The Courts Uphold the Correct Interpretation of Fixed-Date Election Laws for the Fifth Time Since 2009


Image unrelated to Duff Conacher and to the text below

Introduction

Blaine Higgs became Premier of New Brunswick on 9 November 2018 because Brian Gallant’s Liberal ministry lost the vote on the Address-in-Reply to the Speech from the Throne in the minority legislature that voters had returned on 24 September 2018.[1] Most premiers seem not to appreciate gaining the governor’s commission through events so inauspicious and messy as mid-parliamentary transfers of power after votes of non-confidence and resignations; Higgs proved no different and sought his own “mandate” by advising Lieutenant Governor Brenda Murphy to dissolve the 59th Legislature on 17 August 2020, for an election on 14 September – two years before it reached its maximum life.[2] (Naturally, Higgs had only a few weeks earlier claimed that he had no interest in calling a snap election.)[3] Higgs thus obtained the 9th early dissolution notwithstanding a fixed-date election law in Canada.

As of December 2021, 12 such snap elections have taken place since 2008. Even though Canada’s fixed-date election laws only lower the maximum life of a legislature or parliament from five years to something between four and just under five years and do not guarantee a minimum lifespan, Duff Conacher – for the third time since 2009 – launched frivolous litigation contesting the legal-constitutional validity of a dissolution of parliament and, by necessary implication, the legitimacy of the general election which followed. The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick issued a ruling on 29 October 2021 that this province’s fixed-date elections law does not prevent the Premier from advising the Lieutenant Governor from dissolving the legislature earlier that the scheduled date, though Democracy Watch v New Brunswick (the Attorney General) did not become publicly available until 9 December 2021.[4] In this ruling, the Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick affirmed four previous rulings on this very same question – the two Conacher rulings by the Federal Court in 2009 and Federal Court of Appeal in 2010, as well as the two Engels rulings of Alberta’s Court of Queen’s Bench in 2019 and Court of Appeal in 2020[5] – and acknowledged that dissolving legislatures is fundamentally a “political decision and therefore, as noted in Conacher, not justiciable.”[6] The Supreme Court of Canada also considered this jurisprudence definitive and refused to waste its time re-adjudicating the Engle rulings in May 2021.[7]

Continue reading →

Posted in Crown (Powers and Office), Dissolution, Fixed-Date Elections, Watching Democracy Watch | 1 Comment

Barry K. Wilson’s Biography on Sir Mackenzie Bowell


If Canada maintained a list of mediocre prime ministers like the mediocre presidents parodied by The Simpsons, Sir Mackenzie Bowell would surely round out the top five along with Sir John Abbot, Sir John Thompson, Kim Campbell, and Joe Clark. Our second and last Senator prime minister languished in obscurity for most of the 20th century, but he seems to have regained some renewed interest in the 21st with two recent biographies. Yet it is telling that Canadian historian Betsy Dewar Boyce failed to obtain a publisher for her book in her lifetime; her biography on Bowell did not appear until 2017, ten years after her death, and this book about Bowell has itself disappeared into the ether of the internet.

In 2021, Canadian journalist Barry K. Wilson secured the publication of Sir Mackenzie Bowell: A Canadian Prime Minister Forgotten by History, and I reviewed it for the latest issue of The Dorchester Review, which just came out online today. You can subscribe to it here.

Similar Posts:

Posted in Dorchester Review, History of British North America, Reviews | Leave a comment

Review of Gee & Webber’s “What Is a Political Constitution?” and Some More Thoughts on the Nature of Constitutional Conventions


Constitutional Norms in the United States vs Constitutional Conventions in Canada

I’ve been mulling overGould’s article “Codifying Constitutional Norms” (in the United States) and about constitutional norms in the American versus Canadian systems of government a bit more over the last few days, as well as on the differences between Responsible Government and Consensus Government, as well as a strange precedent that just unfolded in the State of South Australia this week (more on that in a subsequent post). It seems to me that constitutional norms in the United States still remain, for the most part, different in kind rather than merely in degree to most of the constitutional conventions which apply in the Commonwealth Realms, what the British call “the political constitution.”

Continue reading →

Posted in Articles and Books, Codifying Norms in the US, Comparative, Constitution (Written), Constitutional Conventions, Division of Powers, Parliamentarism v Presidentialism, Reviews | 2 Comments

Consensus Government & Confirmation Voting in Nunavut


Consensus Government

Nunavut held its second scheduled general election under the Nunavut Elections Act on 25 October 2021, and the Commissioner convened the 1st session of the 6th Legislature on 17 November so that the 22 members of the Legislative Assembly could gather as the Nunavut Leadership Form and elect a Speaker and also to select the Premier and Executive Councillors of Nunavut, too. MLAs elected Tony Akoak as Speaker, and P.J. Akeeagok as the next Premier of Nunavut (at age 37, perhaps the first head of government of my generation in Canada), along with 8 other MLAs – David Akeeagok. Pamela Gross, David Joanasie, Lorne Kusugak, Adam Arreak Lightstone, John Main, Margaret Nakasuk, and Joanna Quassa – as Executive Councillors.[1]Premier P.J. Akeeagok will assign them portfolios as ministers in the coming days and weeks.

Continue reading →

Posted in Comparative, Confirmation Voting, Consensus Government, Individual vs Collective Ministerial Responsibility, Responsible Government | 1 Comment

Constitutional Conventions in the United States: Some Thoughts on Jonathan Gould’s “Codifying Constitutional Norms”


Introduction

As of 2021, I have been writing scholarly journal articles and blogging here on Parliamentum for ten years. What I find most interesting is seeing how my earlier works have influenced or been used by other scholars, in some cases now a decade after its original publication.

One such example came to my attention earlier this year: Jonathan S. Gould’s “Codifying Constitutional Norms” in the Georgetown Law Journal. Gould cited the piece that Nick MacDonald and I wrote on officialising constitutional conventions in cabinet manuals; we drafted it in 2011, but it did not appear in the Journal of Parliamentary and Political Law until 2012.

Continue reading →

Posted in Articles and Books, Codification of Convention, Codifying Norms in the US, Comparative, Constitutional Conventions, Officialization of Convention, Parliamentarism v Presidentialism, Reviews | 1 Comment