Explaining how Canadian politics works when it comes to becoming prime minister

Unelected PMs allowed

Photo: Contributed

Central Okanagan-Similakmeen-Nicola MP Dan Albas

A number of constituents have told me they're confused about what's happening right now in Ottawa.

This past weekend, Mark Carney became the new leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. He took over from Justin Trudeau, who plans to step down as prime minister.

Many are asking, will Carney automatically become prime minister just because he's the new Liberal Party leader?

Let me explain how this works. Right now, Carney is set to become prime minister, but Trudeau is still officially prime minister until the handover occurs. First, Trudeau must tender his resignation to the Governor General, who would then be in the position to ask his successor—Carney—to form a government as prime minister.

In Canada, a prime minister doesn't need to be an Member of Parliament to serve as leader of the country. While it doesn't happen often, this is allowed under our system of government.

Carney is expected to be sworn in as Canada's 24th prime minister this week. At that time, Trudeau will return to serving solely as the Member of Parliament for Papineau. Trudeau has stated that he will not seek re-election.

Another frequent question I get is about the timing of the next federal election. Canada's fixed election date is Oct. 20, 2025, with the election campaign period (writ period) likely to begin in September.

Because Carney will not be allowed to sit on the floor of the House of Commons without being elected MP, it is unlikely he would wait until the fixed election date. An unelected prime minister, who has not won a seat in Parliament, cannot participate in votes or debates on the floor of the House of Commons.

It's important to note Carney will inherit the same minority Liberal government—one that all three major opposition parties have already stated they will vote against when next given the opportunity. Currently, the House of Commons remains prorogued until March 24.

In my assessment, Carney will likely ask Governor General Mary Simon to dissolve the House of Commons and call an election before March 24. According to Elections Canada rules, the campaign period (also known as the writ period) must be between 37 and 51 days long.

If an election is called late next week, Canadians could have a new government by late April or early May—the exact timing would depend on the campaign length chosen by Carney.

If he and the Liberals are re-elected, he will remain as Canada's 24th prime minister. However, if Canadians elect a new government led by a different prime minister, that person would become Canada's 25th prime minister—and Mark Carney would have had one of the shortest terms as prime minister in Canadian history.

My question for you this week:

When would you like to see a federal election called?

You can join in the discussion on my Facebook Page, email me at [email protected] or call toll-free at 1-800-665-8711.

Dan Albas is the Conservative MP for Central Okanagan-Similkameen-Nicola.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

With election talk heating up, MP touts party's counter-tariff plan

Tory counter-tariff plan

Photo: Contributed

Central Okanagan-Similakmeen-Nicola MP Dan Albas

My weekly columns almost need timestamps now, given how rapidly the situation changes—sometimes daily or even hourly—regarding the fluctuating threat of American tariffs on Canadian-manufactured goods imported into the United States.

Given the dynamic nature of the tariff situation, any summary I provide now could be outdated by the time you read this column.

That demonstrates how much of this situation lies beyond our control at the border, as we face continually shifting terms and conditions from the Trump administration. While we cannot control everything, the official

Opposition Conservatives see an opportunity to focus on actions we can take domestically to combat these tariffs effectively.

This week, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre outlined a comprehensive strategy to counter these tariffs effectively. Here is a summary of the plan:

First, we must retaliate with counter-tariffs, targeting American goods in this strategic order: products we can manufacture domestically, non-essential items, and goods we can source from alternative trading partners.
Second, counter-tariffs must not become a revenue windfall for the government. A Conservative government would direct nearly all tariff revenue toward tax relief, while reserving a portion for targeted assistance to workers most affected by the trade war. This represents the fairest solution since Canadian citizens will ultimately bear the cost of these counter-tariffs. We must prevent the federal government from exploiting this crisis through debt-driven spending that serves only to win votes and create divisions between regions of our country.

Third, we must immediately pass a “Bring It Home” tax cut to reduce taxes on work, investment, energy, and homebuilding. That would help neutralize much of the tariffs' effects and boost investment in local economies. The first steps should be eliminating the carbon tax and sales tax on new homes, followed by reversing the capital gains tax increase and reducing income tax—ensuring that hard work is properly rewarded.

Fourth, we must immediately repeal the “no-pipelines” law to advance critical infrastructure projects. Building LNG plants, mines, pipelines, and refineries would create well-paying local jobs while diversifying our export markets beyond the United States.

Fifth, boosting housing construction remains within our control and would strengthen a vital domestic industry that provides well-paying local jobs. By cutting regulatory barriers and taxes on construction, we can help ensure our workers have access to affordable homes.

Sixth, we must unite the provinces to eliminate internal trade barriers and create a single national free market economy—a change that will deliver lower prices for Canadians.

Seventh, in the Canadian Armed Forces we have one of the most highly trained and dedicated military, however it has been asked for too long to do more with less and that must change. We must secure our borders and rebuild our military to assert our sovereignty and strength in the world.

These proposed solutions are practical and grounded in common sense—their merit is difficult to dispute. Yet while the House of Commons remains prorogued by the Liberals, Canada's position continues to weaken due to this lack of action.

My question this week:

What do you think is the best way for Canada to respond to U.S. tariffs on Canadian exports?

I can be reached toll-free 1-800-665-8711, by email at [email protected] or join the discussion online on my Facebook page.

Dan Albas is the Conservative MP for Central Okanagan-Similkameen-Nicola.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

An early election or a return to the House of Commons?

What's next for MPs?

