Right now, 338 Canada has the following:
LIB 136 ** rounded down from 136.6 to make the total 338 seats
CPC 123
Bloc 39
NDP 36
Green 2
PPC 1
IND 1 (Jody-Wilson)
If this is the outcome, it is quite probable the Liberals will get together with the NDP, either in a coalition (where NDP ministers get appointed) or unofficially (similar to in British Columbia where there is a supply agreement that gives the 3 Green Party MLAs more power far above what their electoral standing would otherwise give them).
The implications to this will be fairly clear:
1) TMX is dead
2) BC-LNG will probably face huge hurdles (the Coastal Gaslink natural gas pipeline is provincially regulated) which will probably face regulatory federal barriers… and this will be at odds with the provincial BC NDP government – it will be interesting to see what concessions will occur here.
3) Carbon taxes will be guaranteed to rise, and in general, costs will rise significantly
4) Erosion of the Canadian dollar
5) Probable increases in corporate tax and capital gains taxes
If your money is anywhere around oil and gas in Canada (or pretty much anything for that matter), things will probably get worse.
However, with the surge in the NDP in the polls, this actually bodes well for the Conservatives in certain areas (recall in 2011 that a majority government was obtained with the assistance of the NDP sucking up what would otherwise have been Liberal votes). Because of this and the “shy Tory” effect (where Conservative voters are less likely to report to polling agencies their support), there are alternate scenarios which may surprise people on election day, e.g.
CPC 140
LIB 119
Bloc 39
NDP 36
Green 2
PPC 1
IND 1
In this case you get a CPC-Quebec informal alliance. There is also the outside possibility of a LIB-Bloc-NDP coalition, which was attempted after the 2008 election, which I would not entirely rule out, especially if the CPC can’t get together with the Bloc in any material capacity. There’d be another election in a short time frame to hash things out.
So, various scenarios to look out for:
If LIB > 169, apparently being massively hypocritical and corrupt is rewarded with votes as long as food is on the table;
If LIB+NDP+Green > 169, then it’s a probable Liberal government again, sell everything;
If LIB+Bloc > 169, you’ll still get PM Trudeau, then get ready for Quebec subsidy mania! (pick some stocks on https://divestor.com/?p=8934 and might as well buy some call options on SNC while you’re at it)
The plurality of seats condition kicks in if LIB+NDP+Green or LIB+Bloc+Green < 170, which in that case the CPC would have more seats than the Liberals. Despite news headlines and Justin Trudeau himself (in 2015) saying that the party with the most seats should have the first chance to govern, it isn’t apparent to me that Trudeau will step down until he tries to negotiate some sort of anti-CPC coalition. Watch out for Liberal/NDP headlines saying “2/3rds of Canadians did not vote for a Conservative government” and stuff to that extent to try to make a moral argument why the Liberals should stay in. My guess is that if the Liberals fall 15 seats short of the CPC but still have a workable coalition, they’ll do it. Anything more than a 15 seat difference with the CPC and keeping government becomes more difficult.
The only defense the CPC has (other than an obvious out-right majority) is a CPC+Bloc arrangement (if their seat count is 170 or above). Despite seeming odd to partner with separatists, this was successfully done before: in 1984 and 1988, where the Progressive Conservatives (under Brian Mulroney) successfully formed an internal coalition with the Quebec separatists to win two majority governments. This fractured badly in the early 1990’s and the Bloc Quebecois were created as a result – in addition to destroying the Progressive Conservatives (leading to the uprise of the Reform Party).
A potential CPC+Bloc arrangement will likely involve trading some provincial concessions for energy-positive developments strictly on the west coast of Canada. It would take shape in the form of provincial autonomy and decentralization of federal powers (closer to what the Canadian constitution was formed as), which was fairly standard Harper-style governance. The next month will be interesting to say the least.
Interesting comments. Whatever the outcome I certainly will not be “selling everything”. I think trying to predict election winners AND the policies they will enact AND the effect on the economy AND the effect on the stock market all at once is pretty hopeless!
Just to be clear “sell everything” is hyperbole. But definitely the result (LIB+NDP) won’t be friendly to capital markets.
Absolute nightmarish outcome. Worst than a Liberal majority. Instead of tax loss selling, you may get sell the winner & keep the losers at year end.
