A Fall 2007 Federal Election?

[August1991]

Well of course, this is going to be the debate on all the political pundit TV shows, Internet forums and among columnists. Since this is an Internet forum, we might as well start the debate now.

Assuming Harper wants an election (and given how the stars are alligning in the Tory heavens, it's hard to believe that he doesn't), then how would he get one? It appears that he has already given himself the option. He's moved money into the account and written the cheque, now all he has to do is sign it.

We will have a new parliament on 17 October with a Throne Speech a few days afterwards. The House will vote on this Speech and this is considered a confidence vote. So, all Harper has to do is put into the Speech a few points for which the three opposition parties simply cannot vote in favour. These would be points that, despite how much Dion or Duceppe want to avoid an election, the two simply could not accept.

I think the most distinct possibility is for the government to state in the Throne Speech that Canada's Afghan mission will continue, if necessary, after February 2009. The NDP would have to vote against that, and so would the Liberals and the Bloc.

The election would then turn on Canada's Afghan mission. This is an election that Harper could win.

First, there would be three opposition parties dividing the anti-vote and only the Tories collecting the pro votes. Second, the Tories would collect all the pro-military votes in the Maritimes where the Tories haven't done well. Third, the urban vote is a write-off for the Tories anyway. Fourth, non-Montreal Quebec won't turn on this issue or the Throne Speech. The ADQ success in the past Quebec election and the poor showing of the BQ in the three recent by-elections shows that the Tories have a good chance of getting their 20 or so extra seats from the BQ in ridings outside of Montreal.

Another issue could also force the three opposition parties to vote against the government. For example, the Tories could openly reject Kyoto in the Throne Speech. I don't think Harper will choose such an issue though, and I don't think he'll put in several issues. If he did so, he might risk alienating to many groups.

Harper's the keen strategist apparently so all eyes now will turn to the upcoming Throne Speech.

[jdobbin]

The election would then turn on Canada's Afghan mission. This is an election that Harper could win.

First, there would be three opposition parties dividing the anti-vote and only the Tories collecting the pro votes. Second, the Tories would collect all the pro-military votes in the Maritimes where the Tories haven't done well. Third, the urban vote is a write-off for the Tories anyway. Fourth, non-Montreal Quebec won't turn on this issue or the Throne Speech. The ADQ success in the past Quebec election and the poor showing of the BQ in the three recent by-elections shows that the Tories have a good chance of getting their 20 or so extra seats from the BQ in ridings outside of Montreal.

Another issue could also force the three opposition parties to vote against the government. For example, the Tories could openly reject Kyoto in the Throne Speech. I don't think Harper will choose such an issue though, and I don't think he'll put in several issues. If he did so, he might risk alienating to many groups.

Harper's the keen strategist apparently so all eyes now will turn to the upcoming Throne Speech.

I think Liberals will not vote down the government. They will abstain or have members absent but they won't vote the throne speech down.

It will be up to Harper himself to call the election rather than hoping for the Opposition to give him the reason to dissolve Parliament.

[1967100]

If I was PM, 32 percent support for my party won't cut it for me. I don't see how any Prime Minister would want an election with what the Conservatives how been pulling through in the polls.

Edited September 18, 2007 by 1967100

[Higgly]

Steve's waiting to see what happens in the Ontario election. That's why he prorogued. He's got two throne speeches ready. Maybe more.

[jdobbin]

If I was PM, 32 percent support for my party won't cut it for me. I don't see how any Prime Minister would want an election with what the Conservatives how been pulling through in the polls.

Decima says even with all of Dion's troubles, they are still tied with the Liberals in three weeks of polls.

[geoffrey]

I think Liberals will not vote down the government. They will abstain or have members absent but they won't vote the throne speech down.

It will be up to Harper himself to call the election rather than hoping for the Opposition to give him the reason to dissolve Parliament.

Easy. Call it because the Liberals are attempting to legislate the hypocritical and impossible from opposition (the Kyoto bill).

Call it because the Senate refuses to pass Senate reform legislation. Have it as a sort of Senate referendum. Liberal Senators refusing progress certainly is a tasty election snack for CPC supporters.

