Why is coalition a dirty word?

Parliamentary process isn’t usually a sexy topic, but it’s become the ultimate hot-button in the 2011 election thanks to the word coalition.

It’s become a dirty word that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is attaching to the opposition parties every chance he gets.

And it’s a word Michael Ignatieff is doing his best to avoid.

But coalitions are the reality in the vast majority of democratic states, and constitutional experts in Canada say there is nothing to fear.

“It’s a bogeyman of Mr. Harper’s creation,” said Ned Franks, an expert in constitutional issues at Queen’s University. “Coalitions can be very effective.”

A coalition government is one in which several parties cooperate with each other to govern, usually based on a formal agreement that includes a division of cabinet posts.

A slow demise

The idea of a coalition in the Canadian parliament, started its demise in 2008 when then Liberal leader Stéphane Dion and NDP leader Jack Layton attempted to form one in 2008, with the support of the Bloc Quebecois.

“(Harper) called it a coalition of the Liberals, separatists, the socialists, although that was never what was proposed,” said Franks. “It took hold and I think most of the people in Canada who never think much about coalition one way or the other began to think coalitions are a doubt-worthy, untrustworthy thing and that is the sentiment Mr. Harper is still playing on.”

Harper took a chance on Wednesday to reinforce that view.

“We don’t know what that government will stand for,” Harper said. “But we do know the general outlines. There’s no focus on the economy. There are tax hikes, and, of course, these parties have very dangerous and conflicting views on national unity and constitutional matters.”

The comments were in response an interview Ignatieff did with the CBC’s Peter Mansbridge on Tuesday, in which he said:

"If the Governor General wants to call on other parties, or myself, for example, to try and form a government, then we try to form a government.”

The rhetoric brings the election debate full circle. When the writ was dropped on May 2, Harper warned of a coalition right away.

Meanwhile the first thing Ignatieff did was to put out a statement saying: “We will not enter a coalition with other federalist parties.”

Adding fuel to the fire

Ignatieff’s hesitance to state he is open to a coalition now and in 2008 helps to further debase the option, says Bill Cross, the Hon. Dick and Ruth Bell Chair for the Study of Canadian Parliamentary Democracy at Carleton University.

“It encourages the Prime Minister to continue this argument now that somehow it is undemocratic and it would be illegitimate,” said Cross.

“If Ignatieff had formed a coalition in 2008 and he would be Prime Minister right now”, he said, adding that Canadians may have been leery at first, but would have seen a coalition can work.

“Sometimes clarity helps and it seems to me that people in Canada have to know coalitions are not to be feared,” said Franks. “They can be very good government.”

A legitimate alternative

Franks said that a coalition is no less legitimate than a Conservative minority.

“There’s nothing illegitimate or improper about the 62 per cent of people who vote participating in government one way or the other,” said Franks. “I’d make a case that it is less legitimate for a party voted in by 38 per cent of Canadians to claim it governs for all Canadians.”

A government can’t be legitimate without the confidence of the House of Commons, said Cross.

“What we forget as Canadians is that we don’t actually elect a government. We elect a parliament and parliament chooses the government,” he said. “If you are in a minority position you only have a right to govern if you can command the confidence of a majority of the house.”

The way of the future?

“There’s no reason it couldn’t work,” said Cross about the possibility of a coalition in Canada.

“If we are in a situation where no party can win a majority and it may be where our party system is. “

If a minority is voted into parliament on May 2, it will be the fourth in seven years.

“A coalition is a natural response to that so we can have stability and majority parliament,” said Cross.

Canadians and coalitions

Canadians are torn when it comes to coalition governments, according to a poll done by Ipsos-Reid earlier this month.

Fifty-two per cent of Canadians oppose the idea of a coalition of opposition parties forming the government, but 48 per cent support it.

The majority of Canadians would actually prefer to see a Liberal-NDP coalition government (54 per cent) than a Conservative majority government (46 per cent). The margin of error for the poll was +/-3.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Historically, there has only been one federal coalition since Confederation in Canada. The government was led by Robert Borden’s Conservatives and propped up by Liberal and independent MPs who supported Borden’s policy of conscription during World War I. The coalition won the general election of 1917 and pushed conscription through parliament.

Coalitions around the world

Eighty per cent of the world’s democracies, including those with a parliamentary system similar to Canada, have some form of coalition government, says Franks.

“Great Britain has a coalition government. New Zealand has a coalition government. Australia almost has a coalition government. India has a coalition. Pretty well every country in Europe has a coalition. None of them have proven that the coalition itself is the cause of problems,” said Franks.

Coalition governments are especially common in countries like Germany and the Netherlands that have a proportional representation electoral system. Proportional representation systems usually result in minority governments because the number of seats a party gets corresponds directly with the percentage of the popular vote they receive.

In many countries coalitions are extremely formal, but are not announced during the campaign. Instead, parties wait until the votes are tallied and the will of the electorate are known. Then the parties start negotiations, which generally result in a transparent, written agreement detailing who does what.