Prorogation: Harper was Wrong and so is McGuinty

I sometimes employ a test to see if I'm being overly partisan.  So i pose the question "would I oppose a conservative policy or piece of legislation if it were instead promoted by the Liberals or NDP". This framing helps me to focus on the issue and not on the party responsible. An objective assessment of an action is necessary and only possible if rancour a partisanship is but aside .

Yesterday Dalton McGuinty resigned as leader of the liberal party. A surprise to the general public and perhaps to the elites as well. Then he dropped the other shoe, prorogation. Peter Loewen of the Ottawa Citizen offers up this analysis. For those needing a quick reminder of the definition of Prorogation is here is a handy reminder. Its use is quite specific.

"In the Canadian parliamentary system, the legislature is typically prorogued upon the completion of the agenda set forth in the Speech from the Throne..."

This is in my opinion, the only acceptable use of this singularly powerful tool. The executive brings to a halt all action in the legislature.

The principal effect of ending a session by prorogation is to terminate business. Members are released from their parliamentary duties until Parliament is next summoned. All unfinished business is dropped from or “dies” on the Order Paper and all committees lose their power to transact business, providing a fresh start for the next session. No committee can sit during a prorogation. Bills which have not received Royal Assent before prorogation are “entirely terminated” and, in order to be proceeded with in the new session, must be reintroduced as if they had never existed.

You can see the appeal of prorogation, for Governments facing legislative opposition, contempt allegations or loss of power. Harper has used it to avoid accountability in the house, 3 times. McGuinty is doing the same. Prorogation must be placed in the context that it occurs. Under the circumstances of a completed legislative agenda then prorogation carries no taint. But when used to avoid accountability it becomes odious.

Mr. McGuinty's reasons for the prorogue are spurious. He says that the need to act on public service pay  cuts and to engage in consultation on this issue with opposition parties requires the legislative break. So to carry on the business of government you need to close government. The purpose of the legislature is to deal with these issues, in public, not behind office doors. Yes the legislature is fractious and time consuming and work is delayed that might otherwise be moved swiftly forward. That is sometimes the cost of democratic government. A bill I am most willing to pay.

McGuinty has done good things for Ontario, in Education and Health. They have also done poorly on Energy, Ornge or E-Health. When they are facing real criticisms for damage done it is not appropriate for the Liberal government to side step these calamities by closing the Legislature. I would be appropriate if the Lieutenant Governor denied the request to prorogue, but that is unlikely. I surmise that the Liberals having taken a page from Harper's book on "Prorogation and avoiding accountability" hope to be as equally successful in retaining public support as Harper was. 

It was wrong for Harper to do it. It is wrong for McGuinty.