Article content continued

Much has changed since, as I wrote recently: the coalition that might form after the next election would be a very different one than the one that collapsed after the prorogation crisis of 2008. More to the point, it’s not obvious who the governor general will call upon this time, or how long they would last in power. Mr. Harper, for example, need not win the most seats to get first crack at forming a government. By convention, the incumbent has the option; were he at least a close second, you may be sure he would give it a thought.

But even if the Conservatives do emerge with the most seats, that does not settle matters. For there would be enormous pressure on the opposition leaders, given the depth of hostility to the government in opposition circles, to vote together to defeat the government in the House of Commons at the first opportunity and to form a government — a coalition government — in its place.

Of course, the first opportunity might not come until some months after the election. As prime minister, Mr. Harper would retain a number of prerogatives as he looked for ways to hang on to power, one of which would be to avoid recalling Parliament for as long as he could. After the 1979 election that returned a Conservative minority, Joe Clark did not recall the House for five months.

Mr. Harper might use the interval to curry favour with voters, or to sow divisions in the opposition, the better to deter them from defeating him. (I do not hold with those who think that, merely for having been reduced from a majority to a minority, Mr. Harper would resign as leader or be pushed out. “The longer I’m prime minister” and all that.) But eventually Parliament would have to sit, which is where the governor general comes in.