No peace, order nor good government...

June 7, 2005 7:28 PM

And just when you thought it was safe to go back near Canada's House of Commons... When last we checked, a rookie Conservative MP (a former contender for her party's leadership and, some gossipped, the attentions of a certain ex-President) crossed the floor on the eve of a vote on the survival of the Liberal government...
posted by docgonzo (27 comments total)

Belinda Stronach's defection shocked her party -- and most Canadians -- and was the differance for Prime Minister Paul Martin and his Liberals. Shortly before, Conservative MP Gurmant Grewal -- who once boasted to a political reporter he was a key supporter of a bloody African despot -- said he had audio tapes of a top Liberal cabinet minister and the Prime Minister's chief of staff offering him and Mr. Grewal's wife (also a west coast member of parliament) inducements for sitting out the crucial vote. Just after word broke about the identity of Deep Throat, Mr. Grewal would not say if his tapes were made as part of a sting or a fishing trip. The Tory leader, the humourless Stephen Harper, refused to say if Mr. Grewal's shenanigans were sanctioned. When Mr. Grewal finally released the tapes, at least one forensic audio expert said there were indications they had been tampered with.

Meanwhile, in mainly french-speaking Quebec, a provincial premier who had long insisted that a 50%-plus-one vote would be enough to break up the country decided a 76.2% vote in favour of his leadership was insufficient and promptly resigned. Gilles Duceppe, leader of the Bloc Quebecois and most famous for his unfortunate choice of headgear, says he's thinking of running for the leadership.

While the Liberals survived the non-confidence vote -- with the help of the left-wing NDP -- there is no guarantee the government will survive the summer. The showdown will likely come over the government's bill to legalise same-sex marriage. Last week, a group of Liberal MPs met to discuss how to scuttle their government's own bill, and one, Pat O'Brien, later voted with his feet and left the party. The leader of this renegade crew is one Tom Wappel, a so-called "family values" MP, who once opposed divorce, until it allowed him to divorce his wife and marry his secretary.

Although the Liberal-NDP coalition's majority is still razor thin, it was bolstered by the absence of Gurmant Grewal. He's now on "stress leave" after the Mounties caught him soliciting passengers in the departure lounge of the Vancouer airport...
posted by docgonzo at 7:30 PM on June 7, 2005

we must be contagious or something. : >

I can't believe that guy altered the tapes--and didn't even do a good enough job for it to pass muster.
posted by amberglow at 7:39 PM on June 7, 2005

Important to consider the Grewal incident and Stronach together. It would be easier to condemn dealmaking with Grewal if the Stronach deal were not lauded as excellent politicking on Martin's part. Not that this makes Stronach's decision any more ethical (why not sit as an independent?). Not that I'm saying it wasn't smart.

Then again, it should be easier to condemn dealmaking in general. Isn't it strange that Stronach's constituents are bound to her decisions be those decisions for their benefit, as they should be, or for her career? A person campaigns on a particular platform with a particular party. If they leave it, shouldn't they cease to represent those constituents?

Grewal's Air Canada thing... just too bizarre.
posted by dreamsign at 8:05 PM on June 7, 2005

God bless Paul Martin.
posted by mert at 8:12 PM on June 7, 2005

You had to laugh out loud when, on the very first instance of the tapes being examined, they were found to be altered. You can't make that sh*t up.

A person campaigns on a particular platform with a particular party. If they leave it, shouldn't they cease to represent those constituents?

That's just not the way it works. Then again Stronach's constituents are actually getting much better deal with her as a federal Minister than they did when she was just an opposition MP.
posted by clevershark at 8:14 PM on June 7, 2005

No, I know it's not the way it works. I simply think it's strange, as a matter of democratic principles.

Then again Stronach's constituents are actually getting much better deal with her as a federal Minister than they did when she was just an opposition MP.

That's provided that she still represents, in her new party, the ideals she was elected for! Not much of a deal if she's suddenly empowered to break down what her former party stood for, if that's not what her constituents want.
posted by dreamsign at 8:41 PM on June 7, 2005

That's provided that she still represents, in her new party, the ideals she was elected for!

