MPs on legislative committees in Canada, in contrast, pretty much hew to the talking points issued by the leader's office.
Parliamentary governments typically have weaker legislatures than those in other consensus-style democracies. Some European governments have had unhappy experiences with leaders who turn into dictators. Others are marked by sharply polarized politics.
To prevent the repeat of past abuses, Prof. Thorlakson says, modern European constitutions tend to have strong legislatures and relatively weak executives. “Governments cannot just prorogue or dissolve Parliament easily.”
The case against Canada's Parliament isn't entirely black and white. Our MPs do spend more time at their desks than some of their equivalents elsewhere. While Congress and the British House of Commons spend more time in session than our Parliament does (159 and 154 legislative days in 2009, respectively, compared with our House's 130 days), the Australian and New Zealand legislatures both sit for less than 100 days a year.
And Prof. Johansson observes that governments everywhere “suffer from the same malaise: Our elected leaders and representatives cannot overcome their entrenched partisanship to tackle our respective nations' long-term policy dilemmas” because of the “dysfunctional short-termism that sees momentary political advantage trump the common good.”
If you scan newspapers in Washington or London or Canberra or Berlin, you'll see the same thing: Governments are every bit as determined to control the agenda; the hysterics of the opposition is every bit as shrill; and critics offer the same laments about the decline of Parliament, or whatever it's called.
But at least other prime ministers haven't got it into their heads that they can shut down their legislatures on a whim. Though that could be because it hasn't yet crossed their minds.
