Scheer’s untimely release, and a looming minority
Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives finally got around to releasing their costed planform. On Friday. Before a long weekend. After the debates. And at the same time as advanced voting got underway. Not that they were trying to hide or downplay anything.
Consider the words of Kevin Page, former parliamentary budget officer and CEO of the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy. He told CBC: “I’m a bit disappointed, particularly on this platform, less on the NDP because they just struggled to get a document out period. They (the NDP) probably would have liked to have gotten it out a week ago. They just weren’t ready.
“But this looks more nefarious from the point of view that, ‘We don’t want to tell people till after the debates, till people start voting, that this is how we get back to balance.’”
Page is referring to the $69 billion in cuts and savings Scheer outlined. To his credit, he was more honest about it than Doug Ford was in Ontario. But Scheer’s cuts are disturbingly vague in too many instances. He is honest about cutting infrastructure spending by $18 billion, and about killing the federal carbon tax, along with all electric car subsidies.
The Conservatives would also freeze public service hiring, cut the use of consultants, cut down on travel, tighten procurement and scale back on governmentowned real estate. And they would cut foreign aid by 20 per cent, saving $1.5 billion. And they would identify $3.7 billion in the future.
If all that sounds familiar, it’s because in many ways the language is similar to that used by Ford. If you’re a Ford fan, no doubt you are happy with Scheer and his party. If not, Conservatives may have a problem at least in seat-rich Ontario.
It turns out Scheer and friends didn’t need to worry overmuch about the scrutiny brought to bear on their platform. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh made sure of that by mentioning mere hours later that his party would be open to a coalition with the Liberals in order to keep Conservatives from governing.
To some, that’s a nightmare scenario, but it’s not unheard of. British Columbia, which remains one of Canada’s strongest economies, is effectively governed by an NDP-Green coalition. And while coalitions federally are extremely rare, there is precedent. In 1917, the only successful coalition government was led by Robert Borden. But there would also have been one in 2008, when the Liberals and NDP tried to form one, before then-PM Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament to avoid the prospect.
Two things to keep in mind about a coalition government. One, it is not illegal or unethical. There is provision for it in law. And two, the odds are still long. Singh walked back his coalition talk within days.
Barring something miraculous, neither Liberals or Conservatives have enough support to form a majority government. That opens an interesting door. Minority governments have worked in the past, and one can work again, assuming the various players can get past militant partisanship and focus on governing effectively. Canada has had 13 of them, the most recent lasting from 2004 to 2011.
Some argue minority governments are actually better because they force teamwork and compromise, unlike what happens with a majority government. Parties need to work together to keep the government and a productive legislative agenda in place, or else topple the government and face the electorate, who could easily look unkindly on the party that kills a potentially productive minority Parliament. All things considered, Canadians could do worse than to have elected a minority government when the dust settles Oct. 22.