As if people voted for her because of her party. They voted for her cuz she's kinda hot, and they recognized her name. And yeah, I'm generalizing, and maybe not EVERYONE did that - but I can guarantee you it was no small percentage of the votes that she got, that's for damn sure. Most people vote on vague whims and notions of what they think they know, as opposed to having an informed opinion. So, even though she crossed the floor, I'm betting she would get re-elected if there was an election tomorrow. Unless someone even more popular was running against her. Like maybe Carolyn Parrish.
posted by antifuse at 8:53 PM on June 7, 2005

It's times like this that make me wish Double Exposure was still on the air.
posted by Johnny Assay at 9:29 PM on June 7, 2005

dreamsign writes "That's provided that she still represents, in her new party, the ideals she was elected for!"

Actually it really doesn't matter. In Canada we vote for persons foremost. Likelihood is that when she runs next she'll not only be reelected, but she'll actually get a higher margin of victory than last time. The Conservative party is having an awful tough time trying to expand beyond Western Canada.

Besides, it's not like politicians are usually held to what they promise at election time anyway.
posted by clevershark at 9:32 PM on June 7, 2005

As if people voted for her because of her party.

You don't think she picked up party votes? In the last election particularly, many, many people voted along party lines (particularly with the Liberal vote -- me, I was voting for Broadbent because of Broadbent, but otherwise, I was simply anti-conservative, as so many were, and thus leaning Liberal).

This also ignores the people who vote for what she promises to the community, her platform, though you are obviously convinced that people do not vote in this manner (I think they do at a grassroots level, and almost not at all at a provincial or national level where personality and appearance overrides).

Actually it really doesn't matter. In Canada we vote for persons foremost.

Bullshit. We have MAJOR party divisions and animosity, especially since the conservative/allliance alliance, and especially with Harper in control. I guarantee that many conservative voters will feel betrayed by this. How do you think many Liberal voters would feel if their elected rep took their power and gave it to Harper?
posted by dreamsign at 9:38 PM on June 7, 2005

Besides, it's not like politicians are usually held to what they promise at election time anyway.

Hell, if voters bothered to check up on the reps in Hansard, incumbents would almost never stand a chance.
posted by dreamsign at 9:43 PM on June 7, 2005

It's times like this that make me wish Double Exposure was still on the air.

It's a sad day for Canada - and possibly for democracy, and definitely for good taste - when anyone is willing to make a declaration like this in public. Even in jest, which I have to assume it was. Thankfully, that indefatigable gang of greying goofballs at Air Farce is still around to sate the public's ravenous appetite for broad caricature of Canadian public figures and softball satire of Canadian politics.

Back on topic, I've got to commend Stephen Harper for the enormous efficiency improvements he's introduced to prairie populism. Clark and Diefenbaker waited until they'd actually won an election to implode.
posted by gompa at 10:00 PM on June 7, 2005

CanadaZone!
posted by Hat Maui at 10:22 PM on June 7, 2005

Grewal has a long history of strange accusations (I hope that link worked). I think it is confirmed that the tapes were altered (read the June 3rd point on the CBC timeline).

I have no idea what this says about Canadian politics, but it sure is funny!
posted by Chuckles at 11:03 PM on June 7, 2005

dreamsign: Bullshit. We have MAJOR party divisions and animosity, especially since the conservative/allliance alliance, and especially with Harper in control.

I don't think you have to look at Harper to make those statements. Fact is Canada is virtually a one party state. Understand, that is not a complaint, it is just my interpretation of the facts. Personally I would prefer a little more democracy, but not if it means Diefenbakers, Mulroneys and Harpers...

gompa: Back on topic, I've got to commend Stephen Harper for the enormous efficiency improvements he's introduced to prairie populism. Clark and Diefenbaker waited until they'd actually won an election to implode.

Well, Mulroney imploded too don't forget. I don't think anybody can match the efficiency of Kim Cambel, although I really think she was treated very unfairly.
posted by Chuckles at 11:11 PM on June 7, 2005

I like Monday Report and This Hour has 22 Minutes best.
posted by jb at 11:30 PM on June 7, 2005

dreamsign writes "Bullshit. We have MAJOR party divisions and animosity"

Well duh. I think I know a thing or two about this, thank you very much. I meant legally it doesn't matter. She was elected and she's entitled to serve out the rest of her term no matter whether she joins the Liberals or the Rhinos at this point.
posted by clevershark at 12:10 AM on June 8, 2005

Chuckles writes "Well, Mulroney imploded too don't forget."

