The Pearson Centre for Progressive Policy

Progressive Dialogue and Policy for a Better Canada

ELXN 2019; Minority Govt Options

By

October 22, 2019

ELXN 2019; Minority Govt Options

By

Observations on Elxn 2019 + Options for Minority Governments

1. Everyone was a winner, somewhat

First it was a terrifically Canadian election as all the parties won something but no one won too much. Canadian and polite.
The Liberals won government but not a majority and were shut out of two provinces. The Conservatives didn’t win the election but won the popular vote and got 21 more seats than Stephen Harper did in 2015. The Bloc won a whopping 32 seats, got more than the NDP, but less than the Liberals 35 and less than the Liberals’ popular vote. The NDP came back from what seemed like a death march at the start of the campaign, with a leader whose popularity grew during the campaign – and now the potential of more influence in this “hung Parliament” than they have had for many years of majority government. The Greens got three seats up from one in 2015, with a new seat in New Brunswick, but didn’t make more of a breakthrough in the rest of the country. Even Max Bernier who lost his seat, won 2% for his party, which is just about a pinky-toe-hold if he wants to carry on.

2. The Minority Government

The Minoirty government changes everything. The key thing is that the governing Liberals cannot get anything through on their own, in the House Chamber and more importantly, in every committee. They will need some opposition support on every single thing that has to go through Parliament.

For every bill that comes before the House the Liberals would do well to consult with and get on board, at least one opposition party with more than 15 seats, before introducing the bill. That means the NDP, the Bloc or even the Conservatives. Generally speaking though, the Greens with three seats provide them with little help – their main lever is to threaten procedural delays.

And here’s the scary thing for the government, the opposition parties could gang up to the government at any time and launch inquiries into anything that could prove to be embarrassing to the government, including SNC Lavalin. This Damocles sword will both keep them on their toes but also ensure a permanent sense of mistrust and nastiness.

Thanks to the accusations of Warren Kinsella’s company receiving a secret contract from the Conservatives to attack the People’s Party, the Conservatives might just want to put everything of the past into the part. They may just want to “choose forward”!

There is always good reason for Parliamentary oversight and investigation of government missteps, but looking at the US Congress, opposition parties have to decide between investigation and policy progress. The choice is not always easy.

3. A climate change Parliament

This one has the ability to go down in history as the “Climate Change Parliament”, with the Liberal government getting strong support from the three other progressive parties – the Bloc, the NDP and the Greens. But they have to do this in an open and inviting way so the Conservatives are not forced into being the only defenders of the oil producing provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan.

4. The National Unity debate returns

With the resurgence of the Bloc Québecois and the growth of separatist sentiment in Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada is back into the national unity debates. This time may be more seriously in the two prairie provinces. Some critical new outreach is needed with an openness on both sides.

5. New issues that need further discussion

Despite what many say was a campaign without good policy discussions, a number of new issues were raised or older ones got some attention, not a whole lot, but enough that they need more attention now. Here are some
• Climate change
• Affordability, especially housing
• Prairie alienation (and possibility separation)
• Quebec nationalism (as distinct from separation)
• Racism
• Indigenous advancement
• Regional alienation

6. Minority Government

On the matter of Minority government, there are three basic options available:
At the Pearson Centre we can afford to be fans of minority government because Lester B. Pearson led two back-to-back minority governments from 1963 to 1968 in which he delivered on a long list of policies that have defined modern Canada, policies that are still in place or have been further advanced.

Think of Medicare, the Canada Pension Plan, the Maple Leaf flag, the Canada-US Autopact (the first free trade agreement with the U.S.), the Royal Commissions on Bilingualism and Biculturalism and on the Status of Women and the Immigration point system.

