The real issue

by Andrew Coyne on Friday, January 8, 2010 8:54pm - 266 Comments

Absolute must read by the great John Ibbitson: Few countries can claim such a pathetic Parliament. Every single word…

It is a small symptom of a grave condition. Our Parliament has become the most dysfunctional in the English-speaking world, weaker and more irrelevant than the U.S. Congress or the parliaments of Britain, Australia or New Zealand.

If Britain is the mother of Parliaments, her Canadian daughter is a fallen woman. Government MPs are cowed; parliamentary committees are too often irrelevant. Three consecutive minority governments haven’t strengthened the powers of the House to hold the government to account; instead, they’ve encouraged new methods by which the Prime Minister’s Office seeks to centralize authority…

It isn’t prorogation, as such, that’s the issue. It’s everything around it: the motive, the precedent, and most of all, that our Parliament should be in such a degraded state already that the Prime Minister would think he could slap it around with impunity. All parties have contributed to this, and it is time for all parties to clean up the mess they have created.

That’s what all the facebook fury should be aimed at. That’s what the rallies later this month should take as their subject: not bemoaning the past, but fixing the future. It isn’t as if Parliament is going to be “unprorogued.” It’s what happens after Parliament returns that counts. The first week of March could prove to be a historic moment in the life of Canadian democracy: the opportunity, at long last, for Parliament to stand up, and start to take back the powers and rights that have been stripped from it by successive prime ministers.

And if Parliament won’t stand up on its own, then maybe it will need a little bit of encouragement.

NOTE: There is one sure way to stop anything useful from coming of this, and that is for the opposition parties to try to turn the whole thing into a chance for partisan point-scoring, rather than a genuine reform moment. No doubt there will have to be some barking of shins to impress upon the PM that Parliament means business. But the Liberal leader would make a sign of his sincerity if he were to publicly accept his party’s share of the blame for the damage that has been done to our democracy over the years.

Offer to cooperate with the government on a comprehensive plan of parliamentary reform. Make suggestions; challenge the government to match them. But be constructive. If statesmanship is met with indifference, the voters will be able to draw their own conclusions as to who is interested in restoring popular rule to Canada, and who is not. But first they have to see some statesmanship.

Bookmark and Share
  • John

    “Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognised as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile. Once a nation parts with control of its credit, it matters not who makes the nation's laws…Usury once in control will wreck any nation.”
    William Lyon Mackenzie King, former PM

  • http://yappadingding.blogspot.com/ Yappa

    Please tell us HOW the opposition is supposed to take back parliament.

    People talk as if Ignatieff was never popular. In fact, he was soaring in the polls until he threatened to bring down the government last summer. The approval rating of Ignatieff and the Liberal party suddenly plummeted, and he is only just now crawling back out of that hole.

    A coalition government is a widely used parliamentary device in a situation like this, only Harper has conned Canadians into believing that it's undemocratic. I have even heard them (on CBC radio) refer to last year's coalition as a "coup d'etat".

    Sometimes we can't rely on our representatives to solve things. Sometimes we have to stand up and take charge.

  • Mike T.

    OK after a few days of people trying, there's nothing showing the last Liberal regime was anywhere as bad as the Harper guys. Now granted it was farther in the past and people might have forgotten stuff, but if so it shows that we as a people forgive and that change isn't really necessary.

    Mr. Coyne, I invite you to update your article to point out that while the Liberals might do well to admit past culpabilities, the lion's share of bad behaviour has been shown over the much shorter Harper regime, and that more blame should lie there as well.

  • Tim Fitz

    Mr. Coyne

    You should be promoted to the job of hostng CTV's Question Period. Craig Oliver almost sounded like he was getting soft on Ignatieff there for a few seconds on todays episode. He needs to be replaced ASAP. Can't think of anyone who who has his head up Harper's Ass further than you. That seems to be the main criteria for hiring for CTV so you are a natural.
    Come on . . . at least . . . could you pretend to have some objectivety.

    The problem with our parliamentary system is just what I described above. There is no objective media anymore to keep these political jokers in check. You guys sold out your journalistic morals and jumped into bed with the political partys. Much akin to being a dirty cop on the take from the mob – you sir are a "dirty" journalist! Time for you to get some backbone if you really have an ounce of journalistic credibilty left in you and that you actually believe in fixing what you guys broke!

  • http://yappadingding.blogspot.com/ Yappa

    I disagree that any partisan response to this is invalid. Consider this scenario: we have an election in March-April, and Harper wins a minority or majority government. What will that mean? It will mean that the precedent is set. He can claim that an election was fought on the issue of prorogation and the public supported it.

    The opposition parties have so little money at the moment, compared to the Conservatives, that it seems likely that the Conservatives will win. Therefore, to oppose prorogation we should all be giving money to the nonCon party of our choice.

    It is true that I want Harper to be unseated, but part of the reason I feel so strongly that we must get rid of him is that he is doing great harm to our democracy. Sure, Chretien did a lot of damage, but Harper has taken this to a whole new level. Chretien's prorogations were not nearly as political as Harper's have been.

  • ggcarere

    remember king byng or am i the only one? gg to harper you want to shut down parliament fine with me go back to the legislature and introduce that motion-hello to coyne and ibbitson and simpson-we have a history and precedent use if now now now

From Macleans