OTTAWA—Who decides who’s in and who’s out of Liberal caucus?

Is it the prime minister? Is it caucus?

You can be forgiven for not knowing.

As the governing Liberals have tried to figure out what to do about former cabinet ministers Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott, even they don’t appear to be sure.

It should not be this way.

Under a law passed by Parliament in 2015 all parliamentary caucuses were obliged to decide by internal vote at their first meeting the extent of the powers of the prime minister and members of the caucus to decide key issues like membership and expulsion.

Read more:

Celina Caesar-Chavannes quits Liberal caucus

Opinion | Thomas Walkom: Jody Wilson-Raybould still controls the SNC-Lavalin narrative

Who is Jane Philpott, the Trudeau cabinet minister whose sudden resignation has rocked Ottawa?

Conservative MP Michael Chong, who sponsored the changes in a private members’ bill that became the Reform Act, believed the Liberals, and the New Democrats, were in clear violation of that law because he has tried for three years and failed to get the results of their caucus votes after the last general election.

However, the Liberal party disputes there was ever any breach.

Nonetheless, in the Liberal party’s case, it has all led to much confusion over how to decide the fate of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott.

The Conservatives did vote on the measure. And one of its votes determined that only the Conservative caucus, elected MPs and senators, can decide on the fate of a fellow caucus member, not the leader. One can resign, but leader Andrew Scheer can’t kick anyone out without a vote of caucus.

On Wednesday, Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes quit caucus, in apparent regret over having disappointed her caucus colleagues when she gave an interview critical of Justin Trudeau at the height of the SNC-Lavalin affair. She tweeted an apology over the “unintended effects” her interview had.

It fuelled the Conservative Opposition’s attacks Wednesday on Trudeau as a “fake feminist” who drives out strong women or silences them in his cabinet and caucus.

Yet two higher-profile players in the SNC-Lavalin drama — MPs Wilson-Raybould and Philpott — remain in the Liberal caucus fold despite having quit cabinet.

Each has protested the Trudeau government’s handling of allegations the PMO tried to politically influence the SNC-Lavalin prosecution. But their reasons for quitting cabinet have still not been publicly detailed.

Philpott told the Star in a brief interview Wednesday it was not the time to speak at length about why she quit cabinet but remains in a caucus led by Trudeau.

“My letter made it clear that I believe that the Liberal party has the best plan for our country and I am fully supportive of our party and our approach on a range of important issues,” she said.

Caucus sources say discussions in caucus meetings were heated Wednesday, with Liberals venting concerns about the damage the past few weeks have done to the Liberal party, however the MPs in their sights were not ousted.

Senior officials in the PMO told the Star in recent weeks it would be up to Liberal caucus colleagues to decide their fate.

Yet Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested it would be his call, telling reporters he was “reflecting” on their future.

By Wednesday, he had clearly decided that to lose them entirely would be more damaging.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Without naming Wilson-Raybould or Philpott, Trudeau suggested bygones could be bygones, but left open the possibility that all wounds weren’t healed.

“Any member wanting to run for us in the next election obviously believes in what we want to do and the two members in question have been saying, thus far, they wish to run for the Liberal party in the next election,” Trudeau said Wednesday.

He also praised Caesar-Chavannes’ work for the party and wished her well.

Trudeau tried to make a virtue of necessity, saying it is a “strength of our party that there is a diversity of opinions and perspectives.”

Yet Michael Chong draws a thread through what he sees as the Liberal government’s disdain for the independence of the attorney general’s role in overseeing prosecutions in the SNC-Lavalin affair, and the Liberals’ refusal to publicly state whether and how it complied with the Reform Act that required votes to determine the mechanisms to expel caucus members.

In fact, Chong wrote Wilson-Raybould when she first took office, and her successor David Lametti, before the SNC-Lavalin affair broke on Feb. 7, to flag the failure of the governing party to follow that law.

Neither replied to him, Chong said.

After the Star sent an inquiry to Lametti’s office Wednesday, spokesperson David Taylor replied by email: “The letter was received. The Government will be providing a written response to Mr. Chong in due course.”

The law has practical effects, says Chong, as it determines the power of the prime minister and the powers of caucus.

But more important, Chong says “These matters concern the independence of our judicial system and the balance of power at the heart of our democracy.”

Late Wednesday night, the PMO told the Star it is wrong to say the Liberal caucus was in breach of the law. Trudeau spokesperson Chantal Gagnon refused to release publicly any results of any caucus votes, but said caucus did send a letter in 2015 to the Commons Speaker’s office, as required, advising of the governing party’s caucus position. She said there were votes, but would not reveal the outcomes citing confidentiality of caucus discussions.

After the Liberals first came to power, news reports of the day said the Liberals had punted the question to their next convention.

Chong asked the Speaker’s office to release any Liberal letter early in the Liberals’ mandate, but says his request was denied.

The Speaker’s office confirmed late Wednesday it received a letter from the Liberal caucus, but could not disclose what it said.

If it was clear to Liberal MPs who has the last say on who gets to stay and who goes, several appeared to be in the dark Wednesday morning.

Read more about: