Getting It Right, re: Canadian Coalition post

A few days ago, I wrote about the possible Canadian governmental coalition which in theory could replace the Conservative minority that currently holds office. I think it's fair to say I wasn't that well informed about this at time of writing; I did presume a few things and, as a result, the article was both inaccurate and vague.

(Photo: The Canadian Parliament building, Ottawa. For licence info see here.)

Specifically, I presumed the figure '62% majority' referred to the proportion of Canadians supporting the coalition. Instead, that figure was obtained from the number of Canadian voters who did not back the Conservatives at the recent election.

In fact, in one poll, 36% said they would support the coalition, compared to 41% who would not. The support would rise to 37% if Harper (the PM) received a no-confidence vote. Support for the Liberal and New Democratic parties has fallen by a few percent since the election.

The other option, which I hadn't considered, is a new election being held (if Harper's govt is thrown out). This was supported, according to one poll, by as much as 56% of the population, if given a choice between that and allowing the coalition to govern.

Lastly, I ended the article with the sentences "Canadians, the world is watching. And the world wants a coalition."

Apart from this being sensationalist and patronising to Canadians given the errors earlier in the article, it is also contradictory to say "the world is watching" when earlier in the post i said that few outside Canada would know much about this situation (of course, myself might not be included in that group).

(Photo: The guy who it's all about, Canadian PM Stephen Harper.)

There is concern over other specific issues such as status of Quebec, which may gain independence under a coalition. Also, an argument against the coalition is that it would undermine Canadian democracy and party politics, which I would also be concerned about if this happened in Britain.

I noticed all these problems and facts just after a quick re-read, and a look at the Wikipedia take on this, which was a little concerning to me.

What have I learnt:

• NEVER type first, read information later.
• Cite more evidence/sources in posts (already done this in more recent posts)
• Always presume you are wrong until proved right, rather than vice versa.
• Show more respect for foreign politics without making broad generalisations.

And for the record, I still support the idea of a coalition, as the impression I get is that even this would be better than another term of Conservative control. Also, and this is not just a Canadian thing, but why are the centre-left parties divided e.g. NDP/Liberals, or Labour/Lib Dems in UK, while the centre-right tends to merge into one party, thus benefiting from the left's divided voter base? Not fair in my opinion, and more than that a block against progressive change.

Whatever happens, Canada, good luck w/ the 4oth Parliament, and I appreciate your standing with Britain and the Americans - among many others - in ISAF, hopefully we'll all be able to bring all the troops home soon.

P-C