The Opposition tries to eat it's cake and have it

For the last two weeks now I have been listening to the NDP claim that their compromise to avoid a Christmas election campaign is credible. Now the Bloc Quebecois and the CPC have also signed onto this rhetoric claiming this means then if Martin does not agree with them that it is his and his responsibility alone for the election campaign over Christmas. One slight problem. It is complete and utter fiction. No government in a Parliamentary system of governance could accept this notion. The most basic component of how a Parliamentary system works is the issue of confidence. Confidence is defined by the ability to pass money bills as well as surviving votes of non-confidence moved by the Opposition. We all got a reminder of what confidence meant last spring when the CPC started attaching to committees amendments claiming to be non-confidence motions passed by the House and therefore the government must fall. This was rightly shown to be utter nonsense.

Now we have the various Opposition parties claiming that they will pass a motion of delayed non-confidence. In effect this is saying we have no confidence in the government yet we are willing to allow it to govern for several more weeks including passing money bills in that period. That debases and damages the very notion of what confidence means on our Parliamentary system. This has been corroborated by experts in Parliamentary process and precedents. For Martin to accept this as valid would be to create a new precedent regarding confidence with the effect of undermining the very concept of what a confidence motion is. In other words this affects one of the most basic principles upon which our system of government works. No PM could accept such a notion as valid, not and respect the very process/system of government Canada operates under.

What is really offensive about all of this to me though is that Jack Layton either understands this and is playing politics while claiming to be advancing a workable "compromise", or after all this time still does not understand the basic principles upon which Parliament operates. So Jack Layton has proven himself out to be either incompetent or to be just another political weasel, despite all the claims to the contrary about how Jack is the only honest man in a den of thieves. What is ironic to me though is that until this matter came up I thought Layton had done remarkably well in positioning his party as a credible alternative to the Liberals and the CPC. His actions in the spring showed his flexibility, and his consistency regarding issues and not playing the more typical partisan political games the CPC and BQ were playing really showed statesmanship. Now though he reveals that all that notwithstanding he is as much a politician willing to play with the truth and be dishonest as anyone else. He advances a "compromise" that he should know is antithetical to the fundamental principles upon which our government operates. He claims that this is a valid "compromise" despite virtually every constitutional/Parliamentary expert claiming this is not a serious/realistic notion. Yet because this move allows him to bring down the government while positioning himself as not actually being the one doing so he continues on with this as does his party. While this has useful optics, it is also essentially dishonest and duplicitous.

That the CPC and the BQ would sign on to this deception is no shock given how willing they were to redefine confidence motions in the spring. That the NDP appears more concerned with trying to increase their seat representation than they are with honest politics though was I must admit a bit of a shock to me. The Liberals are correct when they say this is nothing more than political games and not a serious proposal. It is also telling that all the Opposition parties have made clear this government has no moral authority to govern in their eyes, yet they are willing to let such a government survive for several weeks all because they would rather not take responsibility for triggering a Christmas campaign. That to my mind is almost the antithesis of political leadership and the courage of one's convictions. If you think you can make the case the Liberals do not have moral authority to govern to the electorate, then do so. Trying to eat your cake and have it like this shows that the idea of a Christmas election with all the potential hazards that could come from such are more worrisome to all the Opposition parties than their supposed outage and clear "conviction" that the Liberals have no moral authority to govern. I will make this clear...if there is a Christmas election called I will lay the blame at the feet of the Opposition parties and refute the idea that this was Martin's idea only because it happens to be the truth.

Incidentally, this rhetoric from the NDP about how Martin and the Liberals cannot compromise has one slight problem with it. We saw differently six months ago with the budget and confidence issues back then. So we know Martin and the Liberals can compromise with the NDP, we saw it recently. So suddenly trying to paint the Liberals as being incapable of compromise also is a bit disingenuous, another strike against the NDP and Layton in their attempt to portray themselves as a party and leader not interested in political gamesmanship and only in making government work. Trying to make a clearly unconstitutional and unprecedented "compromise" regarding what a confidence motion is as being something the Liberals and Martin are unreasonable for rejecting will work with those Canadians that do not understand how their government works. However, for those of us that do understand just how completely idiotic and unfeasible this "compromise" truly is, what we see is what I have just written, political games and disingenuousness being paraded around as honest and reasonable politics. Up to this point/issue Layton had done a very good job of convincing me to consider voting NDP this time out. Not any longer. I don't like having my intelligence insulted, and I do not like being played for ignorant/stupid where my understanding of how our government works. Any party, any leader willing to do so is not one I am comfortable trusting, especially when I have some reservations about other policies advocated by that party and leader.

This "compromise" is anything but, pure and simple. Those that claim it is reasonable either do not understand how Parliament works, or they do not care preferring instead to use dishonesty that looks good for political gains. This is one of my primary issues with the CPC and one of the reasons I oppose their forming a government so strenuously, and now the NDP have shown themselves to be no better. It is maneuvers like this that end up forcing me to consider voting again for the Liberals, and I suspect other Canadians as well. Pity, the NDP and Layton until this idiocy were actually doing very well in convincing me and likely other Canadians to take them seriously as a potential/credible alternative for government.