Poilievre may have wanted to avoid an election. But maybe not like this

2 weeks agone, deutschmark Carney and capital of south dakota Poilievre met in the undercoat minister's Parliament Hill office in an apparent attempt to find common ground on the government's legislative agenda.

"My message to him is to work with us," Poilievre told reporters afterwards.

Perhaps Carney took that message more literally than Poilievre intended.

Carney had already welcomed two former Conservative MPs to the government side of the House of Commons — Chris d'Entremont in November, then Michael Ma in December. After a pause for January, the floor-crossings resumed on Wednesday with the defection of Matt Jeneroux, who had previously announced his intention to resign his seat as the MP for Edmonton Riverbend.

"This is a time to come together," Carney said in announcing the newest member of the Liberal caucus.

Poilievre was less enthused.

"Mark Carney is trying to seize a costly Liberal majority government that Canadians voted against in the last election through dirty backroom deals," he wrote in a social-media post.

Jeneroux says Carney's 'head-on' approach in Davos influenced floor-crossing

The Conservative leader said much the same thing two months ago after Ma's sudden exit. But now Carney's Liberals really are on the verge of a majority — a majority that would, at the very least, bring a definitive end to the election speculation that pundits and amateur strategists have been entertaining themselves with of late.

Cynically, one might have wondered whether Poilievre's recent enthusiasm for collaboration was inspired, at least in part, by a simple desire to avoid an election. 

To be seen working constructively at a fraught moment for the country might have the potential to improve Poilievre's public image. But more than that, working with the government to pass legislation would make it harder for the government to argue that an election is necessary because of parliamentary obstruction — an argument that Liberals have seemingly been itching to make lately.

And the Conservatives are not in a position where they should obviously want an election — a recent poll by Abacus Data gave the Liberals a seven-point lead, their largest advantage in an Abacus poll since Carney became Liberal leader last spring.

The good news for Poilievre's Conservatives is that Jeneroux's departure makes a spring election that much less likely. The bad news is that it's happening in a way that will only raise more questions about Poilievre's leadership.

If the Liberals were to win byelections in three seats that are currently vacant — University-Rosedale, Scarborough Southwest and Terrebonne — the governing party would have a narrow majority of 172 MPs. University-Rosedale and Scarborough Southwest are safe Liberal seats, but Terrebonne, decided by one vote last year before the result was overturned by the courts, is the very definition of a toss-up.

To govern comfortably, they might want another couple seats. But a bare majority would at least allow them to control legislative committees and stave off defeat in the House.

There is perhaps some risk that voters will agree with Poilievre and look askew at a majority that was gained, in part, by MPs crossing the floor. But Carney might see that as a risk worth taking for the opportunity to govern for another three-and-a-half years.

For Poilievre, the latest defection is a reminder that his result in the Conservative Party's leadership review won't be the last word on his leadership or the direction of his party. That 87 per cent may have reinforced Poilievre's position, at least in the moment, but Conservative MPs are obviously not obligated to stand by him. And like d'Entremont and Ma before him, it's impossible to say whether Jeneroux will be the last to go.

As evidenced by the dismissive, even angry, messages posted to social-media by Conservative MPs on Wednesday, another defection might act to galvanize some Conservatives. But it seems that even among the remaining Conservative MPs there is a certain independent streak, of a sort that has lately been causing Poilievre different problems.

Last week's Conservative caucus meeting featured an angry exchange over one MP's public declaration that he would refuse a legislated pay raise. And less than 24 hours before Jeneroux's departure, the Conservative leader was being asked by reporters on Parliament Hill to account for a Conservative MP's suggestion that Canadians were going through an "anti-American hissy fit."

It might be true that, one way or another, an election right now would be bad for Conservatives. And it might be fair to say they need time — for the shine to come off Carney, for the acute threat posed by Trump to recede, for Poilievre to reassure Canadians who have misgivings about him. 

But it's also not obvious that things will get easier for Poilievre.

Senior writer

Aaron Wherry has covered Parliament Hill since 2007 and has written for Maclean's, the National Post and the Globe and Mail. He is the author of Promise & Peril, a book about Justin Trudeau's years in power.

---

---