Neil Reynolds' musings about how the Bloc could be offered the chance to form the government of Canada obviously don't have any real chance of coming to pass. But it's worth pointing out whose rhetoric would take Reynolds' scenario a step further.
After all, the Cons are trying to push Canadians to believe that the only party who can legitimately form government is the one who wins the most seats.
It's theoretically possible that the Bloc could be that party, as a near-sweep of Quebec combined with a relatively equal split among the four national parties could position Gilles Duceppe with the highest seat total. Which means that if Stephen Harper actually believed a word of his own rhetoric, he'd find himself supporting a Gilles Duceppe government for the sake of preserving the sanctity of "most seats wins".
In contrast, the reality-based line is that what matters is whether a party can win the support of a majority of the House of Commons. And on that front, any risk of a Bloc government fades away in a hurry - regardless of whether or not the opportunity is offered.
Which nicely contrasts how Canadians should view the requirements for a new government to be legitimate. Would we be forced to accept a Bloc government simply because it ends up on top of the party standings? Or would the national parties have any capacity at all to work on putting together an alternative?
No comments:
Post a Comment