Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

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.

Tags: Election Watch, elections, fixed election dates can break too, More cloak-and-dagger off-the-record stuff

More by Paul Wells

Jody

Twice I’ve read an unattributed Conservative spokesthingy comment to the effect that an election would “clear the water” for a new Conservative OR Liberal government. Is this just more smoke, is there any possibility Steve wants out of office for some reason? Just asking.
Lord Kitchener’s Own

And of course it was written for majority governments.

Does anyone know where this patently false line came from first?
Lord Kitchener’s Own

Dot,

The link for the wiki entry Jack cites is here. So, the mandatory retirement age is a part of the Constitution (The BNA Act 1965 was renamed the Constitution Act 1965 and made part of the modern Constitution by Section 52(2)b, which incorporates all of the earlier BNA Acts (except those previously repealed of course) into the 1982 Constitution we know today). The Schedule referred to in Section52(2)b can be found here and the Constitution Act, 1965 is number 27 of the list of included documents.

So, I believe that makes Harper’s plan for term limits on Senators extremely difficult to achieve without amending the Constitution (if not utterly impossible without amending the Constitution). But I’m no constitutional scholar.

What I am certain of, is that if the government passes a federal statute meant to impose term limits on Senators, and the first section of that legislation reads something like “Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Senate, including the right of Senators to serve until the age of 75.” then no matter what the government says, that Act will NOT limit the terms of Senators.

LOL
catherine

What’s this about it only applying to majority governments? Is that in the actual legislation? Harper has said that he doesn’t expect any majority governments for the forseeable future. So, …is Harper now writing legislation for the twenty-second century?

When Harper introduced this legislation, he made a big deal about it making the government so much more accountable and predictable. Now it seems we will have to wait another century to see that effect.

Monty python indeed. Someone has to make a skit of this.
Paul Wells

LKO, I take full credit for the patently false line about majority governments! Or rather, I reported it from the briefing the other day! Do I get steak knives?
Dot

I’d say Battling Tops would be a better prize.
Jack Mitchell

PW & Dot, you have both jumped the gun by 23 and 22 comments respectively.

If the Fixed Comment Marathon Law (mandating the knives at 100) isn’t sacred, what other laws might one suspect to be grossly hypocritical and uninformed meddlings with our constitutional system for the sake of partisan showmanship?

You have 21 more comments to decide.
Dot

Floating trial balloons. Gravity.
Dot

Jack, don’t forget: Of course, we are talking Maclean’s here, where, with the ascension of Kenneth Whyte as editor and publisher, the contrarian and the counter-intuitive have become the leitmotifs of editorial policy.

I seen it Saturday with my own eyes in the G&M. Honest!

(down to 19)
Jack Mitchell

Hmm, that certainly is a powerful argument for reconsidering the steak knives policy. Perhaps they could be sent at the behest of the GG, on the Advice of Kenneth Whyte? Or would that be insufficiently Dadaesque for the new Maclean’s?

(18)
Dot

I think sending a belted Karlheinz over with the request would provide the dignity this dissolution requires.

He is the forgotten master strategist who most welcomes a change in gov’t, further postponing the day when parts of his torso will be the daily subject of flattering German curiosity.

(17)
Lord Kitchener’s Own

I tried twice to address Dot’s early question about Senators and the 75 year mandatory retirement, but for some reason it just won’t take. (perhaps my unfortunate tendacy to babble on and on upset the comment machine!) Here I go again.

The mandatory retirement age for Senators of 75 years IS in the Constitution (originally BNA 1965, later Constitution Act 1965.. incorporated into the totality of the Constitution in ’82). So, I imagine it would be EXTREMELY difficult (if not totally impossible) for Harper to impose term limits on Senators through the use of a mere federal statute or other similar instrument.

What I am absolutely certain of, is that if the government passes a federal statute meant to impose term limits on Senators, and the first subsection of that legislation reads something like “Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Senate, including the right of Senators to serve until the age of 75.” then no matter what the government says, that Act will NOT limit the terms of Senators.

