I have been stopped a few times over the last week and asked what I think about the decision to allow the B.C. NDP to form government with the support of the B.C. Greens. My answer is that I think it was the correct decision and I base that response on the constitutional role of the lieutenant governor.
In many ways, Christy Clark's meeting with the lieutenant governor put a spotlight on the nature of our democracy in Canada and demonstrated a rising awareness that the lieutenant Governor has a very powerful and important position in the functioning of our system.
The fact is that Judy Guichon was fulfilling her constitutional role to seek the advice of the Premier as to how confidence may be achieved in the legislature. The fact is that the B.C. Liberals were given a chance to govern but they were unable to maintain confidence in the house thus there were two options left to the lieutenant governor: allow the NDP try to maintain confidence or call for another election. It seems to me that her choice to give the NDP the same opportunity to maintain confidence is the right one. The vote was so very close (both the seat count and the popular vote) that really it is not a stretch to believe that this outcome reflects the will of the electorate. In the end, the lieutenant governor simply constructs the government in line with the election results. Her decision is framed by the democratic process.
For me, the most interesting part of the last few weeks came during the B.C. Liberal throne speech. Some weeks ago, I went out on a limb to suggest that this almost tie might lead to a government that can work across party lines because the democratic election process showed that we have an electorate that is fairly evenly divided about the role of government in B.C. The electorate seems to want policies from both parties that include a growing economy with a strong social contract (meaning that the state does have a role to play in supporting social programs and other policies that lead to better opportunities). I suggested that Clark could "now reach out and say that the electorate is asking for more cooperation across the aisle. [And that] they [could] open the door to all sorts of new policy options." I argued that "[she could] begin to repair the damage with public sector unions....advance climate change policy [and even] demonstrate that a female premier [could] promote equality by recognizing the needs of women and families across the socio-economic spectrum..."
Curiously, that is exactly what Clark did. She essentially took the policies of the NDP and the Greens and packaged them into the throne speech. We know now that this move was largely reported to be a crass reversal of the B.C. Liberal platform and a way to maintain power rather than any genuine belief in the importance of any of the policies, like poverty reduction, which as Les Leyne said in his column in this paper on June 22, the Liberals had been "stone-cold" on in the past.
Yet, curiously, at least one poll showed there was a bump in the Liberals popularity after the throne speech. The Vancouver Sun reported that the Mainstreet Research poll showed that support for the B.C. Liberals had risen since the last poll taken just after the election. The article said it is not clear whether the throne speech was the direct cause of the boost but on some key issues, like childcare and early education spending, "71 per cent either strongly or somewhat approved of the idea of government spending." The article also reported a different poll showed that voters did not want Clark to continue as premier.
What this says to me is that people do want a government that will work across the aisle but they want a government that will do that all the time and not just when it is just politically expedient. It is now time to see if the NDP can learn this lesson. If not, we can then go to an election.
