Doug Ford Wins Snap Election on an Extremely Unequal Electoral Map


The 15th Snap Election Notwithstanding a Fixed-Date Elections Law

Ontarians last went to the polls during the pandemic on 2 June 2022 in accordance with section 9 of the Election Act:

General elections at four-year intervals

Powers of Lieutenant Governor

9 (1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Lieutenant Governor, including the power to dissolve the Legislature, by proclamation in Her Majesty’s name, when the Lieutenant Governor sees fit.  2005, c. 35, s. 1 (3).

First Thursday in June

(2)  Subject to the powers of the Lieutenant Governor referred to in subsection (1), general elections shall be held on the first Thursday in June in the fourth calendar year following polling day in the most recent general election. 2016, c. 33, s. 7.[1]

They would have gone again on 4 June 2026, but Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, decided otherwise. He made this speculation official on 24 January 2025 at a press conference in Brampton, and he formally requested that Lieutenant Governor Edith Dumont dissolve the 43rd Legislature on 28 January. However, Her Honour could not issue the writs of election until 29 January because “a writ for an election shall be dated on a Wednesday” under section 9.1(3) of the Election Act[2] for an election on 27 February 2025, the “fifth Thursday after the date of the writ.”[3] The writ period in Ontario therefore lasts 29 days.

Continue reading →

Posted in Fixed-Date Elections | Leave a comment

Nova Scotia Poised to Repeal Its Fixed-Date Elections Law


 

Tim Houston, Premier of Nova Scotia and leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, decided on 27 October 2024 to advise the Lieutenant Governor to dissolve the legislature for a snap election 7 months early instead of allowing the general election to take place on 15 July 2025 based on the legislation that he himself had introduced in 2021. His gambit paid off. Houston’s Progressive Conservatives won 43 out of 55 seats in the election held on 26 November 2024 on 52.49% of the popular vote, compared to 31 seats on 38.55% of the vote on 17 August 2021.

In my previous post on this subject, I predicted that Houston would introduce legislation to change the schedule of fixed-date elections from the ridiculous Third Tuesday in July every four years as of 2025 to a date every fourth early June, like in Ontario. But Houston has exceeded my expectations and instead tabled a bill on 18 February 2025 to repeal Nova Scotia’s fixed-date elections law outright! Nova Scotia became the last province or territory to enact one of these futile and redundant laws on 5 November 2021, and it now seems poised to become the first province to repeal its fixed-date elections as well.

Continue reading →

Posted in Fixed-Date Elections | Leave a comment

Trump’s Tariffs Will Make America Expensive Again


Trump admires William McKinley and his high tariffs

Protectionism Is Cool Again

Donald Trump promised to cry havoc in November 2024 as President-elect, and he hath now as President let loose the dogs of tradewar. Trump had denounced the tradedeficit between Canada and the United States, which have occurred under the trade agreement between Canada, the United States, and Mexico that he negotiated during his first non-consecutive term.[1] But the Doctrine of Trumpian Infallibility dictates that he somehow bears no responsibility for the trade agreement that he initiated and secured eight years ago and which he now finds bad.

NAFTA was always NAFTA in English, ALÉNA en français, and TLCAN en español, but this newer trade agreement that Trump forced in his first term reflects the post-truth era of caprice and stupidity in which we live, because we cannot agree on something as basic as the name of this trilateral agreement. Canada in English calls it “The Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA)”, while in Washington the agreement identifies itself as “The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.” The trilateral international Secretariat charged with administering the treaty between the three countries also gives it different names in English, French, and Spanish. In English, “The Agreement” identifies as both the “Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) / United States-Mexica-Canada Agreement (USMCA).” The Mexicans call it El Tratado entre México, Estados Unidos y Canadá (T-MEC), simply “The Treaty between Mexico, the United States, and Canada.” And Canada also calls it in French by Accord Canada – États-Unis – Mexique – a direct translation of the Canadian English name shorn of the preposition which elegantly marks the Spanish, which surprises me given the prevailing pedantry that French-speakers usually show toward their language.

On 1 February 2025, Trump issued an executive order under Article II of the US Constitution and delegated legislation pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the National Emergencies Act, the Trade Act, and the United States Code to impose a tariff of 25% on all Canadian goods and products except energy, which he shall merely tariff at a rate of 10%, as of 4 February.

