More from Susan Delacourt available More fromavailable here

Every now and then, governments need to be reminded that they only rent their power — they don’t own it, no matter how long they’ve held the keys to the fancy offices in Ottawa.

Elections are one such reminder; so are the “caretaker conventions” now in force during the current campaign. If Stephen Harper’s government does sign a big trade deal at the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in Atlanta this week, expect some pointed questions about whether Conservatives are stretching the limits of their current, caretaker power.

On Aug. 2, when Harper officially plunged Canada into this extra-long election, the Privy Council Office issued a set of guidelines on how government should operate during a campaign — rules of engagement, you might call them.

Basically, these guidelines say that the government should make sure the lights stay on and the bills are paid, but “major decisions” should be avoided whenever possible.

Of course, not all major decisions can be deferred until after Oct. 19, so the rules also offer some guidance on how to proceed:

In certain cases where a major decision is unavoidable during a campaign (e.g., due to an international obligation or an emergency), consultation with the opposition parties may be appropriate, particularly where a major decision could be controversial or difficult for a new government to reverse. In short, during an election, a government should restrict itself — in matters of policy, expenditure and appointments — to activity that is:

(a) routine, or

(b) non-controversial, or

(c) urgent and in the public interest, or

(d) reversible by a new government without undue cost or disruption, or

(e) agreed to by opposition parties (in those cases where consultation is appropriate).

I asked senior New Democrat and Liberal officials this week whether they had been consulted on the TPP negotiations.

“The government has done nothing to brief us on anything and has sent clear orders to the civil service not to do anything either,” said one, who preferred to speak only as a “senior Liberal.” The NDP adviser said much the same thing: “The government has not reached out on TPP.”

Until very recently in this country, it was standard practice for the government in power to help opposition parties prepare for a possible transition of power — or at least to avoid throwing obstacles in the way. Until very recently in this country, it was standard practice for the government in power to help opposition parties prepare for a possible transition of power — or at least to avoid throwing obstacles in the way.

Back in August, Michael Geist at the University of Ottawa noticed that the PCO guidelines seemed to have been written with an anticipated TPP deal in mind. Beyond the provisions listed above, Geist observed that the rules also state that:

… for greater clarity, there may be compelling reasons for continued participation by Ministers and/or officials in specific activities such as treaty negotiations. For example, when negotiations are at a critical juncture with timelines beyond Canada’s control, the failure to participate in ongoing negotiations during the caretaker period could negatively impact Canada’s interests. Under such conditions, a compelling case may be made for ongoing efforts to protect Canada’s interests. Irreversible steps such as ratification should be avoided during this caretaker period.

The talks this week in Atlanta would fit that description, it seems. But given that either the New Democrats or the Liberals could be in power after Oct. 19, and in charge of that subsequent ratification vote in the Commons, wouldn’t it make sense to keep them both in the loop?

This isn’t wild-eyed optimism about the ability of politicians to put politics aside, even in the heat of an election battle. Until very recently in this country, it was standard practice for the government in power to help opposition parties prepare for a possible transition of power — or at least to avoid throwing obstacles in the way of assistance from the public service.

David Zussman, who oversaw the transition process for Jean Chretien’s Liberals in 1993, laid all this out in his 2014 book, Off and Running: The Prospects and Pitfalls of Government Transitions in Canada. Zussman also said that the practice of assisting the opposition ceased during Paul Martin’s brief time in power; Harper simply carried on where Martin left off. No coincidence, that was around the same time we started getting used to the idea of a “permanent campaign” in Canadian politics — where parties never stop fighting the next election.

We do know that the New Democrats and the Liberals have transition teams in place (in case they do end up in charge after Oct. 19) and reportedly they have had some limited contact with the public service. But not, apparently, on the TPP negotiations — which could be at the top of the to-do list for any government after election day, whether it’s a new one or a re-elected one.

It’s been widely observed that the longer governments stay in power, the more they get used to thinking of themselves as the only people qualified to govern. Some people call that entitlement, or a “natural governing party” attitude.

It shows up in media relations too. Long-time journalists on the Hill know that the best political aides in government are the ones who worked in opposition, too — not just because of their long memories, but because of their humility. Once you’ve begged reporters to cover your press conference, it’s hard to treat them shabbily once you’ve moved to a nicer office.

In the early days of the Harper administration nearly a decade ago, it branded itself as “Canada’s New Government” in all its press releases. It was annoying — but it also may have kept the Conservatives humble by reminding them daily that, in a democracy, power is as temporary as it is precious.

No politician, whether in opposition or in government, wants to contemplate the possibility of defeat while an election is under way. But we have a long tradition in Canada of making sure that changes of power happen as smoothly as possible after an election.

Consulting the NDP and the Liberals on a looming trade deal as vast as the TPP might get in the way of election politics, but it’s also good government. Strong, stable government, you might say.

Susan Delacourt is one of Canada’s best-known political journalists. Over her long career she has worked at some of the top newsrooms in the country, from the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail to the Ottawa Citizen and the National Post. She is a frequent political panelist on CBC Radio and CTV. Author of four books, her latest — Shopping For Votes — was a finalist for the prestigious Hilary Weston Writers’ Trust Prize for Canadian non-fiction in 2014. She teaches classes in journalism and political communication at Carleton University.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.