Breaking: Poilievre asks Governor General to call Jagmeet Singh's bluff

No prorogation. Parliament must be reconvened for a confidence vote.

Moments ago, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre held a press conference calling upon the Governor General to reconvene Parliament and so that a confidence vote can be held. Here’s why.

As the chaos surrounding Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau descended further into utter madness today, New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh released a statement claiming he does not have confidence in the Liberal government.

At the same time, rumours swirled that Mr. Trudeau will as the Governor General to prorogue (suspend) Parliament to ensure that the opposition Conservatives cannot reconvene Parliamentary committees over the winter recess, and to prevent the House of Commons from triggering an election in the middle of a potential Liberal leadership race.

These news items present a big problem for Canada’s Governor General - one that should result in her to immediately recalling Parliament. Here’s why.

While the Governor General could have reason to believe Jagmeet Singh is bluffing, if he’s not, it means a majority of the House of Commons has lost confidence in the Liberal government. Either way, given how Canada’s system of government works, the Governor General should reject any request made by Mr. Trudeau to prorogue Parliament, and reconvene Parliament to test confidence in the government instead.

This instability is something Canada can’t afford, with major affordability, crime and drug crises raging on and with less than a month left with a new American President threatening to impose 25% tariffs on our country on day one of his administration.

Here’s a quick explainer on all of these issues, and what Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre just said in a press conference should happen next.

Why could Jagmeet Singh be bluffing about losing confidence in the Liberal government?

In his statement this morning, Mr. Singh said the following:

"The Liberals don't deserve another chance. That's why the NDP will vote to bring this government down...No matter who is leading the Liberal Party, this government's time is up. We will put forward a clear motion of non-confidence in the next sitting of the House of Commons."

Singh does not say he'll vote non-confidence at the first opportunity, which is important. He could wait quite some time "in the next sitting" of the House. Notably, Singh is not appearing to take questions today, presumably because he doesn't want to be asked specifics about this so-called promise.

His actions since September suggest he’s bluffing, too. At last count, Jagmeet Singh and the NDP voted confidence in the Liberals eight times since they supposedly “ripped up” their supply and confidence agreement with the Liberals at the start of September.

Singh also knows that the Liberals have many procedural tricks to avoid a confidence vote during the next sitting. For example, they could delay opposition parties' supply days, which could trigger a non-confidence motion until the last possible minute (roughly at the end of next March). This could buy the NDP time to work out a new deal with the Liberals, particularly if there’s a new leader in place.

This would then allow Singh, as he’s done multiple times in the past, to vote to prop up the Liberal with some sort of thin, bullshit-laden fig leaf - at least through his pension vesting date in late February.

Singh’s own words in recent days have also proven he’s most likely just bluffing to get through the next few weeks until Trudeau figures out if he’s going to walk or not. For example, from the Globe & Mail's Marieke Walsh appearing on CBC's Power & Politics with CBC reporter David Cochrane yesterday:

WALSH: I think [Jagmeet Singh] had a really bad outing on Monday. I think the fact that Peter Julian was the one doing interviews at the end of the day on Monday speaks to that. But more than that, Jagmeet Singh was on CTV this morning and would not repeat what Peter Julian said to you on Monday.

COCHRANE: February or March.

WALSH: February or March. Jagmeet Singh would not commit to that today in an interview on TV. And when I asked his office to clarify what the position is, they sent me to voicemail and left me on ‘read.’ So I think the NDP has some figuring out to do.

Lastly, in an interview with CTV this week, Singh provided a hypothetical wherein he'd avoid an election because Parliament needs to vote on retaliatory tariffs:

SINGH: “Well, here's a concrete scenario. We've got Trump coming in at the end of January, and he's going to impose tariffs. Do we vote on retaliatory tariffs to say no, we're not going to take that, we're that we're gonna fight back, when it's gonna cost you. If you think that you can put tariffs on us and get away with no harm, it's gonna hurt you. It's gonna cost Americans. It's gonna raise the cost of items in America. So we've got a vote choice between a vote on retaliatory tariffs, or triggering election, and what's in the best interest of the Canadians. What's in the best interest of hundreds of thousands of workers who say well I don't want my jobs to be at risk, I want you to fight back and protect my jobs. I don't know what's gonna happen. And so that's why I'm not gonna speculate.”

Singh surely knows that Section s.53(2) of the Customs Tariff Act provides the Cabinet with the executive power to impose tariffs without a vote of Parliament. Recall when Canada imposed tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum - Parliament had no vote. So Jagmeet Singh was likely once again seeking excuses to avoid committing to bringing down the Liberal Government.

Ok, fine. But why should the Governor General deny a request for prorogation?

It’s simple—if Jagmeet Singh isn’t bluffing, that means the Liberals have lost the House's confidence. So, a test of confidence, not a prorogation, is what’s needed.

Professor Philippe Lagassé, who specializes in the Westminster system tweeted, "If Singh actually intends to vote no confidence, the Prime Minister should request a dissolution." He’s right. If Singh isn’t bluffing, all three opposition leaders, constituting the majority of the House of Commons, have clearly indicated that the House no longer has confidence in the Government.

In Canada's system of democracy, the Prime Minister and Cabinet must maintain the confidence of the elected House of Commons to govern. Losing confidence typically means the government must resign or seek a fresh mandate through an election. If the Prime Minister has clearly lost the confidence of the House, the Governor General would generally expect them to either resign and allow another leader who can command confidence to form a government, or advise dissolution and call a general election. Prorogation for the Liberal to avoid scruinty for months while they select another leader, and while knowing that the government has lost confidence in the House - particularly in the middle of the many crises facing the country - shouldn’t be an option right now.

Also, the Liberals have denied the will of Parliament for months by denying an order of Parliament to produce documents. This is another reason the GG shouldn’t consider allowing prorogation when a majority of the House is now saying (again, if Singh isn’t bluffing) that they’ve lost confidence in the government.

So what should happen next?

This afternoon at a press conference, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre called for the Governor General to reconvene Parliament in order for a confidence vote to be held. He also called Jagmeet Singh’s bluff, and called upon him - as well as Bloc Quebecois leader Yves-François Blanchet - to support this call by writing their own letters to the Governor General calling for the same.

Mr. Poilievre reiterated the impact that the chaos in the government is having on everyday Canadians. He’s right. Canadian’s can ill afford to have this chaos continue. As I wrote last week, Canada needs an election, not months of uncertainty caused by a prorogation and a Liberal leadership race.

In light of Mr. Singh’s statement today, the Governor General should require the House of Commons to test confidence in the government before entertaining any request for prorogation.