Pierre Poilievre may have lost the election to Mark Carney, but nobody seems to have told him that it’s over. Jagmeet Singh, days after stating that he risked sacrificing seats — ultimately including his own — in order to prevent a Conservative majority, resigned the NDP leadership immediately upon losing. Poilievre seems intent on evicting back-bench MPs to take their spot in order to hold onto Candice Bergen’s new mattresses in Stornoway.
It is a practice he is familiar with, given his role with the campaign of Calgary Conservative candidate Ezra Levant. Levant backed out of running for a safe seat in order to give Stephen Harper a seat in the House — and the keys to Stornoway with, presumably, the original mattresses.
The last time the official opposition party gained seats, gained vote share, stayed official opposition, and managed to lose their leader’s seat was….well, I am not sure it has ever happened. The last time the leader of the opposition, then Michael Ignatieff, lost his seat, the Liberal party had gone to third place, the leader resigned on the spot, and that was the end of that.
Now the question is more unusual. With Poilievre having lost his Ottawa-region seat to Bruce Fanjoy, whose very name expresses everything Poilievre is not, Poilievre seems intent on holding on. His concession speech on Monday night, while more gracious than anything he has said in the previous three years, was a subtle announcement that he does not plan to let the minority parliament last and intends to try again. It is clear that he will do everything he can to have another election as soon as possible.
There is a lot of debate on the Internet about whether, while he waits for another crack at the crown, he may continue to live in Stornoway, the government-funded official residence of the leader of the opposition.
Common interpretation is that the leader of the opposition has to be a sitting MP in order to stay there. That would be correct if Bosc & Gagnon (House of Commons Procedure and Practice 3rd edition, 2017) governed the National Capital Commission, which owns and maintains Stornoway -- but it does not. The NCC provides Stornoway for the leader of the opposition but does not define it.
The Member who is the leader of the largest party sitting in opposition to the Government in the House of Commons becomes the “Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition”. Provisions governing the position are defined in the Parliament of Canada Act, in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons and in various practices of the House. To become the Leader of the Opposition, a person must hold a seat in the House of Commons
But the National Capital Commission simply says:
Today, Stornoway is home to Canada’s leader of the Opposition, who occasionally hosts official events.
Canadians recognise Pierre Poilievre today as the leader of the opposition, and that did not change with Monday’s defeat; the Conservatives are still the opposition and Poilievre remains their leader. That the House of Commons will no longer recognise him as "Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition" has no bearing on the National Capital Commission or his non-parliamentary partisan role.
He should have resigned his leadership when he lost his seat, but it is not cut and dried that he must move out (even if he should) until he does resign, nor is it clear who would carry out the eviction. A man without principles cannot be expected to act on principle.
[Edit: The Official Residences Act does state:
Notwithstanding anything in the Parliament of Canada Act, the lands described in Schedule II and the buildings thereon shall be maintained as a residence for the person holding the recognized position of Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons, in this Act called “the Leader of the Opposition”.
So he is has no statutory authority to remain in Stornoway; but it is hard to imagine the government initiating formal eviction proceedings.]
For now, we can expect Poilievre to continue attacking the government while avoiding getting a security clearance as he looks for the next generation’s Ezra Levant to make way for his triumphant return. National or even party unity on the way there is the least of his concerns.
He will hold on to the house as he tries to retake the House. The symbolism of moving out of Stornoway without moving into the Prime Minister’s residence is that of accepting defeat, which he will not do until he no longer has a choice. He will not pack until he is sent packing by a party that wholeheartedly embraces his Trumpian approach to national discourse.
Meanwhile, duly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney can get on with the process of Canada’s deMAGAnation. We have a lot to do together as a country. Our elbows are up, Canada is strong, and we are in the best of hands.
None of that should be taken for granted. Canadians expect results. Significant results. Fast results. Undefined results.
Poilievre knows that Canadians’ patience is short, their expectations are long, and all he has to do is undermine the government’s work and credibility to give himself another chance. If that hurts Canada as we battle the United States to protect our very sovereignty, don’t expect him to be on our side if he sees any personal advantage in selling us out. This election may be over, but the next one is already underway.
(Autistic question to seek to learn: not a challenge, and not partisan)
I'm confused why we were supposed to accept Mark Carney as leader of the Liberal party and even Prime Minister when he didn't have a seat, but we aren't supposed to recognize Pierre Poilievre as leader of the Conservative Party and thus the leader of the opposition?
It appears you are pointing out a bug in Bosc and Gagnon that needs to be fixed -- I would prefer it be fixed to clarity that the Prime Minister must *first* have a seat (House of Commons or Senate), but at least it should be consistent in saying that if the PM doesn't need a seat then neither does any other official position.
I agree with everything you have said in the past about how leaders should be decided by caucus from fellow caucus members, and not imposed externally by the corporate fan club. I personally didn't recognize Mark Carney as the Canadian PM until this week. But I had to recognize that I was in a minority in feeling that way, and also that I need to be consistent in how I think about all these corporate fan clubs manipulating parliament. This is the most critical form of foreign interference in Canada's Democratic Institutions, but unfortunately isn't generally recognized as such.
BTW: The direction of that populist movement wasn't going to be impacted by the outcome of the election. Populist movements don't operate in a healthy political context.
https://metaviews.substack.com/p/167-the-kids-are-not-alright
Thanks for this, David. And I'm happy to say I'm starting to get used to your usual useful usage of multiple-usage terms.