Right--but vote it out and have an election as a result. The relevant question here, I think, is that there is some point at which it is legitimate for the Prime Minister to go to the Governor General and advise, “I want a new election; call an election.” There is a point at which, for example, in the absence of having commanded Parliament's support ever, the throne speech having been voted down, the Prime Minister cannot tender such advice and expect it to be listened to. It would be disregarded, and the Governor General will turn to the leader of the opposition.
Clearly you wouldn't draw the line and say that once you got the throne speech through, the Prime Minister could then give this advice. There is some point--I think you would say--at which the Prime Minister can give that advice, having lost the confidence of the House.
This is the question I'm really asking you here: under the current situation--not under the situation you're proposing, which would change the rules of the game--what would that point be, in your mind?