If they'd tried a coalition at any point in the last six months to a year, the Prime Minister would have asked the GG to dissolve parliament, and she would have consented - because for most of the last year, that government had already exceeded the average lifespan of a minority. There was no compelling reason to avoid an election like we have now.

While the cutting of public funding was certainly the straw that broke the camel's back, the NDP in particular is far more outraged over the cuts to negotiated contracts and union rights for public sector employees. You'll notice that they're not backing down now that the withdrawal of federal funding is off the table.

Frankly, I think the attempt to take taxpayer funding away from political parties looks far worse on Harper for proposing it than it looks on the others for objecting to it. The reason for that law was to eliminate massive campaign contributions by big business or other special interest groups, which often came with strings attached. With less reliance on that money, governments were in a better position to do what was best for all the people rather than just the big corporations with deep pockets. The funding model happens to chafe on Harper's ideology, while fitting neatly into both the NDP and Liberal ideologies - after all, it was the Liberals who passed it to begin with.

I'm content to wait and see how this coalition turns out. I'm not convinced it's the best thing for the country, but I'm very firmly convinced that it's better than Harper playing another year's worth of Parliamentary Chicken, making every motion a confidence motion and daring the House to vote him down. It's partisan and silly, foments resentment and rebellion within the House, and it lacks both dignity and efficacy as a long-term strategy. If this coalition can deliver some co-operation for a change, it will be a dramatic improvement.