Political primer has chapter on selective amnesia

Last month as Parliament legislated striking public servants back to work, the Reform opposition tried to add a side dish to the political stew.

The Liberals had cut off debate and forced the back-to-work bill through the House faster than the opposition wanted.

Reform MP Chuck Strahl announced it was a record of sorts – the 50th time since late 1993 that the ChrŽtien government had used its majority to limit debate.

“It took the Mulroney Tories eight years to get to this point and the ChrŽtien Liberals have done it in just over five years,” he said. “It’s an incredible record.”

Read Also

Producers face the reality of shifting grain price expectations

Significant price shifts have occurred in various grains as compared to what was expected at the beginning of the calendar year. Crop insurance prices can be used as a base for the changes.

In opposition, of course, the Liberals were outraged at Tory efforts to stifle debate.

Strahl vowed that if Reform ever won government, it would be different. “If the choice was between full debate or cutting it off for the convenience of the government, I’d prefer full debate.”

Those are stirring, predictable opposition words in favor of a bit of chaos and inconvenience in their democracy.

Some day, if Reform or son-of-Reform ever does dislodge the Liberals, Strahl may have cause to remember them. Like all governments, Reform would find closure a convenient tool to help get its parliamentary way.

And true to opposition form, the Liberals will denounce Reform’s dictatorial tendencies.

It is not simply an “Ottawa thing.” Provincial governments of all stripes across the Prairies also have cut off debate when they decide opposition arguments are more delaying than enlightening.

It is a safe bet that in opposition, none of those now-governing politicians favored less debate.

It is one of the many unwritten rules of Canadian politics. Something mind-altering happens when the opposition leader takes a ragtag band of undisciplined critics a few metres across the floor to assume the discipline and mantle of government.

In Ottawa, that short walk created two of the most-profound road-to-Damascus moments in recent Canadian politics.

Anti-free-trader Brian Mulroney became a free trader in 1985. Anti-free-trader Jean ChrŽtien followed eight years later.

There must be something in the parliamentary air, in Ottawa and elsewhere.

In Regina, opposition leader Roy Romanow surely would fight any attempt by a conservative government to impose a settlement on striking nurses. But last week, premier Romanow decided there is a public interest that is greater than party principle.

It is a lesson politicians rediscover year after year. As voters across the West prepare for provincial elections, it is a political reality they should keep in mind as well.

In government, politicians develop a selective amnesia about what they once believed and promised. Reality is more complex and choices are tougher on the government side of the aisle.

It is why governments usually defeat themselves, rather than being defeated by opposition arguments. Opposition parties mainly have to look competent, credible and available when their time comes.

With good reason, few voters really believe opposition politicians would do what they say once in power.

In many cases, they probably wouldn’t want them to anyway.