Throne Speech showdown (part 2)

As promised in part one of this two-part post, I will here finish my analysis of the fall Throne Speech showdown, and attempt to answer this fall's big political questions: will the opposition parties bring down the government? And will the Harper Conservatives be looking to compromise, or go to the voters?

Part 2 examines the Liberal and Conservative perspectives on the issue. On to the showdown!

The Liberals

The Liberals, of course, have enough seats to save the government from collapse. But whether they will do so is far from obvious. The Liberals have a lot to consider here: the perceived weakness of their leader; their apparent weakness in Quebec; whether or not they can afford to let Harper build up a green image; whether or not they can afford, financially, to conduct an election; and on and on and on. There is a storm cloud of political considerations swirling around the Liberal party right now, and a mis-assessment of the current political climate could at worst lead to a Harper majority or, worse still, a long, cold winter of Liberal shivering in Quebec.

As for where we stand right now, a lot has changed since I published part 1 of this analysis just two days ago. At that time, Dion was declining to set any mandatory conditions on the Throne Speech, thus signaling to Harper that he was willing to make a deal. But I read today on the CBC that Dion has taken a harder line:

Stephen Harper's Conservatives must make major changes to the upcoming throne speech or the opposition Liberals will vote against it, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion warned Wednesday, adding fuel to speculation there could be a fall federal election.

"This hidden agenda will be stopped," Dion said after a meeting with Quebec caucus members in Montreal.

Dion is demanding two major items, discussed by me in a previous post:

The Liberals want the Tory government to make a firm commitment to withdrawing combat troops from Afghanistan in early 2009 and to re-introduce clean air legislation, Bill C-30, that failed to make it into law during the last session.

Dion also said he wants more help for families and combating poverty, as well as a better plan for the Canadian economy as it faces the uncertainty of dollar parity and the unpredictable U.S. market.

If you read my previous post, you'll know that I think the Conservatives are unlikely to bend on these two items (Bill C-30 in particular). But more on the Tories in a second. First, I want to briefly list some of the pros and cons, from the Liberal perspective, of a fall election.

Pros of a fall election:

1) By voting against the Conservatives, Stéphane Dion will appear decisive.

2) The Conservatives will be denied the chance to build up a greener image, and will have to face Canadians with a poor environmental record.

3) The Liberals will be able to tap into growing public dissatisfaction with Canada's role in Afghanistan. If they support a Throne Speech that fails to set a solid 2009 withdrawal date, they will lose their ability to criticize the government on this issue.

4) A campaign will give Dion a great deal of public profile at a time when he desperately needs it. He'll be able to make the news virtually every day, and not have to pay for it (the Liberals can afford little, if any, television advertising).

5) If the current political situation persists, Dion is likely to face increasing dissent from his party ranks. A campaign could act as a rallying point for the leader, or at least cause other party members to sheathe their knives - especially if Dion eats his wheaties and campaigns effectively.

6) The Liberals can campaign like bastards in Quebec, and try to stem this tide of Quebecois dissatisfaction with the party. In the grand scheme of things, rebuilding the Quebec stronghold is far more important to the Liberals than winning the next election.

7) For the time being, the Liberals and the Conservatives are polling neck and neck, even though Harper is overwhelmingly more popular as a leader. That's something, and the Liberals might need to strike while the iron's hot.

8) Dion has lot of room to defy public expectations right now.

Cons of a fall election

1) Stéphane Dion has a weak public image and is unpopular, as shown by public opinion polls.

2) The Liberal war-chest is all but empty, and they will be overwhelmingly out-financed in a campaign.

3) The recent Outremont debacle reveals that the Liberals are facing a potentially historic moment of weakness in Quebec.

4) A majority outcome for the Conservatives could lead to Dion's resignation, and another leadership race would be tiresome and divisive for a party that desperately needs to be unified.

I have to admit, the Cons are powerful, and loom large. But Dion seems to have made up his mind: he simply can't afford to support the Conservatives if they slap him down on Afghanistan and Bill C30. He would appear too weak for words. So he's put the ball in Harper's court, and has signaled his willingness to roll the dice this fall.

I think that's probably the best move. If the Conservatives fail to include the 2009 troop withdrawal or the Clean Air Act in their Throne Speech, then the Liberals can raise holy hell and claim the moral high ground. If the government bends and meets Dion's demands, then he can claim victory and flex some political muscle.

A fall campaign for the Liberals could result in disaster, or it could turn the tide of Dion's leadership. One thing's for sure: it will be an upstream swim.

The Conservatives

Stephen Harper has the ball now. He has heard the demands of the Bloc, and almost certainly considers them flatly unacceptable (the elimination of all federal spending powers in the provinces? Ha! He'd sooner tax the oil sands). He knows the NDP wants an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, and that they are expecting something concrete on that file. And he has heard Dion's recent demands. What now?

I don't think Harper is likely to bend. Why would he give Dion the opportunity to appear leader-like? He's certainly not afraid of an election, given his fundraising, his inroads into Quebec, his progress in the GTA, and his generally popular legislative record. And, as I've said before, allowing a vote on the Clean Air Act would be a major victory for the opposition. He already has a poor green image; refusing to allow that vote probably won't make him much worse off on that file. And besides, he can use an election campaign to roll out all kinds of environmental agenda items.

So I think that Harper will, true to form, read a Throne Speech of breathtaking ambition and fiscal generosity, while quietly ignoring the demands of the opposition parties. Let them vote against all his other goodies, or let them appear spineless. He won't care which; he's in a very strong position.

And of course, rather than swallow this insult, the opposition parties will have to take their chances with a campaign.

So get out your pencils, Canada. I think we're going to the polls.