McLeod Group Blog, Sept. 14, 2015
[Third of three McLeod Group blogs about Coalitions]
In a two-party political system, two parties dominate the political scene, and in an election one has the expectation of forming a majority government.
The Canadian two-party system has become something of a fiction, played out in the hopes and aspirations of three different parties and often in majorities that are that in name alone. The Harper ‘majority’ of 2011—54% of the seats—was achieved with only 39.6% of the popular vote. The NDP ‘sweep’ in Alberta was similar: 64% of the seats with only 41% of the popular vote.
This isn’t good democracy, and the losers know it. Tom Mulcair and Justin Trudeau have promised to fix the problem federally if either gets the chance.
But the chance may not arise. After the coming election, either the NDP or the Liberals may be stuck with a minority government, encouraging a repeat of the crass calculation that politicians in such situations always make: It will be better next time. The beat may simply go on. And on.
Like it or not, we now have a multiparty system, which means that parties need to be realistic about the possibility of a minority government and open to new ways of governing.
The Conservatives have benefitted handsomely from the current system and may well do so in future, perpetuating the current arrangement in which a government with 39% of the popular vote can transform the country, silencing scientists, eliminating statistics, punishing critics, defunding hard-won social programs and ramming through draconian, democracy-changing legislation buried in elephantine omnibus bills.
Then there is the spectre of a chastened Harper, limping along after October with another minority government of his own and counting the days until the resurrection of a Conservative majority. If that were to happen, it would be unfair to ascribe responsibility to the voters. Even in 2011, half of them voted, collectively, for the NDP and the Liberals. No, the responsibility for another Harper minority would fall squarely on the shoulders of the two main opposition parties, on their inability to form a coalition, their unwillingness to compromise in the face of an extended Conservative mandate, and on what Freud so aptly called ‘the narcissism of small differences.’
If the NDP and Liberals, faced with another Harper minority, are unwilling or unable to form a coalition reflecting the popular will of Canadian voters, their leaders should be replaced by people who have a better understanding of democracy and who are willing to put the welfare of the country ahead of personal ambition.
Informal arrangements (e.g. the 1972-4 Liberal minority supported by the NDP) have their positive aspects, but they are inherently unpredictable and short-lived. It might be too much to hope, faced with the possibility of a minority government of their own, that the NDP or Liberals would still consider a formal coalition. It would be nice to think that the narcissism of small differences could be overcome in the interests of both democracy and Canada.
If the stars align and a coalition government were to be formed, one of its first tasks would be the electoral reform that Mulcair and Trudeau have promised, so that we never again have a ‘majority’ government run by a party that 60% of the electorate don’t want.