Call it because the opposition has blocked this that and the other thing.

We are far enough from the last election now that regardless of the reason of Harper calling an election, it will not play into the voting equation.

Plus, if the Liberals support the throne speech (or abstain), it would look terrible upon Dion. "So you have confidence in the government? What of Kyoto? Afghanistan? All that other bullshit we complain about." Nah. Dion would look terribly weak supporting or allowing the throne speech.

He must vote against it. His leadership hinges on looking tough in the coming month.

[jdobbin]

Easy. Call it because the Liberals are attempting to legislate the hypocritical and impossible from opposition (the Kyoto bill).

Call it because the Senate refuses to pass Senate reform legislation. Have it as a sort of Senate referendum. Liberal Senators refusing progress certainly is a tasty election snack for CPC supporters.

Call it because the opposition has blocked this that and the other thing.

We are far enough from the last election now that regardless of the reason of Harper calling an election, it will not play into the voting equation.

Plus, if the Liberals support the throne speech (or abstain), it would look terrible upon Dion. "So you have confidence in the government? What of Kyoto? Afghanistan? All that other bullshit we complain about." Nah. Dion would look terribly weak supporting or allowing the throne speech.

He must vote against it. His leadership hinges on looking tough in the coming month.

I have no problems if Harper calls it. It will make the fixed election date a mockery though and people will find it hard to believe that Harper was ever serious about it in the first place.

I think Dion will probably find a reason to vote for the throne speech or have enough members who abstain so that is passed.

I guess this all depends on whether Harper really wants to force the issue of an election by being inflexible on the throne speech. If he says he is going to renew the combat role till 2012, the three parties might indeed vote against them. Some think that Afghanistan and fighting into 2012 would be a winning issue for them. I tend to think it won't be.

It would seem some on the right are hankering for an election immediately though. After Decima's poll today showing they are at 32%, they must think they will have a lot of growth over the election campaign.

[August1991]

Call it because the Senate refuses to pass Senate reform legislation. Have it as a sort of Senate referendum. Liberal Senators refusing progress certainly is a tasty election snack for CPC supporters.

I agree with Dobbin that Harper cannot call the election. He has passed fixed date legislation.

OTOH, I disagree with Dobbin that Dion can find some way around a Throne Speech deliberately set for him (and Layton and Duceppe) to vote against. Not having deputies show? Quite a few would have to, uh, have a cold.

Radical Senate reform would be a wonderful issue to put in the Throne Speech but the BQ and/or NDP might vote with the government. Extending the Afghan mission beyond 2009 and Senate reform might be too complicated.

If Harper is going to do this, then he better pick an issue that matters, and that divides starkly the Conservatives from the other three parties. Extending the Afghan mission does that.

It would seem some on the right are hankering for an election immediately though. After Decima's poll today showing they are at 32%, they must think they will have a lot of growth over the election campaign.

Agreed. A cold, hard look at the polls will be sobering for Harper.

Steve's waiting to see what happens in the Ontario election. That's why he prorogued. He's got two throne speeches ready. Maybe more.

I disagree. Unliek the recent Quebec election, the Ontario election will not have much of an effect on federal decisions or strategies. Edited September 19, 2007 by August1991

[Michael Bluth]

Radical Senate reform would be a wonderful issue to put in the Throne Speech but the BQ and/or NDP might vote with the government.

A true triple E senate would be something great to put to test the will of the opposition to avoid an election.

People don't hold very strong opinions against reforming the senate in this way. They might not care, or maybe want it abolished. But does anybody ever have really strong opinions about abolishing something?

If the opposition doesn't have the cohones to pull the plug then hey a reformed Senate ain't a bad thing.

[jbg]

It will be up to Harper himself to call the election rather than hoping for the Opposition to give him the reason to dissolve Parliament.

He doesn't have that power any more, remember?

August1991, good analysis.

[jdobbin]

He doesn't have that power any more, remember?

August1991, good analysis.

