When I was a kid I never climbed trees.
I should have I suppose but I was not a big risk taker and I was afraid of heights... I am still afraid of heights. This lesson should have taught me not to go out on a limb like I did in last week's column. Clearly the branch has broken and I am pretty sure that I have fallen to the ground with a thump.
If you missed it, I suggested that the B.C. Liberals might get some momentum from their minority government and their potential affiliation with the Green party. My hope was that there might be a chance for B.C. politics to bridge the divide of polarization but alas within a few days of publication of my column, the Greens decided that the B.C. NDP were stronger allies than the B.C. Liberals.
As a lesson in political science, the events of the next few months will be very interesting. I have already written about the role of lieutenant governor who will ultimately decide about who will govern in British Columbia.
Christy Clark will be given a chance to recall the Legislature and to present a throne speech.
The NDP and the Greens will then have to vote together to defeat the government in a vote of non-confidence. Lt-Gov. Judith Guichon will then decide whether or not to accept the proposal by the NDP and the Greens that will give the NDP a minority government. The alliance between the parties is interesting because they are not proposing a coalition.
The Greens will hold substantial power in this configuration.
As I have written before, confidence (the key to responsible government) is a key part of the model of our democratic system.
You will read in many news reports that the Greens have agreed to support the NDP on "supply and confidence" issues. A supply, or money, bill is a bill that deals with taxation or government spending. It allows government to appropriate funds to pay for budgeted programs and services.
You will also have read that, on other legislation, there is no guarantee that the Greens will support the NDP so each piece of legislation will be on a case-by-case basis. In some cases, the Liberals may choose to support the NDP.
Every vote of every MLA will be needed to ensure that there is a 50 per cent plus one majority.
It is possible, on less important bills for the speaker to ask if a failed vote was a matter of confidence and for the House to say that the vote was not a vote of non-confidence.
There is, however, a bigger stumbling block that needs to be resolved even before Clark can present a throne speech. In an excellent article that appeared in the Vancouver Sun, Rob Shaw explained the next hurdle in the process of forming a government.
He notes that before any business can take place in the Legislature, the MLAs have to elect a speaker. Under normal circumstances, this election is just part of the process. Like the role of the lieutenant governor, the speaker's role is generally considered to be ceremonial. In this very precarious situation, when the NDP/Green alliance only constitutes an exact majority, the loss of one MLA as the speaker would be extremely problematic. Shaw asked Phillipe Lagass, "an associate professor at Carleton University and a specialist on issues involving the Crown" his opinion about the impact of having a speaker in the role of tiebreaker. Lagass said: "Traditionally, the speaker is a non-partisan referee who uses their tiebreaking vote to continue debate or maintain the status quo. But that's a convention, not a law...there's nothing stopping B.C.'s next speaker from breaking every tie in favour of their own party, though it would be "highly problematic because it would erode the integrity of the office..."
Shaw's article shows the real complexities that lay ahead for any party trying to manoeuvre through the quagmire of parliamentary process. Yet, for those people interested in parliamentary procedure, the next few months will be fascinating.
In terms of my own predictions for what's to come, I think I will stay firmly planted on the ground and say nothing about the longevity of this alliance. We will just have to wait and see.
