Roundup: No, fixed election dates don’t give the GG unconstitutional powers

Posted on by

The “debate,” if you can call it such, over Jagmeet Singh’s decision to undermine Her Excellency Mary Simon by publicly writing her and telling her to refuse the advice of the prime minister who commands the confidence of the Chamber just got more ridiculous, as Andrew Coyne decided to weigh in yesterday (and no, I’m not going to link because hate clicks are still clicks). Coyne contends that the fixed election date law empowers the GG to turn down such a request, and “proves” it by quoting testimony from former justice minister Rob Nicholson at the Senate committee.

No. Just…no.

The logic in Coyne’s argument can’t hold because the Governor General’s role in accepting the advice of the prime minister who enjoys the confidence of the Chamber is the very basis of our constitutional framework under Responsible Government. The only discretion she might have over dissolution is when a request is made shortly after an election – that’s it. Nothing a simple statute, like the fixed election date law, can change a constitutional element, and there is jurisprudence to back this up, particularly the doomed attempts at trying to get the courts to uphold the fixed election date legislation, which they dismissed (including the Supreme Court of Canada). Fixed election date legislation is an empty shell – a bit of theatre and attempt to Americanise our system, and is antithetical to how Westminster systems operate – it shouldn’t be on our books as a result. There is no way that it could empower the GG to do away with constitutional norms to refuse dissolution, and if she did refuse, the prime minister would be obligated to resign, and we’d be in an election regardless. It’s ridiculous and wrong to suggest otherwise.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1422914814494584833

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1422925735472271369

What is even more ironic about this whole situation is that Jagmeet Singh and Coyne himself will often rail that the “undemocratic Senate” shouldn’t be allowed to exercise their constitutional powers to veto legislation, and yet they are demanded that an appointed Governor General exercise powers that she doesn’t actually have under the constitution. It’s bizarre, and it’s a lot of bullshit masquerading as principle.

Good reads:

  • The first planeload of Afghan refugees who served as interpreters and drivers, along with their families, has arrived in Canada, with more on the way.
  • Chrystia Freeland delivered the government’s long-overdue report on open banking and implementation of fintech in Canada.
  • Karina Gould announced that 82,000 doses of AstraZeneca already in Canada are being sent to Trinidad and Tobago.
  • Lawrence MacAulay says that new staff at Veterans Affairs is starting to make a dent in the backlog of disability claims by veterans, but it may not be enough.
  • Ahmed Hussen says the government is allocating $96 million in funding for Black community organizations to address systemic barriers.
  • Planned job action by CBSA officers could begin by Friday, just before fully vaccinated Americans would be allowed into the country.
  • The Chief Electoral Officer says if there is an increase in mail-in ballots in the next election, it could take days longer to count and get a final result.
  • The Parliamentary Budget Officer says that fixing the long-term care system (per a Green MP’s motion) would cost $13.7 billion – subject to negotiation with provinces.
  • The Conservatives are calling for national standards for service dogs meant for veterans with PTSD, a project that has had a rocky history.
  • Manitoba’s Indigenous reconciliation minister now says that residential schools were about genocide – but not all First Nations chiefs think he’s being sincere.
  • Kady O’Malley’s Process Nerd column explains the process for creating a new political party (as Derek Sloan is threatening to do).
  • Colby Cosh looks into the evidence that the “Russian Flu” in 1889 may have in fact been a COVID-like coronavirus.
  • My column points out the reasons why the Parliamentary Budget Officer shouldn’t be costing election promises, especially like he did in 2019.

Odds and ends:

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

2 thoughts on “Roundup: No, fixed election dates don’t give the GG unconstitutional powers”

  1. Coyne isn’t making this argument in good faith anyway. He’s just fluffing Singh to split the vote, like a good soldier for his Conservative bosses at the Glob & Oil. Expect other propagandists at Philip Crawley’s Murdoch outpost and the Postmedia Pravda papers to do the same in so many words. Plus he hates Trudeau anyway and wants him to lose.

  2. Actually, you should be pleased that Coyne is making this argument about the GG. It’s a diversion from the broader concern that Justin Trudeau, like Stephen Harper before him, only follows the rules when they benefit him.

    It’s amusing how easily the Trudeau cultists switch from asserting that constitutional conventions don’t matter (as in the case of the SNC-Lavalin scandal), to now clutching those conventions close in order to defend Justin over his desire to ignore the legislated election date.

Comments are closed.