Just as labour day is a seasonal milestone for most Canadians, election fever in this country has become a signifier of coming autumn. This year, however, all federal political parties have reason to avoid a vote.

A year ago, there were plenty of reasons for Prime Minister Stephen Harper not to call an election; among the downers he faced were a serious outbreak of potentially fatal listeria in contaminated meat and a rapidly deteriorating economy. But, as we all know, Harper decided that the time was right for his party to call a federal election anyway, even if that meant breaking Harper’s own fixed-term law.

But the election was mostly for naught — at least, from Harper’s point of view. Indeed, it amounted to a humbling personal blow for the prime minister. While the Conservatives wound up increasing their seats in the Commons at the expense of the virtually rudderless Liberals, Canadians still denied Harper his coveted majority — mostly, it seemed, because many voters simply don’t like him.

The Liberals clearly weren’t ready for an election in the fall of 2008, but the Tories turned out not to be ready either. Harper ran the most gaffe-prone campaign for the Conservatives since the great Kim Campbell’s march over the political abyss in 1993. Had it not been for the hapless Liberal opponent, Stéphane Dion, Harper might have joined Campbell among the ranks of former prime ministers.

Today, the two major parties are as deadlocked in the popularity polls as they were a year ago. Although the Liberals and their new leader appear to have plateaued, Harper doesn’t have Dion to kick around anymore. Tory support in Quebec and Ontario continues to deteriorate. As a result, the Tories this year aren’t so keen for an election.

As for the Liberals, new leader Michael Ignatieff is still suffering from a hard lesson in June, when he brought the country to the brink of an election over the issue of employment insurance and then pulled back. Empty threats don’t pay in politics. This time, if the Liberals’ disagreement with the Tories over EI goes to the brink, Ignatieff will have to move for a vote of non-confidence — even though EI still doesn’t have enough traction to be a ballot issue for most voters.

Today, Ignatieff and Harper share a common problem. Canadians have yet to warm to either one of them. Harper proved in 2006 and 2008 that Canadians don’t have to like someone to elect him or her — at least, to a minority government. But Harper has to keep in mind that he received a lot of help from the Liberals.

This government continues to be its own worst enemy. It can’t resist polarizing controversy, no matter how unnecessary. The recent, widely criticized examples of not allowing two Canadian citizens back into Canada amply demonstrate this.

When the Harper Tories took power in 2006, this genius for trouble was due in part to inexperience. But there are signs, recent relapses aside, that the Tories are finally learning how to sheathe their claws. Harper has become as adept as former Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien at steering the ship of state without much regard for his own stated principles and promises.

Harper is learning to keep his thoughts to himself, and he is quick to respond to the public’s perceptions with announcements of action, contrived or otherwise. In fact, despite the current government’s Reform Party roots, in many ways it looks a lot like Chrétien’s.

Now, Ignatieff can’t count on Tory gaffes to get him elected. It is understandable, however, why the Liberals are reluctant to show Canadians their vision of what Canada should be, which would be the obvious route to building voter support. It will be a long time before the Liberals forget what the Tories were able to do to Dion’s carbon tax. Why provide another target now?

But the current Liberal leader still needs to find a way to connect with Canadians. To that end, Ignatieff needs to get back in the news. A good place to start would be to allow the press gallery to scrum members of the shadow cabinet as they leave their weekly meetings, as former governments used to allow coverage of cabinet before Harper threw a veil of secrecy over Parliament Hill.

@page_break@So, if the major parties find themselves in a game of brinkmanship, it will be up to one of the smaller parties to decide if we go to the polls. The New Democratic Party’s chronic branding issues are coming to a head. This is why the party is desperate enough to even countenance a name change on the eve of a possible election.

But if the NDP — or whatever the party winds up calling itself — decides it can pick up a couple of seats or retain what it has now, there will be an election. After all, this is the same party that was willing to kill a national daycare strategy and the Kelowna accord by deciding to join the Harper Tories in voting non-confidence in the Liberals in November 2005.

It is a similar story with the Bloc Québécois. Even if recent reports of Gilles Duceppe’s exit are indeed exaggerated, he is approaching his “best before” date. The Bloc may decide to consolidate their gains in Quebec before the Liberals get stronger there.

A federal election few seem to want is still possible. IE