Michaelle Jean Talks About Prorogation

Today the outgoing Governor General of Canada briefly discussed her decision to prorogue parliament (for the first time) in 2008.

You may remember the time of political crisis when the 3 opposition party leaders decided to oust Stephen Harper from the Prime Ministers Office and form a coalition government. (You can read my previous post from December 2008 here:http://thoughtsofrainn.blogspot.com/2008/12/harper-prorogues-parliament.html)

There was a certain amount of outrage at the time when Michaelle Jean bowed to the request of the Prime Minister and agreed to the suspending of parliament. This effectively allowed the government to unexpectedly adjourn the session of parliament, and there by dodged the bullet of a non-confidence motion from passing.

Regardless of whether or not you agreed with the decision, since it was a precedent setting course of action (as no other Governor General had made a similar ruling, and the fact that it prevented the opposition from tabling a confidence motion) the people of Canada were owed an explanation as to why and on what merit her decision was made.

We still have not received a justification.

Personally, my biggest problem was not so much with the fact that it saved the current Conservative government but the fact that the action prevented democracy from occurring. There are reasons as to why a process is in place for what should occur if a confidence motion does not pass. It means that the ruling government has lost the confidence to govern, and that either an election be held, or an opposition party take the reins. In all fairness, Michaelle Jean took that democratic process away from the people.

And for that we are owed an explanation.

Unfortunately, during her conversations regarding her choice, she still has not offered any reasonings. (No doubt waiting until she releases a new book about her time as Governor General.)

What she DID say was that she felt her decision had a positive spin, in that it forced a national discussion and led Canadians to learn more about their "democracy".

I find her comments insulting and laughable.

I am glad to see the woman go, and I look forward to the next Governor General. Frankly, I think anyone could do a better job.

Harper Prorogues Parliament

So Harper successfully managed to petition the Governor General to prorogue Parliament until the end of January.

I have difficulty believing that this is in the best interest of the Nation, rather than the Conservative Party of Canada.  How, when Canada is facing an economic crisis, is it worthwhile to STOP working for two months, rather than let a coalition of people get to work and deal with the problem?  

This is purely a move on the Conservative Party to retain power, rather than to help the Nation.  

And shame on the Gov. General for bending to the will of Harper.  Granted the Gov. General position is primarily figurehead status, and has little real power in our current political system.  But considering that this is probably the first time in nearly a century that the Gov. General had a decision to make that actually effected all Canadians, she should have taken a different course of action. 

Since this was relatively uncharted territory in the History of Canadian politics, the Governor General SHOULD have consulted the British Monarchy for advice on how to proceed.  After all, that is her job.  She is a representative of the Queen.  Do not mistake her position as a Regent.  She is not to rule, but rather to represent the Queens authority.

Not only did Governor General Michael Jean NOT consult the Queen when making her decision, but now she has set a very dangerous precedent for future minority governments.  By choosing to prorogue Parliament, she has allowed any minority government to halt parliament whenever they may risk falling to a motion of confidence.  This gives almost any minority government an inexcusable amount of power.

So now, we wait another two months while the Conservatives wage a multi-million dollar propaganda campaign against the coalition, and the economy will continue to crumble.

I would like to be able to sit in a room with Stephen Harper for just 10 minutes, so that I might begin to understand his line of thinking.  The Conservative economic update not only lacked a stimulus package for Canada, but also included eliminating the right of Unionized public servants to renegotiate their contracts (granted I think most of them are already over paid, but they should still have the right like everyone else does), and limited the ability of women to sue for pay equity, but it also eliminated the political subsidies provided by Elections Canada to all of the political parties.  

Regardless of whether or not you feel the political parties should receive subsidies to help them focus on working, rather than fundraising, Harper had to know it would cause a political backlash.  And to save $26 million?  It's a drop in the bucket compared to the billions the economy needs in investment.  I have a hard time believing that Mr. Harper sat at his desk, feverishly looking for an area where he could save a few pennies.  I have a feeling it had more to do with the ability to potentially cripple his opponents under the guise of 'cost cutting'.  I think he expected it to go over better than it did.  But, if I am correct and that was his real motivation, I think the man is too stupid to be allowed to be Prime Minister!  Forcing your political competitors into virtual bankruptcy does not show good faith.  Especially to voters that you haven't convinced yet to agree to your way of thinking!

I would strongly suggest removing the man from leadership of the Conservative Party before he causes more political fallout.  Oh, that's right.  We can't.  Parliament has been suspended!