Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s economic update on Thursday has all three federal opposition parties trying to stare the government down. They all said they would vote against it, which (if it happens) will likely trigger another federal election, probably in late January.

That seems like a bad dream. We just had a very costly and divisive federal election, with results that weren’t much different from the 2006 election. Why do we need another one?

I don’t think that any party wants an election, but the Conservatives were using the results of the Oct. 14 election to try to bully opposition parties on two main points — elimination of federal financing of political parties, and a ban on strikes in the public service until 2011.

The elimination of the $1.95 per vote per year subsidy to parties won’t bother too many people. The Conservatives likely figure that it’s a poor policy for any opposition party to defend too vigorously. Yet at the same time, the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois and Greens will be financially devastated if this goes ahead. The Liberals are in debt, and are prepared to run up more debt as they hold yet another leadership convention.

The Bloc Quebecois do virtually no fundraising between elections. They use the subsidy to pay for their campaigns, which are focused in Quebec and naturally are far less costly than any national campaign.

The Green Party wouldn’t have done nearly as well as it did last month without that subsidy. That steady source of funds gives the party money for research and travel and allows it to promote the national leader.

On Friday, it appeared that the Conservatives were backing down in eliminating the subsidy.

Personally, I would be happy to eliminate the subsidy. But to do so, the government has to allow parties to receive larger donations than the $1,000 limit now imposed by law. It also has to allow corporations and unions to donate to parties — something that is currently banned.

I don’t believe in limits on donations, as long as there is full disclosure of all monetary and in-kind donations — both during elections and between elections. That way the public can find out who really backs parties.

As for the no-strike clause in Flaherty’s statement, it is doubtful if it would survive a legal challenge. It seems to be there mainly to provoke the NDP, in particular. In fact, very few federal employees ever go on strike and there is little appetite for doing so. The only exception is the post office, which is now a Crown corporation, and this clause may or may not apply.

The statement contains some good measures and realistic forecasts, but at its heart it is a political document.

Thus for the moment, citizens should take all the posturing with a grain of salt. But if asked, let politicians know an election isn’t wanted.