So the Liberals won, sort of. They ended up four seats short of a 172-seat majority. But they gained seats from the 156 they claimed with Sunny Ways as their leader. But then, there were five more up for grabs in the House of Commons, making a total of 343 now. It’s getting rather crowded in that Ottawa kitchen.
The Conservative team that had taken the early polling lead in a short campaign lost momentum in some respects, but that’s a hard statement to sell since they also improved their seat count from 118 to 144. That is no downward slide we would think, but rather impressive.
These two parties gained traction thanks to the near destruction of the NDP and, to a lesser extent, the diminishment of the Quebec only based Bloc that lost 10 seats to now rest with 22 chairs claimed in the H of C while the NDP lost party status, claiming only seven seats compared with the 25 they held earlier. The Green Party also lost one of the two seats they had.
What might be significantly bothersome for the Conservative rank and file is the fact their leader Pierre Poilievre lost in his home riding of Carleton, a seat he had held for the previous 20 years.
So this raises the potentially disturbing question. What do the constituents in Carleton know about PP that the rest of us may not have in our bankable knowledge base? Why did they suddenly turn on their party’s leader, their long time representative? There has to be a reason that Pierre is now outside, looking in.
The next question of concern is, who will assume their leadership role in the H of C while PP tries to direct traffic from the perimeter? It could get clumsy and ugly, especially if a new shining light of political fortitude arises from the crew of Conservatives who are actually in the chamber.
Pierre certainly doesn’t want one of those people gaining traction. He’d rather see someone who is not seen as too ambitious or overly clever in the political plotting games.
Unlike Jagmeet Singh who immediately announced his departure as NDP leader following the results, Poilievre wishes to hang on to leadership and will probably seek a safe seat in a by-election once he and the party’s clique can convince a current sitting member to give up a safe chair in the chamber and accept a cushy job somewhere else within the party’s ranks.
In the meantime, PM Mark Carney will make the rounds through Canada to do a bit more glad-handing and may even focus some attention on the west side since that’s where he began his journey.
We’ll have to see how pragmatic he can be. He knows that bipartisan efforts are the only way he can earn respect and get things done to any major degree. He is tied down to that minority government scenario with no other party in the rearview mirror to help him make significant moves. As an economist, he knows a few things about leadership, even though this was his first foray into the genuine political world.
In the meantime, we here in Saskatchewan probably need to reassess our first round of angst regarding another few years of Liberal rule. After all, it doesn’t have to be bad just because a few of their former leaders didn’t “get it” when it came to Alberta and Saskatchewan and to a lesser extent B.C. and Manitoba.
We should probably quit talking about separation for instance. That’s a non-starter. Danielle Smith’s route she claims, would be Alberta separation within a united Canada doesn’t make sense. Our political leadership in Saskatchewan now needs to come up with our own brand and role in Canada rather than blindly follow the Alberta map. If we don’t, then we simply become Alberta’s toady … following their lead, no matter where it goes. They have more people, more oil, more gas, more money, more head offices, more urban choices, and more cattle than we do. We have more canola and mustard. So on the political spectrum we would be expected to fall into line behind whatever Ms. Smith and her gang decided to do for the supposed good of western Canada.
The belief remains within the majority of our population that a geographic split would not serve any real purpose other than to give the finger to Eastern Canada. Yes, Quebec picked up an unfair advantage when they threatened to leave decades ago, but that was a different scenario that involved language, customs and finances. Albertans generally speak the Canadian version of English and don’t have any version of another country or region to call upon to justify departure other than pure anger. So it simply becomes something about money then doesn’t it? Do you think it might be equalization payments as the elephant in the room?
Well, that’s where the political moves are supposed to come into play, and how is that working for you, Ms. Smith and Mr. Moe? We’re guessing not so great since we insist on voting in one direction only. And, as we know, in politics, the winner takes all … well, not really, if the government with the majority wants to play fair.
So, do we give Mark Carney an opportunity to show us that he cares, at least a little about Alberta and Saskatchewan? Or, do we head for the convoys again with placards and swear words, promising to leave Canada unless we get something, but we’re not sure what?
Maybe the options of discussion, debate and negotiation might work if our representatives are sincere and clever enough to meet in the middle to forge out new directions or reshape current scenarios.
We do have an option I suppose. Donnie Deflector, the U.S. President is waiting, not too quietly, for us to disassemble as suggested by Ms. Smith, so he can pick up what would remain.
That isn’t a choice we should relish either. We’re much better than that and right now might be a good time to prove it.
