Who wants two elections in one year?

As most of you know, the 2005/06 Federal Budget was passed on Wednesday in a rather unusual fashion. The Liberals supported it; the Bloc Quebecois and NDP opposed it; while Conservatives abstained from voting.

As a new Member of Parliament, I must say I never anticipated that on the occasion of my first Budget vote, I would register my displeasure with the government and its budget by showing up in the House for the vote but remaining in my seat.

As the Official Opposition, it is the duty of Conservatives to hold the Liberal government to account and offer voters a viable governing alternative. In terms of meeting this responsibility, I believe that Conservative MPs act on that duty every day with our vigorous opposition to what this Liberal government is doing poorly or not doing at all.

At the same time, I believe it is also incumbent upon any responsible opposition party to take into account the consequences of their actions, and accept that they will be held accountable for the consequences of those actions by Canadian voters in the next election.

It’s important to realize that this minority parliament is unlike any other in Canadian history. Unlike the Diefenbaker minority of the 1950’s, or the Pearson minorities of the 1960’s, or the Trudeau and Clark minorities of the 1970’s, this minority parliament is subject to the presence of a 54 seat separatist BQ caucus that has no interest in making the Canadian Parliament – or Canada for that matter – work for anybody.

And it’s clear that BQ leader Gilles Duceppe wants an election right away to take advantage of voters’ outrage in Quebec regarding the Gomery Commission, and even more importantly for him, to allow Duceppe to depart Ottawa for provincial politics later this year and run to become the next Premier of Quebec.

As a result, Conservative leader Stephen Harper took careful heed of the aggressive rhetoric coming from the BQ earlier this month and reacted accordingly. Harper could see that if Conservative MPs voted against the budget, then Canada would immediately be plunged into another federal election campaign.

After careful consideration, Harper decided not to trigger an election but rather to continue pursuing improvements to the budget and government agenda through the day-to-day tools of legislation, estimates and committee work on Parliament Hill.

He also examined the number of urgent problems the government is currently dealing with: the border is still closed to Canadian beef; a national child care strategy that doesn’t give parents the choice of staying home to raise their children; a lack of direction on the Kyoto Accord; and a long gun registry that still doesn’t produce any results.

If an election was triggered, the government would basically shut down and there would be no direction for at least two months, leaving thousands of farmers and Canadian families without answers or solutions.

I agree with my leader’s decision. I believe that Stephen Harper took the difficult but most responsible course of action – to make every possible effort to make this minority parliament work, and not to waste $300 million on a second election in less than a year.