MINORITY GOVERNMENTS CONSIDERED: ARE THEY THE NEW NORMAL? Geoff Norquay Time changes perceptions. In the moment of the Pearson years, the House of Commons was in constant tumult and turmoil, and “the country,” Geoff Norquay writes, “was treated to a succession of tawdry scandals…it seemed that national politics could fall no lower.” Forty years on, the Pearson era is remembered “for a bounty of landmark progressive legislation.” Other minority governments, Trudeau (1972-74), Clark (1979-80), Martin (2004-2006), don’t do so well in the test of time. Which brings us to the current minority governments of Stephen Harper, and the role of the opposition Liberals, from Stéphane Dion in one House, to Michael Ignatieff in the next. Le temps modifie les perceptions. Pendant les années Pearson, la Chambre des communes était en perpétuel chambardement et « le pays ébranlé par une série de scandales sordides », rappelle Geoff Norquay. « La politique canadienne ne semblait pouvoir tomber plus bas », ajoute-t-il. Quarante ans plus tard, on parle aujourd’hui de cette époque comme d’une « période faste en mesures progressistes de portée historique ». Les gouvernements minoritaires qui ont suivi — ceux de Trudeau (1972-1974), de Clark (1979-1980) et de Martin (2004-2006) — n’ont pas aussi bien résisté à l’épreuve du temps. Qu’en sera-t-il des deux gouvernements minoritaires de Stephen Harper, dont l’opposition libérale aura été successivement dirigée par Stéphane Dion et Michael Ignatieff ? t is amazing how the passage of time changes percep- “golden age” of modern nation building, the period when tions. For those of us coming of age and political aware- the architecture of durable and treasured national institu- I ness in the Canada of the 1960s, Canada’s 10th decade tions was put in place. Despite all the partisanship of those was a period of brutal and unsurpassed partisanship. Through years, Pearson’s minority governments of 1963-65 and 1965- a combination of mismanagement and hubris, between 1958 68 produced a bounty of landmark progressive legislation, and 1962, John Diefenbaker squandered the largest majority including universal medicare, the Canada and Quebec ever seen to that point in Canadian history. His government Pension Plans, the Canada Assistance Plan, Canada Student finally collapsed of its own weight and because of his para- Loans, the unified armed forces, official bilingualism and the noid leadership style and a cabinet hopelessly divided over Maple Leaf flag. placing nuclear weapons on Canadian soil. With or without the perspective of history, other mod- Diefenbaker was succeeded by Mike Pearson, the Nobel ern Canadian minority governments were not nearly as suc- Prize-winning diplomat, who never really got the hang of pol- cessful as Pearson’s: itics, and who would keep Diefenbaker at bay but never win a G The Trudeau minority ran from 1972 to 1974, sustained majority of his own. The two loathed each other, and as the by an understanding between the Liberals and the NDP. insults flew, the country was treated to a succession of tawdry The political flavour of the time was economic national- scandals — Hal Banks, Lucien Rivard, the Munsinger affair, the ism and the result was the creation of the Foreign Invest- Expo’ 67 construction fiasco — while Pearson lost four cabinet ment Review Agency and Petro-Canada as a Crown ministers to various forms of corruption and other misadven- corporation. Neither survives in its original form today, tures. It seemed that national politics could fall no lower. their original objectives long since overtaken by events But 40 years’ perspective provides an entirely different and changing attitudes. The only other significant ini- view of what the Pearson minorities actually achieved in the tiative of that period was the indexation of old age pen- mid to late 1960s. Today, they are widely regarded as the sions — a worthy initiative, but hardly groundbreaking. 22 OPTIONS POLITIQUES OCTOBRE 2009 Minority governments considered: are they the new normal? G The Clark minority never really today that with the passage of time ments have been in office for a cumu- took shape in substantive legisla- could prove to be equally visionary. lative total of 20 years and three tive terms, and was famously Many people believe that large public months. That’s a little more than 22 defeated on the presentation of its and private investments in carbon cap- percent of the time. The longest minor- first budget. ture and storage may well be the most ity lasted three years and seven months G The Martin minority of 2004 to effective single step Canada could take to (Mackenzie King, 1922-25), and the 2006 had but one crowning achieve- reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. shortest lasted five months (John ment, the negotiation of a 10-year Those investments are about to happen, Diefenbaker, 1957-58). The average agreement with the provinces to and we’ll know in about 20 years how duration of a minority government is improve health care and reduce wait that works out.) one year, five months and nine days. times, but other initiatives were Another important message from Writing on the Web site overshadowed by the sponsorship the Pearson minorities is that noisy par- Mapleleafweb.com, Rhonda Lauret scandal. Neither the national early tisanship and a productive parliament Parkinson and Jay Makarenko have pre- learning and child care program nor are not mutually exclusive, although in sented a useful taxonomy of minority the Kelowna Accord survived the the moment, corrosive politics may governments in the Canadian context. first year of the Harper government, serve to obscure the creative and impor- They suggest that the strategies necessary and the Conservatives suffered neg- tant work that is getting done. for a minority government to survive ligible political damage from wind- Forgotten today in the glow of all the result in three basic kinds of minorities: ing them down. achievements of that period is that by G Ad hoc minorities, in which the gov- the time Pierre Trudeau came along in ernment negotiates support on a s we assess our current round of 1968, most Canadians would have hap- case-by-case basis. Such minorities A minority governments, there are pily offered up their first-born just to are relatively unstable, because there some interesting lessons to be learned bring an end to the partisan bickering. are no durable alliances and no guid- from Canada’s minority experiences over By far the most important influence ing principles to govern interparty the last half century, and especially from of history’s judgment on the Pearson era relationships. Issue-by-issue compro- the Pearson minorities of long ago. is the lasting perception that minority mise becomes the order of the day. The most important message is governments do actually get good things G Loose alliance minorities, where that it takes time for historical assess- done. In fact, the “successful” Pearson “the governing political party ments to develop and mature, so it is parliaments have conditioned how strikes an informal deal with other best to let some years pass before exercising judgment Pearson’s minority governments of 1963-65 and 1965-68 on the achievements or fail- produced a bounty of landmark progressive legislation, including ures of a particular govern- ment or parliament. What universal medicare, the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, the seems incredibly important Canada Assistance Plan, Canada Student Loans, the unified today could be a minor foot- armed forces, official bilingualism and the Maple Leaf flag. note a generation from now, and a decision that appears to be a Canadians look at minority governments political parties to ensure majority sleeper today might turn out to be bril- to this day. As a result, when we began support. Often this involves the liant with the perspective of 20 years. our latest period of minority government governing party taking on certain The reason is that subsequent in 2004, we were told by commentators policies that are central to the events can make or break major deci- and analysts that minorities were noth- other parties’ platforms.” sions taken years earlier, and endow ing to be feared; that, indeed, they are G Formal agreement minorities, in them with the mantle of success or fail- often more sensitive to public opinion, which two or more political par- ure. Back in the 1980s, on the day the more collaborative among the parties ties that together hold a combined Mulroney cabinet made the decision to and therefore more accountable to the majority agree on a written docu- fund the Hibernia project in offshore electorate. Well, maybe not so much! ment that details the specific obli- Newfoundland and Labrador, John gations of the parties and sets a Crosbie told his colleagues, “Depending inority governments in Canada time frame in which the agree- on the price of oil 20 years from now, we M are still the exception to the ment will run. will be seen as either visionaries or rule, but we actually have a fair Coalition government is the final fools.” Today, no one would question amount of experience with them. step in the continuum, in which “two the wisdom of that decision, but at the Canada experienced its first minority or more parties enter into a long-term time, it was far from a sure thing. (There in 1921, and in the succeeding 88 agreement to form the government, to is, by the way, a potential sleeper issue years, 12 separate minority govern- the exclusion of all other parties.” POLICY OPTIONS 23 OCTOBER 2009 Geoff Norquay Cabinet includes representation from yet trust the opposition with a majority,” soft Quebec nationalists and western the members of the coalition.