I usually don't like to use this blog for speculation and political punditry — my desk is next to two of the Hill's top pundits and I like to leave that to them — but one of the fascinating political battles on the Hill in the last several weeks has been Liberals versus NDP and, if there is a confidence motion to be voted on next week, it' may be more of a staredown between two opposition party rivals than a staredown between the government and the opposition.
The Liberals have long chafed at the fact that, under former leader Stephane Dion as well as under current leader Michael Ignatieff, they have voted with the minority Conservative government on matters of confidence. Under Dion, I got the sense voting with the governnment was partly the responsible thing to do but it was also a matter of realpolitik — the Dion Liberals never were ready to fight an election and got pummeled when Harper, frustrated he couldn't goad Dion into a fight, pulled the plug himself, despite his own fixed election date law.
Ignatieff has also stood up, as Leader of the Official Opposition, to vote to sustain the government on confidence matters but he has more success, in my view, in successfully convincing his colleagues and, perhaps, the country that there was a good, responsible reason for doing so, i.e. we're in the midst of a nasty recession and some stimulus spending has to happen.
Whatever the reason, the NDP has used each occasion of Liberal support for the government — and, as Jack Layton notes below, there have been 71 — to deride that party for being nothing but driftless government wannabees. In the last parliament and in the last general election, the NDP painted itself as Canada's Effective Opposition, in contrast to the Liberal Official Opposition.
From an electoral standpoint, the NDP vs Liberal battle on this front seems to have paid some dividends for the NDP. The NDP won several Liberal-held ridings in northern Ontario, kept a seat in Quebec, won for the first time in Newfoundland and Labrador and holds the only seat in Alberta that is not held by a Conservative.
The Liberals know that, in the next electoral battle, they need to take back some of those seats to win the government and one of the ways I sense they hope to do that is to turn the tables on the NDP and get Layton to support the government by either voting with it on a confidence matter or failing to show up for the vote.
If the Liberals end up forcing an election next week, many Liberal MPs and staffers I've spoken to, are saying so be it. If they can force the NDP to blink and get the NDP to prevent a general election this summer, even better.
Layton, seems to be aware of that Liberal endgame and, yesterday after Question Period, he was asked about the prospects of a summer election:
The Hon. Jack Layton: Well I don't think Canadians are all that keen on a fourth election in five years, but I'll tell you, it's clear that the government's direction is the wrong direction. Looking at the statistics that are available — the unemployment rate being so high[and] the government's claiming that money's going out the door. It clearly isn't, if you talk to the mayors, which I've done. And I think we'll just have to see what the Liberals do. We have not brought a confidence motion forward. We brought a motion forward on pensions. It'll be voted on next week. But if the Liberals are counting on the NDP in some way, I think they should just look at our record over the last 71 confidence motions and they'll get an idea of where we're coming from.
Let the staredown begin.
It's time to call Layton's bluff.
It's a pretty high risk strategy for the Liberals to pursue when they would clearly be the ones tagged with causing the summer election … particularly after dragging out the decision-making process so long that it's clear to everyone who did it.
No riskier than Layton giving the progress report a failing grade without even reading it, knowing that if the other opposition parties do the same there will be an election. It shouldn't be too difficult to get that message out if there is an election.
OK, then, I guess we'll just have to see how it all plays out.
Jack Harris won the St. John's East seat for the NDP in a byelection in 1987, as I recall.
If the Liberals do signal they're voting against the government, I wonder how many of the opposition MPs who are just one year shy of their MP pensions will have trouble staying awake in order to attend those late night confidence votes next Friday?
Finally, a pundit pointing the HYPOCRISY of the NDP out. Why the MSM continues to give Layton and the NDP a free ride on this, is indeed a curiosity. The NDP claims the high ground because they vote against anything the government does – knowing full well of course they are immune, and the Liberals will take the heat of “supporting the government”. IMHO, the MSM should be taking Layton to task on this, pointing out what a crock it is.
Thanks for the correction. You are correct indeed. I should have said their first win in a general election.
So you think that the Liberals are free from blame on this, that we shouldn't believe that they have supported Harper?
Honey, the Liberals would not be taking the heat on this if Ignatieff had not been so slow off the mark. Fortune does not favour the timid.
I don't blame you for the mistake David, because this is pretty obscure, but NDP MP Fonse Faour won a seat in Newfoundland in a 1978 by-election and held it in the subsequent 1979 general election. Obviously that parliament only lasted nine months, meaning that Faour never really served a full-term, which is why people often forget that he actually did win in a general election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonse_Faour
The NDP has already annouced how they will vote on next week's confidence vote–against the government. Speculation that Jack Layton will just up and change his mind is completely unfounded.
David, you say that Michael Ignatieff “has [had] more success, in my view, in successfully convincing his colleagues and, perhaps, the country that there was a good, responsible reason for [propping up the Conservatives], i.e. we're in the midst of a nasty recession and some stimulus spending has to happen.”
As for his convincing colleagues: Mr. Ignatieff enjoyed about 75% support from the Liberal caucus in both his leadership races. Mr. Dion had Byron Wilfert. Has it occured to you that perhaps that's why Liberal MPs have done a better job towing the party line under their new leader? It's easy, after all, to find brilliance in the decisions of one leader and bumbling in the decisions of another when you have confidence in the former and not in the latter.
As for convincing the country: I think you mean the media. Despite all the respect I have for your work, please consider the post you've just written. Questioning whether the NDP will hypothetically support the Conservatives? How about questioning how the Liberals can justify having done so for the last two years.
Contrary to your suggestion above, circumstance did not somehow force Michael Ignatieff to support the Conservatives' government. He could have supported the coalition. He could have demanded substantive amendments to the budget. He could have form a united front with the other opposition parties and used confidence votes to force further concessions from the government.
Ignatieff has done none of these things. He has unquestioningly propped up the government at ever turn.
Time to stop giving him a pass.