Option A: Coalition government:

This is an age-old form, the first of which was the coalition government that existed in 1867. Canada was born of a coalition government, so don’t let anyone tell you it is not in the Canadian tradition. A coalition government quite specifically has members of more than one party in the cabinet, the executive branch of government, and probably has an accord on an agreed upon legislative agenda. Former Ontario Premier David Peterson referred to this as “executive cooperation”, which by the way he did not want to have back in 1985. Besides our founding government though, Canada has only had a coalition one other time, during World War II when the issue of conscription was deeply divisive within the major parties and a coalition of the major parties was needed.

Combinations of the above are possible, where the governing party may sign an accord on some issues, but yet expect the support of other parties where the accord-partners are not in agreement. Depending on the issue though, a vote with the non-signatory could cause the accord partners to pull the plug. Coalitions are usually made up of one of the major parties and other smaller parties and are common in many countries.

A “Grand Coalition” usually refers to an unusual coalition of the two major antagonists and even others, and usually is built around some major issue of the times or some kind of national crisis, or when one or more of the minor parties are seen as too toxic for ether of the larger parties to work with.
In 2007, the Liberals and NDP, proposed to topple the newly elected minority Conservative government of Stephen Harper and form a coalition government, with the support of the Bloc Quebecois – which would be supportive but not in the cabinet. This was during the famed Prorogation crisis, when Prime Minister Harper sought and was allowed to prorogue the House for several week while the opposition cooled its jets – rather than face immediate defeat.

Option B: Minority government vote-by-vote:

(This is my term as one does not exist currently.) This is where the party with the most seats is able to get the support of other MPs, however grudging it may be, and survive on a vote-by-vote basis. In this approach, they may count on different parties for different votes. Other parties may also abstain or not vote, to allow the governing party to survive a vote, rather than cause an election, that they or no one else wants. The two Conservative governments led by Stephen Harper from 2006 to 2011 ran on this system as did the Pierre Trudeau government of 1972-74, the Joe Clark government of 1979, the Paul Martin government of 2004 to 2006 and the Pearson governments mentioned earlier.

This is usually the case if the largest party either feels very confident, or is simply not able to work with any of the smaller parties.

Option C: Government by Accord – or Minority Government in Alliance:

(These are also my terms as one does not exist currently.) This is a minority government of one party that signs an accord of some sort with one or more parties agreeing to a series of polices which may include legislative and other policies. There is such an accord in place in BC as there was in the 1985-1987 period in Ontario between the Liberals and NDP (led by David Peterson and Bob Rae, respectively). In the latter case, officials from the two parties met every week to ensure that the accord was being implemented, and in exchange the NDP kept supporting the Liberals for some two years. David Peterson referred to this as “legislative cooperation”. There is also an agreement in the current New Brunswick legislature, where the minority governing Progressive Conservatives have the support of the three-member People’s Alliance.

Other relevant issues

Worth mentioning that this is one of the few situations when the Governor General actually exercizes her powers, albeit dictated by rules and traditions rather than her own thoughts or preferences. Given the record of Governor General Julie Payette to eschew tradition on a lot of issues, this adds another layer of uncertainty. What if she did decides to do something unconventional? There is almost no one to challenge her power….may be the Supreme Court? Unchartered territory for sure. A constitutional crisis is not out of the question.

Minority governments are generally characterized by instability as all parties are on the edge of an election at all times, perhaps a bit less if there is a signed accord, but still just a bit less stable.

On the positive side though, minority governments can be more creative and productive if they work well as they are supposed to. That is by cooperation. Back to Pearson, he proved minority governments can be very good for policy development.
Cooperation over aggression

It does take a change in culture of the parties – and the media. For the media rather than reporting positively on those that stand up to each other and vote against each other, they should report positively on those who compromise and work together. Cooperation good. Bullying and fighting bad.

One downside though is that it is harder to hold parties to account as they generally have to abandon or change some part of their platform in order to negotiate a partnership. It is the fulcrum of the cut and thrust of compromise where some issues get sacrificed on the alter of getting power or providing stable government, depending on one’s perspective.

Andrew Cardozo of president of the Pearson Centre. He has been an adjunct professor at Carleton University.