|
Prorogation limits an idea with merit |
|
|
|
Written by Lethbridge Herald
|
|
Monday, January 25 2010, 9:11 PM |
Credit Prime Minister Stephen Harper for one thing: He’s succeeded in sparking a widespread interest in parliamentary procedure.
Steadily declining voter turnout in federal elections might suggest a lack of interest among the general populace in the nitty-gritty workings of Canada’s political system. But Harper’s prorogation of Parliament in December has made the democratic process a hot topic across the country.
The issue drew thousands of Canadians from coast to coast to attend prorogation protests held on Saturday, including one in Toronto featuring more than 3,000 protesters. An event in Lethbridge attracted about 50 demonstrators despite the chilly weather.
The latest wrinkle in the controversy was introduced Monday when federal Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff announced his party will propose changing the parliamentary rules on prorogation to prevent governments from shutting down Parliament for their own purposes.
Under the Liberal proposals, the prime minister would be required to give at least 10 days written notice of the intention to prorogue Parliament, disclose specific reasons for doing so and allow a full debate on the issue in the House of Commons.
The proposals would also prevent the prime minister from proroguing for longer than a month, or doing so within a year of the last suspension of Parliament. It would also prevent prorogation when the government is facing a confidence vote unless a Commons majority consents to it.
The suggested changes would also permit parliamentary committees to keep functioning even while Parliament is suspended, a measure stemming from the opposition’s belief that the latest prorogation was done to muzzle the special committee examining the Afghan detainee controversy.
The Liberal proposals come on the heels of a more basic proposal tossed out by the New Democrats last week tha would call for the PM to obtain a majority consent from the Commons before proroguing.
The Bloc Quebecois says it supports in principle proposals that would place limits on the prime minister’s prorogation power but questions whether such attempts would be constitutional.
On the surface, though, the idea has merit. The prime minister’s ability to shut down Parliament on a whim when things start to get uncomfortable certainly runs counter to the principles of democracy and accountability that should be foundations of the parliamentary system. Most Canadians may not be experts on parliamentary procedure but they recognize self-serving manipulation when they see it and that’s what has so many citizens fired up about the prorogation affair. They feel duped and it’s difficult to see Harper’s latest shenanigans as anything else. Had the Liberals done something like this a few years ago when the Conservatives were the official Opposition, you can bet they’d be hollering loud and long about the insult to democracy.
Michel Guimond, the Bloc’s whip, said his party has been advised by legal experts that the only way to change the prorogation rules is by a constitutional amendment approved by the provinces.
If that’s what it would take, maybe it’s an issue worth investigating. No matter which party is in power, such antics don’t further the cause of, or Canadians’ confidence in, the democratic process.
|
