Yes and no. The situation you describe is perfectly possible, but I don’t think we could have such a farcical recount as the one going on in Florida because our actual method of voting, although more low-tech, is more reliable.
In any event, you’re into hung Parliament territory whether the result is a majority of one or zero, so I can’t see the overall outcome of a general election–who gets to form a government–hanging on the result of one constituency.
Some might say that would be a capital idea.
Right, I did some poking around, and found out some information about how long it’s taken for changeovers in Canadian governments at the federal level.
Hope this answers your question, The Ryan. By my calculations, the average time for a transition in Canadian federal politics, not counting the anomalous episode with PM Mackenzie in 1873, is 15.3 days.
In the following table, I’ve set out the election date, and then the date that the new Prime Minister and Cabinet were sworn in, followed by the elapsed time.
Note that I’ve only included the cases where a Prime Minister has lost the election, and been replaced by a new Prime Minister. I’ve not included the cases where a PM has retired and a new PM has been selected by the party without a general election - it’s only the “hostile takeovers,” so to speak.
For example, PM Pearson, a Liberal, resigned in 1968. The Liberals then chose Pierre Trudeau as their party leader, so he became PM without an immediate general election. (Of course, he called one soon afterwards, to gain his mandate to govern, and won a landslide.) Similarly, Campbell isn’t shown taking over from Mulroney in 1993. (Of course, she called an election soon afterwards to gain her mandate to govern, and led the PCs to the worst defeat in Canadian history - they went from having a majority to having 2 seats, total - Campbell lost her own seat.)
Since I’m only giving the dates for the hostile takeovers, several PMs aren’t included in the table.
There are also a couple of anomalies: Prime Minister Mackenzie in 1873, and Prime Minister Meighen in 1926. I explain those in notes at the end.
**New PM Election Day Sworn In Time Elapsed**
Mackenzie January 22, 1874* November 7, 1873 2 months, 15 days
Macdonald September 17, 1878 October 17, 1878 1 month
Laurier June 23, 1896 July 11, 1896 18 days
Borden September 21, 1911 October 10, 1911 19 days
King December 6, 1921 December 29, 1921 23 days
Meighen June 8, 1926** June 29, 1926 21 days
King September 14, 1926 September 25, 1926 11 days
Bennett July 28, 1930 August 7, 1930 10 days
King October 14, 1935 October 23, 1935 9 days
Diefenbaker June 10, 1957 June 21, 1957 11 days
Pearson April 8, 1963 April 22, 1963 14 days
Clark May 22, 1979 June 4, 1979 13 days
Trudeau February 18, 1980 March 3, 1980 13 days
Mulroney September 4, 1984 September 17, 1984 13 days
Chrétien October 25, 1993 November 4, 1993 10 days
**Average 15.3 days**
** Arthur Meighen became PM as a result of a similar episode. PM King’s government was in danger of losing a vote of censure in the House. King asked the GovGen for a dissolution and elections, but the GovGen refused, saying that he did not want to interfere with the House while a major item like a vote of censure was pending. King resigned in a huff, leaving Her Majesty without a government for three weeks. The GovGen called on Meighen, who eventually was able to form a government, without going to the polls. (He in turn lost the confidence of the House and then there was an election, which King won.) I’ve used the date of King’s resignation as the equivalent to the election date for the data on Meighen.
erratum: that should be “His Majesty” in the note on Meighen, not “Her Majesty.” (When Elizabeth dies, it’s going to take me awhile to get used to referring to King Chuck, or whatever name he decides to use.)
TomH. I agree that the British system of ballot counting gives less scope for dispute. Remember, however, that machines were used in the London mayoral elections, with rather farcical results. Remember also that the present Labour government did toy with various reforms to the election system, including the possibility of electronic voting. One indirect effect of the Florida result is that we won’t hear anything more about that in the near future.
As I myself pointed out, it is existance of the smaller parties in Britain which makes it unlikely that a General Election would turn on a single seat. However in a hung Parliament single seats can matter, not least because the narrower the margin of seats, the greater the permutations of possible coalitions.
Thanks, jti, that was a rather detailed answered. But I’m not really clear on what the lapsed time represents. Is it time spent choosing a new PM, or do they just take a long time to get around to swearing in the new PM? In the interim, does the previous PM head the government, or does the government go without a leader? Also, while one party winning a clear majority would certainly would make choosing an MP relatively simple, my impression was that, without a strong two-party system, parliamentary systems often end up with no party winning a majority. In that case, how long does it take to choose a PM? Do the party officials spend a few hours on the phone on election night making deals, or is it more protacted?
I suppose if we’re talking multiparty coalitions, someone familiar with Italian or Israeli politics might have a better idea of how long it takes to form a new government.
The Ryan, in the case of a majority government, the “time elapsed” is for purely formal things, like the incoming PM organising his Cabinet, the outgoing PM shredding papers, and so on.
Of the 14 changeovers on the chart I posted (again, not counting the Mackenzie government, which was unique), in 8, the new PM headed a majority government.
Of the other 6, in addition to the formalities, there would have been behind-the-scenes dickering between the party that formed the government and some of the smaller parties, trying to ensure the government had the support of the majority of the House. PM King was a master at that - all three of his governments in the 20s were minority governments. PM Clark, on the other hand, took office saying that he would govern as if he had a majority, immediately pissed off the small right wing party that was his obvious ally in the Commons, and lost office 9 months after being sworn in.
The outgoing PM stays in office between the election and the swearing in of the new one, but is in “caretaker” mode - just keeps the engine of government ticking over, the pensioners paid, etc., but doesn’t do anything at all controversial, doesn’t make any appointments to gov’t offices, and so on. The goal is continuity - there should always be a government in office. That’s why King’s immediate resignation in '26 was so unusual - for a three week period, Canada didn’t have a federal government.
We have some new data on Canadian elections. Here’s the initial results for today’s general election:
Liberals 169
Alliance 68
Bloc Qué. 39
NDP 13
PC 12
**Total: 301**
There are still a few close ridings, where the votes are being counted, and the exact number of seats is flipping back and forth slightly. (For example, half an hour ago the NDP were showing with 15 seats; two of those are now projected for the Alliance).
So, in answer to the OP, by the end of election night tonight, we know that Prime Minister Chrétien’s led his Liberals to their third straight majority. The fact that a few seats are still uncertain is just a detail.