For all one can say about Mulroney one must admit that the guy knew when to quit.
posted by clevershark at 12:12 AM on June 8, 2005

I meant legally it doesn't matter.

Well duh.

In Canada we vote for persons foremost.

Whatever. Thanks for your attempt at explaining the Canadian electoral system, if that was your attempt. No handy link to shove in your face, but I'm a fed.

I would have to say that more votes were cast in the last election along party lines than has probably been seen in some time. Shark, my comments about democracy and taking the constituency to another party stand. Can we differentiate between the way things are and musing about how things should be? Considering that the majority of MeFites are not Cdn, I think it's worth considering this strange (and right now, very important) artifact of the system. But you go on spouting "that's not the way it works" all you like.
posted by dreamsign at 5:53 AM on June 8, 2005

Lord, wish I could get a blog so I could have some authenticity.
posted by dreamsign at 6:16 AM on June 8, 2005

Living in "virtually a one party state" is a problem, I realise, but watching the right flounder and stumble around ever since Big Chin destroyed the PCs has been fun fun fun. I only hope that Mulroney feels the shame that is his due.
posted by stinkycheese at 6:46 AM on June 8, 2005

dreamsign writes "Whatever. Thanks for your attempt at explaining the Canadian electoral system, if that was your attempt. No handy link to shove in your face, but I'm a fed."

It's an article I wrote about how Stephen Harper and the Conservatives will not be making any inroads in Quebec no matter how much effort they put into it. But of course I realize how much easier it is to bitch than to consider the points being made.
posted by clevershark at 7:44 AM on June 8, 2005

Wow, points being made:

- people DO vote for party over local rep
- people's votes get hijacked when a rep crosses the floor for personal gain.

And the strength of the Bloc is another factor in the current situation, where many citizens don't want another election just to hand more power to the Bloc. Another instance of parties over candidates.

You misconstrue a point, then defensively backpaddle (oh what I meant was...). Then engage in a pissing contest. Enough already. I was talking about a peculiar element of the Parliamentary system. You thought it an opportunity to (repeatedly) lecture me on "how things actually work". Let's move on, sharky.
posted by dreamsign at 9:45 AM on June 8, 2005

The painful thing about all this was watching Evan Solomon and Rick Mercer pretend to be political satirists. They cracked themselves up with the idea that Peter McKay's dog would be the next to run away. Priceless! Mercer would rather cavort in the Prime Minister's pool than sharpen his claws on anyone these days. Of course, it's hard to satirize a country with a federal separatist party.

I agree with the notion that Canada's turning into a one-party state, but I can't see how that's a good thing. If the devil you know is always better than the one you don't, why are we still bothering with elections?
posted by Paddle to Sea at 12:06 PM on June 8, 2005

I'd agree that we're taking the "multi-" out of multiparty democracy; especially as, as history has shown again and again (most recently Dief the Chief and Muldoon) Canada is only a two-party democracy when the Liberals lose. The Tories recent failure to do the two things necessary to capitalise on Liberal missteps -- present a competent, moderate alternative and construct a national coalition of anti-Liberal interests that includes BC wingnuts (isn't everyone a wingnut in BC politics?), Western populists, Ontario blue-chippers, Quebec nationalists and Maritime conservatives -- guarantees we'll never have to say the loathsome phrase: "Prime Minister Stephen Harper."

To be honest, i'll always prefer the Liberal's usually benevolent dictatorship to whatever the Tories concoct. Especially now, as the social conservatives (read: unreconstructed bigots puffed up by their recent victories south of the border) seem to have triumphed over the fiscal conservatives.
posted by docgonzo at 12:34 PM on June 8, 2005

The conservatives probably have a hard time, because they seem to be pretty much like the liberals except with more USA asskissing and more religion.
posted by Iax at 2:13 PM on June 8, 2005

It's as if BC's bizarro-world political silliness has been exported to the federal level.

I'm all for BC's bizarro-world politics: it's very amusing and has been mostly harmless.

I'm not at all keen on our feds going the same way. Real damage could be done.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:26 PM on June 8, 2005