Dear editor,

In reading the letters to the editor (Record, April 15) I was astonished to discover that, according to Reg Williams, Michael Ignatieff has an "enormous ego which insists that he be prime minister of Canada."

Is he suggesting that Stephen Harper and Jack Layton are just a couple of humble guys who would prefer to sit in the opposition benches? I would imagine that the leaders of all the federal parties in Canada (except Giles Duceppe) would want to be prime minister and I defy Mr. Williams to find any politician who isn't possessed of a powerful ego.

I would think it's a prerequisite of the job.

And for the record, Michael Ignatieff was not the leader of his party after the last election and did not support the move by the Liberals and NDP to form a coalition government with the support of the Bloc. This coalition government would have had Liberal and NDP members in the cabinet while the Bloc had agreed not to support a Conservative non-confidence motion.

Ignatieff  has said that if no party has a majority after this election, he might attempt to form a minority (not a coalition) government even without a plurality of seats. To do this he would need the support of the NDP and/or the Bloc.

Despite Stephen Harper's claims to the contrary, minority and coalition governments are a normal and legal part of the parliamentary system. In fact when Mr. Harper was leader of opposition during a Liberal minority government, he courted Giles Duceppe in an attempt to form a government with Bloc support. How soon we forget!

In a parliamentary system, the prime minister is not the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons. The government is formed by the leader of the party which has the support of a majority of the members of the House.

With a 58-per-cent voter turnout in the past election, Stephen Harper and the Conservatives received only 37 per cent of the votes cast. The other parties garnered 63 per cent of the votes and had a majority of seats.

Since they were able to compromise with each other and find common ground they had every right to form a government. On the other hand, the proroguing of Parliament to evade debate and unfavourable votes is relatively unprecedented and of questionable legality.

There is no reason to fear minority governments. It is said that politics is the art of compromise and in many of the world's parliamentary democracies co-operative minority governments and coalitions are the norm.

Although it's not always the case, some of our most productive governments in Canada have been minorities and some of our most abusive have been majorities. We have a public health system today only because of past cooperation between the Liberals and the NDP.

In his letter, Reg Williams seems to equate the B.C. provincial party with the federal Liberal party. In fact they are completely unrelated legally and philosophically.

One final point to the editor of the Record. You got it a bit wrong in your note at the end of the letter.

The Conservative Party's budget never came to a vote in the House of Commons. After speaker of the house Peter Miliken ruled the Conservative government of Stephen Harper to be in contempt of Parliament, the Liberals tabled a non-confidence motion that defeated the government when it was supported by the NDP and the Bloc.

Stephen Harper's Conservatives are the only government in Canadian history to be ruled in contempt of Parliament.

Erik Taynen,

Courtenay

Editor's note: As previously noted, I regret the error about what precipitated the current election campaign.