Modeling Journey

The Coalition cobbled together by two opposition parties and supported by a side deal with the Bloc, gave Harper pause because he suddenly realized that his government was really just a minority one, and could be tossed out.

It also gave many Canadians hope that the regressive, do-nothing Tory government could be replaced by a centre left progressive coalition government, which would have at least 18 months of durability to implement policies to protect Canadians from the recession.

Now Ignatieff seems to be entering into a revisionist phase, by having second thoughts about what he thought at the time of the coalition, as so ably described by Don Macpherson of The Gazette:

"And on the weekend, Ignatieff said the coalition government would have been unstable, politically illegitimate to many Canadians and divisive - one report quoted him as saying it would have "profoundly, profoundly and durably divided the country."

Maybe it would have been better for Ignatieff to let the coalition be forgotten. Because his remarks on the weekend raise questions about when he reached those conclusions about the coalition. And none of the answers make him look good.

If Ignatieff reached his conclusions after he signed that petition last Dec. 4, what took him so long?

Many others had reached similar conclusions three days earlier, when the opposition parties announced their agreement. It wasn't as if Dion shoved the petition under Ignatieff's nose and demanded that he sign it on the spot without giving him time to read it and think about it.

And if Ignatieff had already concluded that the coalition would be unstable, of questionable political legitimacy and "profoundly and durably" divisive before he signed the petition, why did he still go ahead and sign it?

Did the self-described "true patriot," who has lately been so critical of Prime Minister Stephen Harper for dividing the country, place party loyalty ahead of the national interest?

Or was it his own personal ambition that came first, and a calculation that to refuse to sign Dion's petition might be seen as an act of disloyalty that might hurt his chances of becoming leader?"

These are valid questions, and Ignatieff will have to address them head on and give a credible explanation of his change of course. When did he see the light and become converted to the "Deal with the Bloc is evil, no Coalition government is good" mantra? And why? And what made him change his mind?

Letting these questions linger will simply make the issue fester.

Siding with the Harper demonization of the Bloc MPs will, however, run the risk of the implosion of Quebec support for the Liberals (once they realize that Ignatieff holds the same views about their Bloc MPs' rights to enter into coalition support agreements) as has now happened to the Tories.

When exactly did Ignatieff and his closest advisors decide that any agreement with Bloc MPs was a really really bad thing for the country?