It's a new year, but nothing appears to be different on Parliament Hill. The games continue in Ottawa in the wake of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to prorogue Parliament on Dec. 30, ending the parliamentary session and putting the kibosh on more than 30 government bills. It's as if all the work that has been done in 2009 didn't even happen.
Instead of heading back to Ottawa on Jan. 25, members of Parliament won't resume sitting in the House of Commons until March 3 with a speech from the throne and budget introduction March 4.
Harper's decision shows a complete contempt for Canada's democratic principles. We thought the Conservatives were elected on the platform of increasing transparency and accountability. So how is shutting down parliament for three months and not allowing the opposition a chance to ask the tough questions and make sure government is accountable to its citizens increasing transparency and being accountable? The simple answer is it's not.
Before the conclusion of the session, Conservatives were under fire over their apparent cover up of the Afghan detainee torture issue. Is proroguing Parliament a way for Harper to shield his MPs from that criticism? What is the prime minister afraid of? If he is so confident his government has made the right decisions with regard to Canada's policies in Afghanistan, then he should stand up in the House and say so. Answer the questions. Respect the democratic process. Respect the opposition MPs for the role they play in our parliamentary system.
And this isn't the first time Harper has done this. It appears that whenever the sharks begin to circle, he runs and hides. Remember he prorogued Parliament just weeks after an election a little over a year ago, when things were getting a bit too hot to handle.
Harper has balked at the claims of the opposition that he shut down Parliament because he refuses to answer the tough questions. He says it gives the government a chance to re-adjust their agenda to what they hope is a better year economically. But why does that mean he has to shut things down to do so? Why can't he continue to work on behalf of those who elected him, while also re-assessing priorities? Do other businesses shut down for long periods of time when they have to change course? No, because if they did, their business would most likely go under.
A minority Parliament can get messy and heated, but it can work if Harper wants it to. But by shutting down Parliament, it appears Harper has no desire to do so.
