On forgotten precedents

Not to pick on Impolitical too much after this weekend's back-and-forth on the Mulronification of the Libs. But this cries out for correction:

On getting more from the Conservatives at the moment or on any issue in this minority parliament, and in light of the Auditor General's recent grumblings, where is the evidence that the Conservatives are rational actors? They've shown themselves to be utterly incapable of making parliament work, of working with other parties in the interests of Canadians.

Now, it's entirely true that the Cons have never been willing to make reasonable deals with other parties based on what's best for Canadians in general. But that doesn't mean a determined opposition party can't get what it wants out of the Cons if it's smart:

Rather than trying to win a better deal only by haggling with Harper himself, Layton instead brought other actors into the picture who had an interest in making sure the funding went through. The end result was that Harper went from making a ludicrous demand to caving completely, giving the NDP almost everything that Harper offered originally at absolutely no cost to the NDP. And it's hard not to think that Harper was worried about trying to work out a deal where the NDP gave something up for fear that Layton would keep the pressure up and get all the more for the NDP as a result.

So no, the Cons don't respond to reason. But they do respond to serious public pressure.

Of course, the most obvious example dates back in 2006 when the Cons first took office - with more recent examples (mostly involving funding renewal) involving smaller concessions. But the only major change since that time is that Harper has gotten into the habit of pushing first the Bloc and then the Libs into agreeing to exactly what he puts on the table - rather than compromising as any minority government should have to expect to do. And it's hardly to the Libs' credit that they've allowed that expectation to develop.

Mind you, the Libs probably wouldn't have been able to summon a major public outcry over attaching conditions to the Cons' slush fund alone. But that reflects only a problem with their aiming low in the first place: if they'd demanded budget amendments which gave a large number of people a significant stake in the Libs' position passing, then it's entirely possible that Harper would have reacted no differently in response than he did when the NDP stood its ground. And the fact that neither the Libs nor their supporters seem to have noticed the one strategy which has proven effective to force changes out of the Cons would go a long way toward explaining Harper's success in pushing his agenda on the country.