@Will, the Liberals and NDP have elements of an economic agenda together (e.g. watch out for those “make the rich pay their fair share” type electioneering) but on a lot of other elements this is going to cause political theatrics, e.g. the NDP has every incentive now to push the Quebec bill 21 wedge and the opposition can gang up on various Liberal corruptions, etc.
But for Alberta oil and gas… good luck.
I think the CPC has really boxed themselves in with a do-nothing approach to climate change and opposition to carbon taxes. It’s not selling well with voters outside AB/SK and has made them too toxic for other parties to work with. It’s creating a growing mass of ABC voters (anybody but Con). There’s no logic to it and it just seems like “virtue signalling” to the Conservative base at this point. I think if they were smart they’d steal the idea from the Liberals and do it better. ie. 100% rebates by law collected by an independent agency. Michael Chong wanted to do that when he was running for the leadership, but he got booed off the stage.
@Rod. Exactly right. In the cross Canada underage school vote, the CPC finished in third place behind the Liberals, and NDP. The Green party also performed well in that vote. The CPC currently appeals mostly to older, and rural voters, and face incremental decline unless they adapt their Climate Change policies to the new realities, and sway more urban voters as the demographic urbanization trend in Canada continues. The premiers of Alberta, and Sask. are also shooting themselves in the foot with their carbon tax opposition (quid pro quo for pipelines), and by not leading in the development of green renewable energy , along with their abundant oil, and gas.
Yes @Rod/Caritas. I think we are witnessing an “escalation of commitment” by the UCP and Kenney’s provincial government, which Wikipedia describes as “a human behavior pattern in which an individual or group facing increasingly negative outcomes from a decision, action, or investment nevertheless continues the behavior instead of altering course. The actor maintains behaviors that are irrational, but align with previous decisions and actions.”
A good start on a way forward would be for Sheer and Kenney to admit they have been wrong about carbon taxes and reset their respective platforms to embrace them (and improve them to align with conservative principles) as the best solution to addressing the cross-Canada political demand for real action on CO2-e emissions. Unfortunately, its almost impossible to see this as a real possibility. Instead, we will probably get more finger pointing at China and India as the “real” culprits in climate change and a doubling down on the idea of ethical oil.
Just a bit of ranting – I’m extremely disappointed with fellow Ontarian. They always put up with government robbing them. On a provincial level – they tolerated Ontario Health premium (a latent new tax), tolerated HST, tolerated cap-and-trade, tolerated huge hydro bills (eventually fed up), new payroll taxes – in the name of enhanced CPP. They keep electing the Liberals. I’m just so sick of it! I recall folks in BC protest and got rid of the HST.
I really think Conservatives need a better messenger, they never had a charismatic messenger since Mulroney. What the Conservative saying are ‘real’ – we don’t create that much greenhouse gases and won’t move the needle much regardless of what Canada do or doesn’t do. Climate change was a fringe issue at the beginning and the other parties some how make able to make it a front-and-center issue.
They just need better messengers and marketing campaign.
I think they would go a long way in using logic as the basis for the Conservative platform like attacking oil supply doesn’t do anything to reduce demand. Carbon taxes can help reduce the use of fossil fuels but it can’t be at the level that kills Canadian’s global competitiveness. An across the board income tax cut can help offset the carbon tax.
Renewables are interesting but they use a lot of natural gas in order to offset their intermittent nature. Renewables also take up a lot of space and wind power in particular kills a lot of birds. Nuclear and hydro are the best sources of carbon free energy and we happen to have a lot of uranium. A plan to build more nuclear power plants should be part of the Conservative agenda.
We should spend more money on adaptation because we can’t control what other countries do and even if all climate change goals are meant, it doesn’t mean that we know exactly what the impacts will be. There is so much infrastructure spending that is necessary anyway that can help with adaptation and we should be willing to run deficits with interest rates at all time lows in order to accomplish that.
Scheer might even have won if after the blackface incident he had just come out and said what most Canadians think. Trudeau made some bad decisions in the past, his actions since suggest he is not a racist and cancel culture is not good for society.
Instead they spent the whole election trying to get the Prairies to hate the rest of the country and think we all want to make them suffer.
Let me just say this is the most respectful political discussion I’ve read on the internet in a long time. Maybe you should all run for the House of Commons.