Roundup: Trudeau’s first minority steps

Justin Trudeau met with the press yesterday and offered a few bits of post-election news – namely that he was not going to seek any kind of formal or informal coalition (not that he would need to, given how the seat maths work out), that the new Cabinet would be sworn in on November 20th, and that yes, the Trans Mountain pipeline is going ahead, no matter how much huffing and puffing certain opposition parties may try to engage in (for all the good it will do because it’s not something that would come before Parliament in any meaningful capacity in any case). Not that there should have been any doubt – he has expended so much political capital on the project that not doing so would make no sense. The November 20th date is later than he took to decide on a Cabinet after the last election, and Trudeau remarked that he has a lot of reflection to do with the loss of all of his Alberta and Saskatchewan seats, and that is no doubt part of the task ahead.

To that end, Trudeau didn’t give any indication whether he would appoint a senator or two to Cabinet to fill those geographic holes (and I will be writing more on this in an upcoming column) – but did say he was going to introduce changes to the Parliament of Canada Act to make the “independent” Senate more permanently so (not that he can legislate the new appointment process, but rather it deals operationally with salaries for caucus leaders). The “facilitator” of the Independent Senators Group is already decrying that any plan to put senators in Cabinet would be somehow “counterproductive” to the whole independent Senate project, which is of course ignorant of history and Parliament itself. I do find myself troubled that Trudeau singled out the mayors of Calgary and Edmonton as people he would be consulting with as part of his “reflection” on how to rebuild trust with Alberta and in terms of how to somehow include them in his Cabinet-making process, because they have agendas of their own, and it would seem to just exacerbate the whole urban-rural divide that the election results are so indicative of.

Trudeau has some options for getting that Alberta and Saskatchewan representation in Cabinet, from Senators, to floor-crossers, of simply appointing non-Parliamentarians to the role (which is permissible, but goes somewhat against the convention that they seek seats as soon as possible). Here’s Philippe Lagassé explaining some of the options and dynamics:

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1187081027254194183

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1187081821948915717

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1187083301086990336

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1187084679859638272

Good reads:

  • Here’s a look at some of the incoming new MPs.
  • Andrew Scheer says the party’s election post-mortem has already begun.
  • Here is a very good interview with a Conservative party insider about the failures of the campaign, that even now Scheer’s people refuse to address.
  • Jason Kenney’s forays into the GTA during the campaign yielded the party no gains.
  • Stephen Harper has been reaching out to Conservatives in an attempt to get them to re-sheathe the knives they’ve been sharpening to plunge into Scheer.
  • A bunch of political science-types want Jody Wilson-Raybould to use social media to amplify her voice as an Independent MP.
  • Kenney is unveiling a budget today that is going to be heavy on cuts.
  • Karl Bélanger notes the failings of Jagmeet Singh in the campaign and notes that under most circumstances, he should resign after such an electoral failure.
  • Susan Delacourt hopes that Trudeau will come back to the National Press Theatre to tell reporters what conclusions he came to after doing all of his promised thinking.
  • Colby Cosh delivers an acerbic reading of the election, and eggs on those would- be “separatists” in Alberta by calling them out for not acting like they mean it.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

8 thoughts on “Roundup: Trudeau’s first minority steps

  1. Could Trudeau assign/request a member from another party to fill a cabinet position to further the cross-party agendas? Or are those positions always filled by gov in power?

    • It would be exceedingly difficult give the nature of Cabinet solidarity, and their party might disown them for the “disloyalty” of serving another party.

      • Post resignation of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott, I’d imagine loyalty is at an even higher premium for Team Trudeau so these fantasy scenarios of NDP MPs or Harper-appointed Senators seem kind of silly?

      • Maybe it’s good to just accept the result and there won’t be a minister from either AB or SK. I’m not buying everything for Liberal Party or Albertans will be solved by having some second-rate Minister of Nothingness and Killing Time?

        Not to go down more fantasy scenarios, but let’s say they wanted Naheed Nenshi or Ralph Goodale or whoever at the Cabinet table, they could get somebody in a safe Liberal seat to resign in another providence and that person runs.

        Wasn’t one of the reasons MaryAnn Mihychuk was shuffled out Cabinet (and not even to another ministry like JWR) was that she really wanted to be “regional minister” for Manitoba and the Prime Minister was really against the whole concept of “regional minister” and Cabinet speaks in one voice rather than parochial interest (like the Bloc)?

        Also doesn’t have to be you, but you’d figure a few co-op writers would pen a piece making the case that regional ministers are kind of a bad idea and not as effect or important as they are being portrayed.

  2. It’s weird to remember there was this idea when he was running for the NDP leadership and right after he won it that Jagmeet Singh would bring in votes from New Canadians particularly the Sikh community, but all the ridings with a significant Sikh presence (Vancouver South, Surrey Centre, Surrey Newton, Calgary Skyview, the ones in Brampton, Mississauga, Scarborough) and yet he didn’t bring anything there?

    Also for your article about no Albertans or Saskatchewanians MPs in Cabinet, curious if you heard David Herle’s point about it?
    http://youtu.be/tsSlMaca4zg?t=1641

    Looking back, why wasn’t Randy Boissonnault made Heritage Minister instead of Pablo Rodríguez (did they really need another Cabinet minister on the Island of Montreal)? It would have made his case a bit stronger and Heritage seems like a portfolio that the main concern is French language culture sector, a Franco-Albertan would have made sense and placated Quebecers?
    twitter.com/icialberta/status/1186525876017618945

    Kent Hehr resigned from Cabinet, but even before that he has been “demoted” (even though his original position in Veteran Affairs was the one JWR felt was a demotion) so it seems weird to vote for him based on the need for Cabinet position if his constituents knew he wasn’t going in a major file.

  3. “Trudeau has some options for getting that Alberta and Saskatchewan representation in Cabinet, from Senators, to floor-crossers, of simply appointing non-Parliamentarians to the role (which is permissible, but goes somewhat against the convention that they seek seats as soon as possible).”

    I have an idea. You might say it’s…. something completely different.

    Appoint Andrew Scheer as Minister of Silly Walks.

  4. I don’t really understand the ins and outs of this rule, but Lester B. Pearson left the United Nations to be appointed as Foreign Affair Minister on September 10, 1948 (coincidently the same day Margaret Trudeau was born) when he was neither a MP or Senator, but he was a candidate set, and only a candidate, for a by-election set for October 26 in Algoma East (an area he had zero connections to, but the Liberals undoubtedly selected Algoma East because it was considered a safe seat and the Progressive Conservatives did not entered a candidate). Although this was really this was about getting a certain person into Cabinet rather than issues of regional representation.

    So just checking that candidates for by-elections can also be appointed to Cabinet?

    • You can appoint someone to Cabinet before they have a seat, under the understanding that you will get them a seat as soon as possible. That is what Jean Chrétien did with Stéphane Dion and Pierre Pettigrew.

Comments are closed.