As far as I can tell, Harper can still go to the Goevrnor-General with or without a vote of Parliament and say that his government has lost the confidence of the members.

http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/lgs/default.asp?L...=20060530_e.htm

This does not affect the prerogative of the Prime Minister to advise dissolution at any time prior to the stipulated date, in the event of a loss of confidence. Where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, a general election would be held in accordance with existing practices. The general election following this would then be set for the third Monday in October in the fourth calendar year.

The Governor-General is free to determine whether to dissolve Parliament on the prime minister's behest regardless of the legislation since she has the Constitutional authority.

The power to dissolve Parliament, an historical prerogative of the Crown considered essential to the principle of responsible government, is expressly conferred on the Governor General in section 50 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 50 of the Constitution Act, 1867 provides: “Every House of Commons shall continue for Five Years from the Day of the Return of the Writs for choosing the House (subject to be sooner dissolved by the Governor General), and no longer.”

Simply put, confidence is whatever the prime minister says it is. A vote on a money bill is an automatic election. The prime minister has discretion on other matters of confidence thereafter.

Edited September 20, 2007 by jdobbin

[Shakeyhands]

Unliek the recent Quebec election, the Ontario election will not have much of an effect on federal decisions or strategies.

How so August? This is a very interesting comment....

[Topaz]

I don't think Harper will call an election because if he does, that would open up the Lib. party to elected a new leader and the next leader may be the one where Harper would meet his match. Its better for him to leaves things alone and just trash Dion in every "Question Period"!! The only reason to call one is if he thinks he can get a majority, then he wouldn't have to worry about the voting on Afganistan, he would have the majority to extend it again.

[Visionseeker]

The Liberals do not want an election before 2008. They need a new calendar year to draw enough finances to meet the election spending maximum. They are also waiting to see if the Commissioner of Elections Canada refers the Conservatives election advertising spending to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Lastly, they know that each initiative Harper releases will either alienate his base or shorten the tent.

The worst thing to have at election time is a divisive record to run on.

As for the Conservatives, it will be interesting to see what they dish-out with the Speech from the Throne. I have my suspicions, but I sure as Hell hope there are no hints of Constitutional overtures - the country simply wouldn't survive it.

[Michael Bluth]

As for the Conservatives, it will be interesting to see what they dish-out with the Speech from the Throne. I have my suspicions, but I sure as Hell hope there are no hints of Constitutional overtures - the country simply wouldn't survive it.

I hope you are right. It will be ineresting to see what the Conservatives do.

I agreed with the call for radical Senate reform, but I fear that can't be done without Constitutional overtures...

[August1991]

How so August? This is a very interesting comment....

Quebec voters are in flux now, and Harper is shopping for a majority. The Conservatives need about 20-30 more seats to form one and Quebec offers potential.

More seriously, if Harper is to be a great Prime Minister, he must win in Quebec. So obviously, what happens in Quebec now matters.

----

In Ontario, the Liberals will get about 50 seats and the Tories about 50 seats - or so. In the last federal election in Ontario, the Liberals were no longer a monopoly. Harper, unlike Stockwell Day and Preston Manning, is a viable candidate in central English Canada. Maybe it's because Stephen is a more acceptable first name. Anyway, the issue is now Quebec - not Ontario.

Edited September 21, 2007 by August1991

[August1991]

The Liberals do not want an election before 2008. They need a new calendar year to draw enough finances to meet the election spending maximum. They are also waiting to see if the Commissioner of Elections Canada refers the Conservatives election advertising spending to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Lastly, they know that each initiative Harper releases will either alienate his base or shorten the tent.

The worst thing to have at election time is a divisive record to run on.

That's an interesting (and intelligent IMV) take on the question. I think too that the Liberals would be foolish to go for an election now. (I think too the BQ would also be foolish to vote for one.)

Yet, Harper may choose to set a Throne Speech so that both the BQ and the PLC vote against the government and cause an election. (Layton wants an election now!)

If Harper chooses his issue well, he can provoke the BQ and PLC. But there's more. I think Duceppe really wants to debate the issue of sovereignty. He's tired of these tergiversations. He was going to run for leader of PQ, and then withdrew. Enough is enough. As to Dion, surely, he must be thinking about quitte ou double.

If we have an election, there's a good chance, given the polls, that we'll be back at a minority government. I think Dion can consider that to be a victory.