Photo: Contributed

Central Okanagan-Similakmeen-Nicola MP Dan Albas

A common question I've heard lately concerns when the House of Commons will sit again.

In early January, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament to allow the Liberal Party time to select his replacement as party leader. Many have asked if the new Liberal Party leader will automatically become the next Canadian Prime Minister, despite not being elected to that position in a general election. The short answer is yes—unless Trudeau asks the Governor General to dissolve Parliament before a new Liberal leader is selected.

Another related question is , if the next Liberal Party leader is not currently an MP, can they still become prime minister? The short answer is also yes. Under our Westminster Parliamentary system, a prime minister can serve without being an MP, though that situation is rare.

Here's how this works. In 1984, John Turner, a former Liberal MP, was elected to lead the governing Liberal Party and subsequently became prime minister. Because Turner was not an MP, he could not sit on the House of Commons floor or perform the typical Parliamentary duties of a prime minister who holds a seat in Parliament. So his only option was to sit in the guest gallery as an observer.

Obviously, that is not an ideal situation and it resulted in Turner calling a general election that the Liberal Party would lose to the Progressive Conservatives, led by Brian Mulroney, just a few months later. It should be noted Turner was successful in winning a seat to become an MP and became the leader of the official Opposition.

Returning to the original question of when will the House of Commons sit again, the House is currently scheduled to resume sitting on March 24. However, the outcome of the Liberal Party leadership race to replace Trudeau may alter that timeline.

For example, the next Liberal Party leader (and by extension the next prime minister) might call an immediate election, which would prevent the House of Commons from resuming sitting on March 24.

Under Elections Canada rules, the election campaign (writ period) must last between 37 and 51 days. If an election were called in mid-March, Canadians could have a new government by late April or early May, depending on the campaign length chosen by the prime minister.

The timing of when a new government would reconvene the House of Commons after an election would lie solely with the newly elected prime minister.

Alternatively, the winner of the Liberal leadership race, the new prime minister, may choose to let the House of Commons reconvene as scheduled on March 24 for a potential throne speech and other Parliamentary proceedings.

The Liberal Party of Canada will announce its new leader March 9, less than two weeks from now. Theoretically, the writ for our next general election could be dropped within days of that announcement.

My question this week:

Do you support a new Liberal prime minister calling an immediate election or do you believe Parliament should first resume as scheduled?

I can be reached at [email protected] or call toll-free 1-800-665-8711.

Dan Albas is the Conservative MP for Central Okanagan-Similkameen-Nicola.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

Liberal leadership candidate Mark Carney's mixed message on pipelines

Carney on pipelines

Photo: Contributed

Central Okanagan-Similakmeen-Nicola MP Dan Albas

Rarely does a major Canadian federal political news story emerge from the Central Okanagan—yet this week, that's exactly what's happening.

This story is particularly significant given Canada's position as a major energy exporter, with 97% of our crude oil exports in 2023, going to a single market—the United States.

The story unfolded Feb. 12, when Liberal Party leadership frontrunner Mark Carney visited Kelowna to meet with local Liberals and campaign for their support in replacing Justin Trudeau as party leader.

During a meeting, Carney delivered a speech—a common occurrence at political rallies. In his address, he made a bold promise: "Something that my government will do is use all of the powers of the federal government, including the emergency powers of the federal government, to accelerate the major projects that we need."

In my view, this statement reveals how the Liberal government's energy agenda—including Bill C-69 (dubbed the "no new pipelines" bill) and Bill C-48 (the tanker ban for B.C.’s Pacific Northwest coast)—have made national energy projects so complex a candidate for prime minister must resort to citing unnamed "emergency powers" as the only path forward.

The concerns over Carney's comments also reached the Province of Quebec, where just five days later on Feb. 17, a Quebec-based journalist asked Carney if he was going to "impose” a pipeline on Quebec.

The answer from Carney this time changed significantly, with Carney stating that: "I would never impose (a pipeline) on Quebec,".
That contradiction raises a serious question given Carney has also said: "We, as a nation, need to build some new pipelines for conventional energy,"

As anyone following Canadian federal politics over the past few decades knows, the previous Conservative government supported and approved new pipelines to diversify and expand our economic interests internationally and reduce dependence on the United States.

Conversely, the Trudeau government cancelled the previously National Energy Board-approved Northern Gateway pipeline—which would have diversified our energy markets and secured international pricing—with the sole exception being the expansion of the existing Trans-Mountain pipeline. The government also enacted new laws and modified National Energy Board regulations that specifically targeted new pipeline proposals.

A prime example is the Energy East project—which would have transported Alberta's energy to New Brunswick refineries and reduced dependence on foreign imports from countries like Saudi Arabia. This project faced a new requirement to account for upstream emissions—measuring emissions from oil and gas extraction—which were never before been part of energy regulations.

The unprecedented requirement added significant complexity to the project, leading the private sector proponent to abandon it. TC Energy has since continued its successful pipeline construction—not in Canada, but in the United States and Mexico, where such stringent requirements do not exist.

Returning to Carney's position, he claims a newfound interest in building pipelines—promising to use "emergency powers" to get them built—yet only five days later, made the exact opposite promise while in Quebec. While he has since faced accusations of talking out of both sides of his mouth, my question this week comes back to Canadian energy exports:

Do you support building new pipelines to diversify Canada's natural resource exports beyond the United States? Why or why not?

I can be reached at [email protected] or call toll-free 1-800-665-8711.

Dan Albas is the Conservative MP for Central Okanagan-Similkameen-Nicola.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.