List of prime ministers of Canada - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org

While constitutional conventions “are not enforced by the law courts”, this pretty much allows any unelected official to hold the role of Prime Minister.

We need to respect the law, including constitutional conventions.

  • AlolanVulpix@lemmy.caOPMEnglish
    16·
    6 days ago

    I understand you are saying this now, but violating constitutional conventions is dangerous:

    1. We must respect all laws, even unwritten ones, to be unconstitutional is to be uncanadian.
    2. This sets the precedent that, well any unelected person could be put into the PMO, which has more power (comparatively) than an American president.
    3. There’s no rules for “brain”, so this further sets up the possibility of both no seat and no brain.
    • ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish
      21·
      6 days ago

      1. Conventions are conveniences. There is no law against a seatless PM. The overriding requirement (again for practical conveniences sake) is that the PM command the confidence of a majority of the house. As it is more damaging to the conduct of business to have a non-functioning Commons than it is to have a non-member PM, the latter is preferable. By convention the PM then seeks election to a seat either by general or by-election.

      2. Not a precedent. This has happened quite a few times before.

      • AlolanVulpix@lemmy.caOPMEnglish
        12·
        5 days ago
        1. There are so many unwritten constitutional conventions. The UK example, literally doesn’t have a written constitution. This point about constitutional conventions being conveniences are ridiculous.
        2. Even if it has happened a few times before, it further stretches the norms of how government operates – better or for worse. I believe it is worse because it can open up: “no seat and no brain” scenarios.