Post by markymark on Jun 27, 2004 10:06:10 GMT -6
Here is an interesting article from the June 24th edition of the Globe and Mail about the possible role of the Governor General in the federal election which takes place tomorrow:
Tight race creates dilemma for Clarkson
Governor-General could decide outcome, and she's being advised to opt for stability
By HUGH WINSOR
Thursday, June 24, 2004 - Page A1
OTTAWA -- The Governor-General, Adrienne Clarkson, has been advised that if there is not a clear winner on Monday, she should opt for a lineup of parties with the best chance of governing rather than one that could lead to parliamentary chaos.
That could mean persuading Liberal Leader Paul Martin to seek a coalition or other commitment from the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, even if the Conservatives win more seats than the Liberals.
The concern is that Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, even with the most seats, would be unable to win a Commons confidence vote.
The Governor-General has a formidable but seldom-used reserve power in times of instability.
A team of constitutional advisers, legal officers from the Department of Justice and public policy experts under the direction of the Privy Council Office are scrambling to put together all of the options for any possible electoral outcome and the implications of those options.
There have already been informal consultations, but any formal deliberations must await the vote. While the Privy Council Office takes the lead role, the Governor-General is free to seek advice from whomever she chooses, and is likely to.
But the final decision, if she has to make it, will be a political one in which she and her advisers take into consideration the number of seats each party obtains, popular votes, and polls reflecting what people want.
These will be blended with public and private statements by the leaders of the smaller parties and any conditions they attach to their support.
The Governor-General will be advised to choose the option that appears to have the most political legitimacy and the most potential stability. That will include social and political considerations in addition to raw numbers.
Some of the potential ambiguity seemed to be diminished yesterday when Mr. Martin told reporters, "it's a common-sense proposition that the party that has the most seats is the party that certainly ought to form the government."
But Mr. Martin's earlier position of keeping all options open -- including governing with fewer seats than the Conservatives -- is favoured by senior advisers. They think that is a solution Ms. Clarkson would also favour, not for partisan reasons, but because it would have the best chance for stability. No one is interested in having another election in the immediate future, especially since the parties have exhausted their government allowances provided for in the new electoral legislation. There is also a question about forcing another election at the estimated cost of $250-million to the public purse.
The first decision in all of this must come from Mr. Martin. Even if he gets fewer seats than the Conservatives, he has the option of either submitting his resignation to the Governor-General or meeting Parliament.
If he chooses to meet Parliament and can survive for a few months, the Governor-General's only role will be to read a new Throne Speech. But if the government loses a budget or other confidence vote and Mr. Martin asks the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament and issue an election writ, Ms. Clarkson can then decide whether to accede to the Prime Minister's request or ask the leader of the next largest party, most likely the Conservatives, to try to form a government.
This is where Ms. Clarkson's judgment will come into play, and one of the first factors will be timing. She would be unlikely to permit another election in less than six to eight months. But before she calls on the Conservative Leader, she would have to make an assessment whether he would be able to govern and sustain confidence votes.
Another possibility is that even if Mr. Martin resigns, Ms. Clarkson could ask him to reconsider, if it appears the Conservative Party couldn't govern.
Rudyard Griffiths, executive director of the Dominion Institute, which promotes Canadian history, said it would be "highly irregular if not constitutionally irresponsible on Martin's part to not attempt to form a coalition."
He noted that coalitions and minority Parliaments are a well-established tradition in Westminster-type democracies. And since Mr. Griffiths is a frequent visitor to Rideau Hall, his views could well go into the mix, if and when that happens.
But it will come down to the gap between the two leading parties on Monday night.
If the gap is around five seats, anything can happen. If it is 25 to 30 seats, the obvious convention will be followed.
Tight race creates dilemma for Clarkson
Governor-General could decide outcome, and she's being advised to opt for stability
By HUGH WINSOR
Thursday, June 24, 2004 - Page A1
OTTAWA -- The Governor-General, Adrienne Clarkson, has been advised that if there is not a clear winner on Monday, she should opt for a lineup of parties with the best chance of governing rather than one that could lead to parliamentary chaos.
That could mean persuading Liberal Leader Paul Martin to seek a coalition or other commitment from the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, even if the Conservatives win more seats than the Liberals.
The concern is that Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, even with the most seats, would be unable to win a Commons confidence vote.
The Governor-General has a formidable but seldom-used reserve power in times of instability.
A team of constitutional advisers, legal officers from the Department of Justice and public policy experts under the direction of the Privy Council Office are scrambling to put together all of the options for any possible electoral outcome and the implications of those options.
There have already been informal consultations, but any formal deliberations must await the vote. While the Privy Council Office takes the lead role, the Governor-General is free to seek advice from whomever she chooses, and is likely to.
But the final decision, if she has to make it, will be a political one in which she and her advisers take into consideration the number of seats each party obtains, popular votes, and polls reflecting what people want.
These will be blended with public and private statements by the leaders of the smaller parties and any conditions they attach to their support.
The Governor-General will be advised to choose the option that appears to have the most political legitimacy and the most potential stability. That will include social and political considerations in addition to raw numbers.
Some of the potential ambiguity seemed to be diminished yesterday when Mr. Martin told reporters, "it's a common-sense proposition that the party that has the most seats is the party that certainly ought to form the government."
But Mr. Martin's earlier position of keeping all options open -- including governing with fewer seats than the Conservatives -- is favoured by senior advisers. They think that is a solution Ms. Clarkson would also favour, not for partisan reasons, but because it would have the best chance for stability. No one is interested in having another election in the immediate future, especially since the parties have exhausted their government allowances provided for in the new electoral legislation. There is also a question about forcing another election at the estimated cost of $250-million to the public purse.
The first decision in all of this must come from Mr. Martin. Even if he gets fewer seats than the Conservatives, he has the option of either submitting his resignation to the Governor-General or meeting Parliament.
If he chooses to meet Parliament and can survive for a few months, the Governor-General's only role will be to read a new Throne Speech. But if the government loses a budget or other confidence vote and Mr. Martin asks the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament and issue an election writ, Ms. Clarkson can then decide whether to accede to the Prime Minister's request or ask the leader of the next largest party, most likely the Conservatives, to try to form a government.
This is where Ms. Clarkson's judgment will come into play, and one of the first factors will be timing. She would be unlikely to permit another election in less than six to eight months. But before she calls on the Conservative Leader, she would have to make an assessment whether he would be able to govern and sustain confidence votes.
Another possibility is that even if Mr. Martin resigns, Ms. Clarkson could ask him to reconsider, if it appears the Conservative Party couldn't govern.
Rudyard Griffiths, executive director of the Dominion Institute, which promotes Canadian history, said it would be "highly irregular if not constitutionally irresponsible on Martin's part to not attempt to form a coalition."
He noted that coalitions and minority Parliaments are a well-established tradition in Westminster-type democracies. And since Mr. Griffiths is a frequent visitor to Rideau Hall, his views could well go into the mix, if and when that happens.
But it will come down to the gap between the two leading parties on Monday night.
If the gap is around five seats, anything can happen. If it is 25 to 30 seats, the obvious convention will be followed.