FIRST THE Liberals suspend Opposition days. Then they filibuster their own budget. Now, having at last been cornered into a confidence vote, they declare the vote is not a matter of confidence at all. Parliament may vote in favour of a motion asking the government to resign, but that should not be taken as an indication that Parliament has lost confidence in the government! So not only will the government decide when or if it will face the judgment of Parliament, it will also reserve to itself the right to interpret what that judgment means. And yet another parliamentary convention crumbles into dust. I cannot think of another Westminster system in which this would be permitted: a government that has clearly lost the confidence of the House refusing to leave office, or even to face Parliament. (There's talk in some Liberal circles of proroguing Parliament until after the Gomery inquiry. I'd laugh, but then I laughed at talk of appointing Tory MPs as Senators.) Of course, the Liberals say they will soon bring forth a budget -- a new one, the previous one having been scrapped -- that Parliament might actually be allowed to vote on, presumably triggering the government's fall. But why such scruples? After all, it's "only a convention" that governments resign if they lose a budget vote. It's "only a convention" that the Governor General decides who to call upon to form a ministry. And so on. Ultimately, the system depends upon people behaving decently, with due deference to convention and precedent. What's it going to take: Thousands of people descending on Parliament Hill wearing orange scarves? HISTORICAL NOTE: Some are already drawing parallels between the current mess and the King-Byng affair of 1926. There is no comparison. King-Byng was triggered by the resignation of a Prime Minister after a in anticipation of certain defeat in the House. What we have here is a Prime Minister refusing to accept a defeat in the House as requiring his resignation. King asked Byng to dissolve Parliament, but was refused. Clarkson, on the other hand, may have to dissolve Parliament over Martin's objections. It's King-Byng in reverse.