Sec. 2. (a) All articles that are products of Canada as defined by the Federal Register notice described in subsection (e) of this section (Federal Register notice), and except for those products described in subsection (b) of this section, shall be, consistent with law, subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty. Such rate of duty shall apply with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 4, 2025 […]

(b) With respect to energy or energy resources, as defined in section 8 of Executive Order 14156 of January 20, 2025 (Declaring a National Energy Emergency), and as otherwise included in the Federal Register notice, such articles that are products of Canada as defined by the Federal Register notice shall be, consistent with law, subject to an additional 10 percent ad valorem rate of duty. Such rate of duty shall apply with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on February 4, 2025 […].[2]

Most ominously still, Trump issued an open declaration of tradewar and warned Canada not to retaliate, or else he might escalate the tariffs yet further:

(d) Should Canada retaliate against the United States in response to this action through import duties on United States exports to Canada or similar measures, the President may increase or expand in scope the duties imposed under this order to ensure the efficacy of this action.[3]

This executive order only applies to Canada, which presumably means that Trump will soon issue additional executive orders imposing tariffs on Mexico separately. CUSMA – I’ll use the Canadian variant of the name here, I suppose, purely because it makes a pronounceable acronym – came into effect in December 2019, shortly before the pandemic.[4] Trump has, in effect, abrogated that Treaty unilaterally, killed free trade in North America, and undone decades of good will.

And yet this is not the first time that the United States has abruptly cancelled free trade and re-imposed protectionist tariffs on Canada either. In some ways, Trump has brought the United States back to its protectionist norm.

Continue reading →

Posted in History of British North America | Leave a comment

Sorry, Steve Paikin, but Mackenzie King Is Not The Longest-Serving Prime Minister in the Commonwealth


The myth which holds that Mackenzie King holds the record of “Canada’s longest-serving Prime Minister” persists. Steve Paikin has outdone himself now by going so far as to claim Mackenzie King holds the record of not merely Canada’s longest-serving Prime Minister but also as “the longest-serving Prime Minister in the history of the British Empire or Commonwealth.”

This is false for two reasons. First, “Canada” as a polity extends all the way back to 1791 and not to 1867.[1] The Imperial Parliament established Upper Canada and Lower Canada in 1791, continued and combined them into the Province of Canada in 1841, and then made the Dominion of Canada the direct continuator and successor polity to the Province of Canada in 1867. Second, “Prime Minister” and “Premier” were used interchangeably in Canada to describe the head of either a federal or provincial ministry until the mid-20th century; not until Bill Davis adopted the title of “Premier of Ontario” instead of “Prime Minister of Ontario” in 1975 did the modern distinction between the federal Prime Minister and provincial Premiers emerge.[2] What we today call provincial premiers in Canada and state premiers in Australia should also count in the calculation of the “longest-serving prime minister in the history of British Empire or Commonwealth” because federated polities also matter.

And we must not forget the former British Crown colonies in the Pacific and Caribbean which achieved responsible government and gained independence as Commonwealth Realms in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, because they also count as and have made contributions to “the history of the British Empire and Commonwealth.” I have defined Paikin’s phrase to include only the properly democratic Commonwealth Realms and parliamentary republics within the Commonwealth of Nations. On that basis I exclude Fiji because of its multiple coups and suspensions from the Commonwealth of Nations, but I have kept Grenada in the dataset because it suffered one bloodless Marxist coup and then restored itself as a Realm under its original constitution four years later after the United States invaded and deposed the Marxist usurpers. I have also excluded Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew’s continuous premiership of 31 years from 1959 to 1990 because I share Freedom House’s doubts on that country’s liberal democratic bona fides. I have also excluded Ireland because it withdrew from the Commonwealth in 1949.

Continue reading →

Posted in Caribbean Realms, Comparative, History of British North America | 1 Comment

Why John Turner “Had No Option”


My hard copy of the latest issue of the Journal of Parliamentary and Political Law arrived in the mail yesterday – delayed, presumably, by the Newmans of the postal strike – including my article on why John Turner sincerely believed that he “had no option” in 1984. Our 2025 seems poised to become another Year of Three Prime Ministers like 1993, 1984, and 1896. (1926 gave us three ministries but only two prime ministers).

Continue reading →

Posted in Appointment of PM, Caretaker Convention & Government Formation, Confidence Convention, Constitutional Conventions, Crown (Powers and Office), My Published Works | 2 Comments