper willing to talk with Ignatieff to avoid election

Not a big surprise:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he is willing to meet Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to discuss his demands to avoid triggering a summer election, including further changes to the country's employment insurance system.

But Harper insisted Ignatieff was not taking a "realistic approach," saying major changes to EI "cannot be done on the back of an envelope in a few days."

He instead called for "dialogue" with Ignatieff over the summer on potential EI changes to be introduced in the fall.

“Mr. Ignatieff said he doesn’t want an election,” Harper told reporters Monday afternoon at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa.

“I don’t want an election. I don’t think anybody wants an election.”

He's right about that, of course; few people in this country want another election right now. So it's a reasonably safe bet that Harper and/or Ignatieff will compromise on this position. Hopefully this will result from Harper backing down, rather than Ignatieff.

When you think about it, Jack Layton wasn't far wrong when he said this:

"We have a new coalition now on Parliament Hill -- it's a coalition between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff," Layton said shortly after Ignatieff announced his conditional support for the Tory budget.

He's not the first person to say this, of course; I seem to recall a columnist saying the same thing a couple of years before, because of the number of times the Liberals supported the Tories on confidence votes. That's not to say I want an election right now either, but I do hope Ignatieff doesn't sell his support too cheaply. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking it's not a coalition, since the Liberals didn't get any cabinet seats, but the effect is pretty similar).

Harper running scared

He's now postponing the confidence vote:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has temporarily stymied a Liberal plan to bring down the government and propose a governing coalition with the New Democrats, delaying the opportunity for a no-confidence vote by one week.

In an address delivered from the foyer of the House of Commons on Friday, Harper said the government should be empowered by Canadians — not through deals negotiated in the shadowy halls of Parliament.

"While we have been working on the economy, the opposition has been working on a backroom deal to overturn the results of the last election without seeking the consent of voters. They want to take power, not earn it," Harper said.

The prime minister has cancelled Monday's opposition day, which the Liberals intended to use to introduce a motion to topple the Conservative government on the grounds that it has failed to recognize the seriousness of the economic downturn.

Harper said the next opposition day will be set for Dec. 8.

From the CBC. I guess he figured the Liberals would never bring down the government for fear of precipitating another election... but it seems he was wrong.

Bye bye Steve?

Let's hope so. It could happen:

Canada's opposition parties said Thursday they will vote against the Conservative government's fiscal update, sparking speculation the country could face another election in the midst of a global economic crisis.

The Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois said they would not support the update introduced by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty because it contained no stimulus package to spur Canada's slumping economy and protect Canadian workers during the crisis.

The update is a confidence vote on Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government and could be voted on as a ways and means motion as early as Monday evening.

From the CBC. Now I don't want another election any more than anyone else, but contrary to popular belief it doesn't have to happen, even if the fiscal update is voted down. If the opposition parties can convince the Governor-General that they can form a government, power could shift without having to go to the polls again. It happened in Ontario, when Frank Miller's minority government was defeated in 1985. I say bring it on.