It's like 1965.

Edited September 21, 2007 by August1991

[Visionseeker]

That's an interesting (and intelligent IMV) take on the question. I think too that the Liberals would be foolish to go for an election now. (I think too the BQ would also be foolish to vote for one.)

Yet, Harper may choose to set a Throne Speech so that both the BQ and the PLC vote against the government and cause an election. (Layton wants an election now!)

If Harper chooses his issue well, he can provoke the BQ and PLC. But there's more. I think Duceppe really wants to debate the issue of sovereignty. He's tired of these tergiversations. He was going to run for leader of PQ, and then withdrew. Enough is enough. As to Dion, surely, he must be thinking about quitte ou double.

If we have an election, there's a good chance, given the polls, that we'll be back at a minority government. I think Dion can consider that to be a victory.

It's like 1965.

Well I think we follow the same stream on this regarding Liberal aims, but I have to disagree on your take of the Bloc and NDP.

First, Jack needs to try and build in Quebec and get the most out of Mulclair. Its a foolish entreprise IMO, but one he has to entertain nonetheless.

Second, in spite of Duceppe's personal motives, he has a party that has lost its purpose and is bleeding in the polls. His hold is severely weakened and electoral suicide is not in the offing for his clan. Of all the leaders, Duceppe is without question the weakest right now.

[jdobbin]

Here's what the Bloc says:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

The Bloc Quebecois has issued a five-point set of demands for the Conservative minority government that appears to be a muscled reaction the party's bruising in byelections earlier this week.

It also appears to be setting the stage for a fall election.

In early September, Prime Minister Stephen Harper decided to delay the opening of the fall session of Parliament by a month. He will go back to the house with a speech from the throne on Oct. 16, setting up the possibility of a fall election if the opposition parties vote against it.

Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe has repeatedly threatened to topple the government unless there is a clear mandate to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by February 2009.

The demands set out Friday are that the government:

* Eliminate all federal spending powers in provincial jurisdictions;

* Respect the Kyoto Protocol and establish targets for greenhouse gas reductions;

* Assistance for workers in the ailing forest industry;

* Changes to supply management for dairy farmers;

* And finally, "non négociable," in the Throne Speech, an announced end to the combat mission in Afghanistan by Feb. 2009.

Edited September 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[August1991]

Duceppe is all but saying that he will vote against the government. IOW, for the Bloc's constituency in Montreal, he can no longer be perceived as propping up Harper. I guess it's over to Dion now to see if he'll vote with the Tories. If not, we'll have an election in late November or early December.

As to the five demands (and what is it about Quebec and five demands...), the federal spending power is one that Harper has said he may incorporate into policy. It's interesting and Harper may use this as a provocation in the Throne Speech. On principle, Dion will accept no limit and he would certainly vote against the government. Duceppe, OTOH, will want something ironclad. Harper may find a way to be between the two and then run the election as the voice of sweet reason.

The milk quota demand is laughable. Duceppe is a Montrealais trying to sound rural. It's also laughable because Quebec dairy farms have 50% of the production quotas in Canada. IOW, if Quebec were to be independant, Quebec dairy farmers would lose their captive clientele. Anyway, you can be certain that Harper will concede whatever the dairy farmers want so this won't be an issue.

If we are going to have an election, then the Throne Speech will amount to the Conservative's campaign platform.

[Newfie Canadian]

So the Bloc is spoiling for a fight, or so it appears. Are the Liberals? Not likely, are they? Is Dion in particular? The knives are already sharpening after the by-election disaster (one could argue that they were sharpened the second he won the leadership, of course).

The Throne Speech will tell us, of course. If the CPC doesn't want an election, and they very well may want one, then Harper will throw the Liberals and or the NDP a bone.

What that bone would be I don't know, as it would almost certainly have to be something that the Bloc wouldn't be able to take credit for.

[August1991]

There's little chance Harper will even pretend to try to meet those conditions. A spokesperson for the prime minister urged Duceppe to reconsider whether he wants to force an election.

"Quebecers were clear in the byelections – they do not want an election now," said Dimitri Soudas.

