Article content continued

The showdown over the government’s decision to scrap that campaign pledge was to get underway on Thursday, although the vote would likely be put off until early next week.

Not, that is, that the timing would make much difference: the wording seems sufficiently stark that the government would have no choice but to instruct Liberal members to defeat it.

Those members would, of course, have the option of not taking that advice, although they might find themselves ejected from caucus if they do so.

On the very off chance that a majority of MPs — which would have to include at least dozen or so Liberals — endorse the motion, the request for a prime ministerial apology is, of course, not binding on Justin Trudeau, although if it actually got to that point, it’s hard to see how he could avoid it without risking any remaining shred of credibility he might have on the democratic reform front.

Either way, the Liberals will want to make sure that any and all MPs assigned to House duty on Thursday are fully prepared to counter the claim that Trudeau “misled” Canadians.

That line of attack will almost certainly involve attempting to make the same point that Gould put forward on Thursday: namely, that while first-past-the-post may not be perfect, “no electoral system is,” and the status quo has served Canadians reasonably well for 150 year and counting.

But as much as the Liberals might dread the prospect of spending another day on the defensive over the decision to abandon electoral reform, it still might be preferable to the other proposition that the New Democrats had put forward for consideration.