One of the most famous scenes in the cult movie classic Mars Attacks is Jack Nicholson's “why can't we all just get along” speech. In the film, Nicholson, who plays the president of the United States, confronts invading aliens and makes a dramatic plea asking why the two sides can't resolve their differences and join together to work for the betterment of all. That scene often reminds me of the advice often offered to government House Leaders. The recent appointment of Bardish Chagger to the role is no exception. As well as noting that she is a bright, energetic and skillful politician, many were also quick to offer her recipes for success in the new role. Underlying most of the advice was the notion that the House Leader, the minister charged with shepherding the government's legislative agenda through Parliament, needs to be more like the Jack Nicholson character. Through charm and friendliness, they need to persuade the opposition to put aside partisan differences and work for the best interests of all Canadians. As the House Leader during the Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne minority governments in Ontario, and the legislative point person for five years in the Jean Chrétien PMO, I can tell you that unfortunately it doesn't work that way. As I have written before, Canadian politics is a zero-sum game. The winners get to form the government and the losers have to sit in opposition, hoping that by holding the government to account they can convince Canadians that they could do a better job. Opposition parties rarely succeed by being overly co-operative or enthusiastic cheerleaders. Every party in the House of Commons works for what they believe is in the best interest of Canadians. The problem is that the government understands this to be the smooth implementation of their agenda, but the opposition sees it as undermining the government in the hopes of one day being in a position to implement what they see as a better set of policies. This is why the opposition tends to oppose everything, even when they actually don't find the specific measure particularly objectionable — it's all part of a larger strategy. And into this reality comes the poor government House Leader. Admittedly they have some tools, especially in a majority situation. Through procedural manoeuvres they can simply outvote the opposition and force legislation over the finish line. This approach doesn't always work so well. On a practical level, it takes a great deal of time, which limits the number of bills that can be passed. On a political level, it doesn't fit the sunny ways of this new government. Remember last spring when the Liberals introduced Motion 6, a procedural move that would have given the government significant power to ram through legislation. It was highly unpopular and many believe marked the lowest point in the new government's honeymoon. So that leaves a different approach. A good House Leader realizes that the opposition needs to do their job. They let them oppose. They let them say negative things about whatever government bill is under scrutiny and convince their colleagues on the government benches that if they want the House to work they need to take their lumps, even though they have a majority. And if simply giving the opposition adequate time to oppose doesn't result in bills moving forward, there are other strategies. A good Government House Leader understands that opposition parties tend to overplay their hands and go too far in criticizing government bills. A clever House Leader can take advantage of this by forcing the opposition to take such a strong stance that they start to look silly, a great incentive to allow bills to proceed. Good House Leaders also try to understand when opposition parties are opposing an item because they are truly concerned or when they are simply doing it because it's their job. Here too there are levers to pull. Political parties are full of human beings with families and other commitments. Long hours of debate are hard to maintain when your heart is not in it, providing fertile ground for a quiet deal. There are numerous other tricks and strategies to make the House work, but my point is not to catalogue them. It's to disabuse the notion that the key to a smoothly running House of Commons is to somehow transcend partisanship or delegate inter-party negotiations to the friendliest MPs. Just remember, (spoiler alert!) despite his passionate speech, the Martians end up killing Jack Nicholson. Whether we like it or not, much about politics is theatre and this is especially true in Parliament. Where it tends to break down is not necessarily when tensions run high, it's usually when all the actors are not allowed to assume their proper roles. Allowing that to happen is the true recipe for success. John Milloy is a former MPP and Ontario cabinet minister currently serving as the co-director of the Centre for Public Ethics and assistant professor of public ethics at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, and the inaugural practitioner in residence in Wilfrid Laurier University's Political Science department. He is also a lecturer in the University of Waterloo's Master of Public Service Program. Milloy is the editor of, and a contributor to, Faith and Politics Matters (Novalis, 2015).