Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

UPDATED: There will now be elections. I think.

by Paul Wells on Friday, August 22, 2008 3:38pm - 0 Comments

Well. People familiar with the thinking of Stephen Harper convened reporters from all the big Ottawa bureaus this afternoon to the place where people familiar with the thinking of Stephen Harper work, and they told the dozen of us what one of the people familiar with the thinking of Stephen Harper told me yesterday: it’s looking like an election is coming, and it’s looking like Stephen Harper will call it.

The final decision will come after meetings between Harper and each of the three opposition leaders. Timing is a bit of a challenge. (Stéphane Dion has spent the week wowing ‘em in Ontario, and Harper leaves Tuesday for a three-day Arctic trip, so the window for the two of them to sit down, at least, would seem to be Monday.)

If Harper doesn’t get an assurance from one opposition leader — he needs only one — that his legislative agenda will receive support through the fall session, he’ll call an election. We were left with the impression that this will happen very soon after the meetings with opposition leaders.

I can’t imagine an opposition leader giving Harper a blank cheque for the next several weeks, ahead of the fact. Because he only needs one, Harper will not decide what to do until he has met all three.

“An election would clear the air and give a government — ours or a Liberal government — some open water to manoeuvre in,” said one, um, person. Why had they gathered us all to lay out this plot line? “If you have to guess, you may guess wrong. So I’m telling you so you’ll guess right.”

The mechanism for kicking off an election would, we were told, be a visit to the Governor General, not a contrived defeat in the Commons on a confidence motion. Could that happen before by-elections? “We’re not ruling anything out; we’re not ruling anything in.”

UPDATE: I thought I saw other reporters in the room. It must be serious: Jean-Pierre Blackburn is staying in Ottawa. But what’s this? Gilles Duceppe, who’s wanted an election since a week after the last one, now says it would be “disrespectful” to have one now. Offhand, this looks like an attempt to frame an election call, not to avoid one.

Bookmark and Share
  • Mike T.

    steak knives!

  • Brian

    I love it. Don’t the Liberals realize they are giving the Tories some wonderful sound bites by teling everyone who will listen that there is no need for an election because the Parliament has been so productive for the past two and one-half years? Just wait until half way thru the election campaign when the ads come out quoting Dion as saying the Harper Governemnt has accomplished a lot.

  • Mike T.

    A thought occurs: wouldn’t it be funny if Dion said it was impossible to meet with Harper while he is bringing a (frivolous) lawsuit against the Liberal party?

  • Mike T.

    Or better yet, skipped the meeting, showed up two days later with his Mom, barged into 24 Sussex and demanded a hearing?

  • http://demosthenes.blogspot.com Demosthenes

    Brian: they would only be useful if Harper was trying to push a “we got a lot accomplished” narrative during the campaign. Which is very doubtful: they’ve played the game like an opposition so far, so they’re likely to continue to do so. It’ll be attack, attack, attack.

    Plus, those ads would be stupid. Impossibly stupid. “I write for townhall.com” stupid. I thought your boss “chosen party leader” was supposed to be smart.

    (Steven backwards= “ne, vets!” Guess somebody should have predicted him screwing over his navy, huh?)

  • http://demosthenes.blogspot.com Demosthenes

    (Apologies, that should have been “boss…ahem… ‘chosen party leader’”.)

  • T. Thwim

    Just to be 100% clear here, has Constitutional Convention constrained the GG to act on orders of the Prime Minister, or orders from the House of Commons?

    In a majority government, these are one and the same.

    In a minority government, especially one where the House of Commons has already said “There shall be no election until October 19, 2009″, is that significantly different?

    I’m not suggesting that she’d try to put a coalition of opposition together to rule, but instead come out with an announcement along the lines of, “Mr. Harper has approached me and asked for me to dissolve Parliament and call an election. However, I do not take my guidance from any minority within the House of Commons, but rather upon the wishes of the majority of the House. Most recently, the House of Commons has agreed that no election is desired before October 19, 2009. I shall meet in the coming weeks with Msr. Dion, Msr. Duceppe, and Mr. Layton, to determine if the House has decided that it is now prepared for an election earlier than that time they agreed to in the legislation which I have signed.”

    Now, since one of the three opposition parties will likely want an election, it’ll probably go through, but it will be delayed for a few weeks, certainly long enough for the by-elections to go through and for Zytaruk and the court appointed third-party expert to begin their testimony on the authenticity of the tape where Mr. Harper admits he was aware of financial considerations being offered in exchange for the vote of a sitting MP.

  • T. Thwim

    Hah. Scenario 2, if Harper really wants an election all he really needs to do is put forward a motion of confidence in the government, and then have the Conservative MPs simply not show up.

  • http://www.johnwaugh.blogspot.com John W

    If the Bloc doesn’t want an election, does it have any power or even a role in these scenarios? If Gilles Duceppe says ‘it’s fall 2009′ does it mean anything? I guess not.

  • Phillip Huggan

    Elections cost $300-350 million a pop, so having them more frequent than every four years is expensive. Assuming 1/2(?) of future years are spent in minority territory (until the Green Democrat Party forms), this is 11.11% more elections, or about $35 million a year in increased costs. An idea for the next government: how about tacking on the North to the Maritimes, and if any party gains a majority in all four areas (West, ON, Que, Maritimes + North), the party gets 5.5 or 6 years in majority?

  • Bill Simpson

    There is nothing sadder than watching this bunch circling around each other, trying to pin the blame for the election on the other one.

    It would be kind of funny if Duceppe, Dion and Layton together decline to meet Harper and tell him to “fish or cut bait”. Not sure what the great tactician would do then.

From Macleans