Angry in the Great White North

Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff seems to have an interesting view of the job of a potential Liberal-NDP coalition.  It's primary goal, he seems to be saying, is to bring out the best in the Conservatives:

Michael Ignatieff, in his first visit to Vancouver as leader of the opposition, said a coalition government remains a real possibility.

"The possibility of coalition must remain on the table because it gives Canadians the possibility of stable government," he said.

Michael Ignatieff goes on to trash talk the Conservatives, of course, but it is this "possibility" that intrigues me.  The possibility of a coalition gives Canadians a possibility of having a stable government.

He doesn't mean a stable coalition government, because if he thought the coalition government would be the stable government Canadians deserve, he would simply say he was voting down the budget no matter what.

Clearly, he means Canadians are getting a stable Conservative government thanks to the threat of a coalition.

Thanks to Michael Ignatieff, Canadians are getting the best Conservative government ever!

Again, Michael Ignatieff's view of a good Conservative government is one that acts semi-Liberally, but then many of the policies and positions of the Liberal Party under Michael Ignatieff regarding taxes and stimulus and the oil sands would not sound out of place if spoken by a Conservative MP.

I'm also going to assume that Michael Ignatieff is precise with his words.  The government does not include the opposition.  Strictly speaking, the government is the Conservative Party only.  The government and the opposition sit together in Parliament.

So when Michael Ignatieff says a "stable government", he is speaking exclusively of creating a stable Conservative Party (in the context of elected Conservative MPs carrying out their governing responsibilities).

When Michael Ignatieff then criticizes Stephen Harper in his next breath, Ignatieff is not being inconsistent.  His criticisms should not be taken as a threat to bring in the coalition.  It is Ignatieff carrying on with his responsibility as leader of the Official Opposition to criticize the government.

So the threat of the coalition is doing its job by making certain that Canadians get the Conservative government they voted for, and that the Liberal and other opposition MPs get to do their job of not governing but of opposing.

This is not really news, since Michael Ignatieff has said before that the threat of the coalition is helping focus the Conservative government, but these latest statements seem to be the most explicit about what the goal of the coalition is, as far as Michael Ignatieff is concerned.

The goal of the Liberal-NDP coalition is to keep the Conservatives in power.

I know that is a gross simplification that skips the conditions under which the Conservatives would stay in power, but this is entirely at odds with the way the NDP, and for that matter, many Liberals, view the coalition.

For them, the coalition is the means of removing the Conservatives from power.  Period.  It is not a threat to remind the Conservatives to govern better and so ensure that the Liberals and NDP stay in opposition.

I have to wonder what Jack Layton is thinking when he hears Michael Ignatieff offering his view of the coalition.

But in particular, I'm wondering what Jack Layton is going to say if and when the Liberals under Michael Ignatieff support the Conservative budget, and then Ignatieff goes in front of the cameras to claim credit for the coalition on delivering an acceptable Conservative budget.

Yeah, it'll be fun.