"The Bloc should listen and not be reckless."

But Duceppe insisted he'll stick to his guns and live with the consequences.

"If it means an election, it means an election," he told reporters following his speech.

....

NDP Leader Jack Layton, emboldened by the byelection results, has warned his party will vote against the throne speech unless it contains a "complete change of direction" on the environment and the Afghanistan mission.

Dion has also spelled out his own conditions for supporting the throne speech – including revival of the Clean Air Act and a commitment to a 2009 exit date from Afghanistan – and has warned Liberals won't hesitate to vote it down if it falls short.

Joan Bryden CP

So, les jeux sont faits and it even appears as if Harper is an innocent victim.

I suspect that Harper will stick a reference in the Throne Speech to limit the federal power to spend. This will ensure that Dion votes against the Speech, it'll split Dion from Ignatieff and it'll help Tory candidates in Quebec.

As to Afghanistan, I think Harper will simply say that an extension of the mission will be decided at a later date but will require consensus in Parliament. This will ensure that the NDP votes against, and likely the Liberals too. Harper would be happy to go to the polls on such a platform.

As to the environment, I think Harper will plead realism and this too is defendable in a campaign.

Excepting the unexpected, I'd say that the chance of a fall election is very great now. I'd be curious to know what the Tories' internal polling is saying.

Edited September 22, 2007 by August1991

[August1991]

This is very strong. Duceppe gave a speech this morning in Rimouski. In the speech, he said that:

Son parti votera contre le discours du Trône du 16 octobre prochain, à moins que le premier ministre n'accepte les demandes bloquistes, qui sont l'élimination du pouvoir fédéral de dépenser, des mesures fiscales concrètes pour les régions victimes de la crise forestière, le maintien intégral du système de gestion de l'offre pour les agriculteurs, le retrait des soldats canadiens d'Afghanistan en 2009, et la mise en oeuvre de Kyoto.

CP

Duceppe is asking Harper to eliminate the federal power to spend and to respect Kyoto. Harper can't do this.

Du côté des libéraux, le chef de l'opposition officielle, Stéphane Dion, a déjà indiqué qu'il souhaitait la fin de la mission de combat à Kandahar dès février 2009. Le PLC veut aussi que la version amendée du projet de loi C-30 modifiant les lois canadiennes sur la protection de l'environnement, sur l'efficacité énergétique et sur les normes de consommation de carburant des véhicules soit remise à l'ordre du jour, ce que refusent les conservateurs.

R-C

Dion is asking for the amended C-30 to be placed back on the order paper in the new session but Harper has already refused to do this.

If you recall, the original Conservative C-30 (Clean Air Act) was gutted and amended by the opposition to become the Clean Air and Climate Change Act, and turn it back into a Kyoto Protocol document. It died on the order paper when Harper prorogued parliament.

----

I'd say that a federal election in November/December is a virtual certainty now.

Afterthought: Maybe Duceppe reckons that an election is a foregone conclusion and he's trying to get in his little edge before the inevitable occurs. In a sense, now an election appears to be a fait accompli and Harper is the one who will look intransigeant, going through the form of presenting a Throne Speech that will be defeated.

In English Canada, this might appear to be a vote-getter for Harper because he'll appear to be standing up to Duceppe's blackmail. But Duceppe's gambit will play very differently in Quebec however. Here, it will highlight the difference between the BQ and the Tories, and if Duceppe gives Harper a majority with English Canada seats, so much the better.

Edited September 22, 2007 by August1991

[gc1765]

I'd say that a federal election in November/December is a virtual certainty now.

Do you think Dion wants an election?

[Michael Bluth]

I'd say that a federal election in November/December is a virtual certainty now.

Afterthought: Maybe Duceppe reckons that an election is a foregone conclusion and he's trying to get in his little edge before the inevitable occurs. In a sense, now an election appears to be a fait accompli and Harper is the one who will look intransigeant, going through the form of presenting a Throne Speech that will be defeated.

Duceppe changing his tune makes an election far from a certainty.

The opposition can only force an election if all three parties agree.

Why would Dion agree to an election?

Fait accompli? La situation n'est pas comme ca.