LOL
Lord Kitchener’s Own

Can I also just say I love it when a post gets to over 80 comments and remains so civil!

86 comments, and not so much as a single, even subtle, oblique reference to a certain German dictator and/or his totalitarian political party! (and since I mention neither his name, nor the name of his party, I consider the streak completely alive).

We could possibly set some sort of record! (In which case, steak knives for all?!?!?)
T. Thwim

It’s been pointed out that this election speculation occurs right as the government announces that it’s scuttling the plan to purchase new supply and other ships to keep their promise of maintaining our sovereignty in the arctic.

Coincidentally, with this cancellation announcemnt, Mr. Flaherty has suddenly announced that we have a budgetary surplus of 1.2 billion, merely a month after a deficit of half a billion dollars.

How much do those ships cost again?
Dot

T.Thwin,

I don’t think there’s a link.

While some time ago, there was much discussion over the fact that for one month the gov’t ran a deficit, to me it is expected.

IF the objective is to have balanced books at the end of the year, one would expect, on average, deficits for six of the months and surpluses for six of the months – balancing out at the end – budgeting being inexact at the best of times.
Dot

LKO, interesting.

I wonder what people familiar with the thinking of Stephen Harper might respond to your analysis, if asked.
catherine

I see in the third reading of Bill C-16, Harper’s government addressed the charge from the opposition that this bill was “illusory in nature” since the Prime Minister (minority or majority) could still call an election whenever he/she wanted. Basically, the response is that the bill had to be illusory. I particularly like the argument that this illusory bill would reduce voter cynicism. I’m certainly feeling a lot less cynical.

http://www.democraticreform.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?media_category_id=1&id=1392
Calgary Junkie

I always thought most Liberals WANTED an early election. Some are confident they would form the next government, others just content to get Dion out as leader.

So now it looks like Harper will deliver that early election. AND he’s doing it in such a way (“breaking” his own fixed election date law), that the Liberals get a useful talking point. They can use it as part of a larger narrative about “Harper being untrustworthy … what OTHER laws will he break” and so on.

So Libs, quit your nitpicking about HOW this election gets started. You have your Greenshift, and more anti-Harper talking points, now run with them. Look at it this way … Harper is giving Dion a 100 yard head start in the election marathon to come. It’s not a lot, but it’s something.
catherine

Dot, although you might expect fluctuations from month to month, Flaherty’s numbers are peculiar. He reported a $500M deficit for the first two months of the fiscal year, then a surplus of $1.2B for the first quarter — a surplus of $1.7B in just one month. Given his new growth rate projections, this is more than the surplus he is projecting for the entire year. Sounds like we already had the best month of the year by far and it is all downhill now. This could be connected to why Harper wants an election sooner than the illusory fixed date.
Jarrid

CJ, I hear you, but Hamlet’s running the show for the Libs.

The NDP – Let’s have an election!

The Bloc Quebecois – Let’s have an election!

The Conservatives – Let’s have an election!

Dion’s Liberal Party of Canada – To have or not to have an election, that is the question…
Dot

More Freudian than Shakespearian.

Dion backwards = No Id.
Dot

catherine

True enough. But we’re still in the 3rd inning, or 3rd end if you’re a curler.

You going long or short on the price of oil?
catherine

“You going long or short on the price of oil?”

Neither. I’ve hedged on oil, but I’m going short on Harper.
Jack Mitchell

Brilliant re: Dion, Dot.

Hmm, why don’t we see more Kabbalah-type analysis in the MSM? Or does that beg the question?

Layton = Not y’al(l)
May = Yam
Bernier = Rein reb.
Brison = No, sir. B.
Emerson = No’s re: me.
Pollievre = Er, veil lop.

These are less compelling, I’ll grant you.
Geiseric the Lame

Were I invited I’d insist the meeting be in camera.