March 23, 2011

Bon Coalition/Bad Coalition?

Mr. Harper and company have been calling it the Opposition Coalition ever since a year and a half ago when the Liberals, NDP and Bloc Quebecois formerly joined forces to defeat the Conservatives. Mr. Harper promptly prorogued Parliament, which caused the downfall of Stephane Dion as Liberal leader, and saw the rise of Mr. Ignatieff as the new Liberal leader. It seems the Conservatives have taken great delight in using that term whenever the other parties would raise points against the Conservatives that were difficult to defend against. As if a "coalition" was an evil and undemocratic thing to do.

Yet, as the Canadian Forces have committed six CF-18's to the fight in Libya, Mr. McKay (Defence Minister) has taken great delight in declaring that Canada is part of the "Coalition" of allies protecting Libyan civilians (and more likely to topple Gaddafi).

So is being part of a coalition good or bad?

The Oxford Dictionary defines coalition as:
1. Union, fusion.
2. (Political) Temporary combination of parties that retain distinctive principles.

Nothing evil about the definition, except of course if it threatens your hold on power. The United Kingdom is currently enjoying a coalition government, and this is the country that developed the government system that Canadians use. The British accept that a coalition represents a majority of the people that voted in the last election, just as if a coalition government in Canada had assumed power. There is nothing in the Canadian constitution or Parliamentary rules that I'm aware of that would prevent this. But the Conservatives would have you believe that it amounted to a coup d'etat.

But wait a second. The Canadian Government sent fighters to participate in the "Coalition" against Gaddafi forces. So, here it's a good thing (unless you're on the side of Gaddafi, who is in power at least in parts of Libya). Apparently, coalitions are only bad when you're the leader that the coalition is after.

Yet again, the Conservative Government turns something that at one time was black and white into something that is now shades of grey, to suit their own purposes. I'm tired of their antics and I can only hope that they are forced out of office by Canadian voters in the upcoming election. But I fear the memories of voters are short and self-serving.

As a side note, I want to state categorically that I do not support Gaddafi in any way shape or form. He is a despotic dictator who, true to form of any dictator, exploits his citizens. He should be deposed, but I could imagine the way events would unfold, that there would be significant issues to overcome (history repeats itself, yet again). Only a few Western countries have supported the UN resolution on Libya (Germany is opting out, and there is very little support for NATO taking over, which would like cause Italy to pull out of supporting the action by no longer allowing the use of their bases), and the coalition actions are now causing Arab groups to call the coalition "crusaders" and "colonialists", as the Arab League gets cold feet in their initial support for this action. The more things change...

No comments: