Editorial cartoon by Brian Gable.The Globe and Mail
The weekend press featured all sorts of hand wringing instigated by Ig's statement that he won't pursue a coalition government. Here, in case you've been living under a rock, is what he said to set the chattering classes a-nattering "We will not enter a coalition with other federalist parties. In our system, coalitions are a legitimate constitutional option. However, I believe that issue-by-issue collaboration with other parties is the best way for minority Parliaments to function."
On his blog over at Macleans, Andrew Coyne referred to this as a " blood oath." First off, suggesting that anything a politician says in the heat of a campaign amounts to a blood oath beggars credulity. Second, even if Ig's got his fingers crossed behind his back, so what? A coalition is simply a means to the democratic end. An arrow in the quiver. Any responsible political leader who, should events dictate, fails to advance the cause any way he/she knows how is failing to do his or her job.
The key line in Ig's statement is "in our system, coalitions are a legitimate constitutional option." The rest is posturing to keep the enemy at bay and will be about as relevant once the votes are cast as last week's weather. Coalitions are a means to effect responsible government; period, full stop.
Here's a rough analogy. Polynesian seafarers got from A to B all over the South Pacific long before Europeans turned up with their compasses and sextants. They did so in part by divining the direction of subtle ocean currents using the feel of the boat's pitch and roll against their testicles (I'm not making this up). That was as natural a means of navigation as gauging the speed and direction of the wind. My point is that if after the country hands the pols yet another Tory minority, a Liberal pol has the, er, balls to renege on a campaign "promise" and to do what's best for the country, ie paddle the damn canoe, more power to 'em.