I'm simply saying that in our British Westminster model, if the government is defeated on a matter of confidence, that is what the crown must take cognizance of. The constitutional experts can argue on that.
I think the point, though.... Again I emphasize the practical versus the theoretical. Honourable members keep talking about the theory, and I understand that. But again I point you to the empirical evidence: in jurisdictions where this has happened, there has been no legal restraint on the power of the prime minister or the crown. The political reality is that politicians act within that paradigm. It almost creates a new paradigm. Therefore, if it's apparent to the opposition and the press that the government is manipulating its own defeat in this new paradigm, the prime minister and his government are going to face a bigger consequence than they did in the past.