Foreseeable risks

A couple of recent columns look to form a nice summary of the conventional wisdom as to what's supposed to happen on Parliament Hill over the next month. But even as pundits set out their expectation that a Con budget will pass, they're also offering plenty of reason for doubt that the result would be positive for anybody other than Harper and his party.

Let's start with John Ivison - but look behind his far-too-charitable interpretation of the Cons' current spin:

When asked whether the justice bills will still be treated as confidence measures, the Prime Minister’s Office seemed to suggest only money bills will be deemed confidence votes going forward. “The government is focused on the economy. At this time, other issues are secondary,” said Kory Teneyecke, director of communications.
...
Rather, Conservatives say the Prime Minister is “reaching out” during the budget process, after being chastened by his near-political death experience before Christmas. The hope is that Mr. Harper will be more focused on the deteriorating economy than on inflicting political ill-health and penury on his opponents.

In other words, the Cons have at best hinted that "at this time", they're focused on the economy rather than on other issues. And even in the face of the Cons' complete lack of shame about breaking previous commitments, Corn Cob Kory won't bite on an opportunity to reassure the opposition and the public that Harper won't try to force a hard-right agenda through confidence votes this spring.

Moreover, even other Conservatives are left having to "hope" that Harper has somehow decided to change from his well-established track record of putting politics above good governance, rather than having any substantive reason for believing that to be the case. Which can hardly inspire any confidence for the rest of us whose jobs don't depend on feeding positive reviews of Harper's performance to the media.

All of which means there's ample reason for Chantal Hebert to be skeptical that any vote to prop up the Cons on their budget will actually buy political peace for any significant length of time:

Ironically, the prospect of a popular Conservative budget only acts as an accelerant on the election flames.

That's because the opposition suspects the Conservatives are preparing for war even as they overtly seek peace, by crafting a budget designed to become the stepping stone to a spring campaign. Having consolidated their advantage in public opinion with a well-received budget, they would be free to engineer their defeat on an issue of their own choosing later in the session.

Of course, Hebert considers that outcome as reason to expect that another election will be forced at some point in 2009, as the parties aside from the Libs find a theoretical "community of interest" in wanting to go to the polls before Michael Ignatieff settles in as the Libs' leader. But surely any Lib with an iota of foresight would anticipate the danger of ending up in that position - and recognize that there's a course of action which doesn't involve being forced into another election on Harper's chosen timing and terms.

(Edit: fixed wording.)