Skip to main content

The Centre Block of Parliament sits empty in Ottawa on Jan. 6, 2010.

The Liberals are right to propose that future prorogations should take place with the consent of the House of Commons. They have also advanced the debate on this matter by saying that Commons committees should have the option to continue their work, while the House is out of session.

Ralph Goodale, the Liberal House leader, sensibly commented that, in general, prime ministers should be free to exercise their own judgment about the timing of the end of a parliamentary session. Reform was needed only because of Stephen Harper's manipulation of the legitimate, normal power to prorogue.

Strictly speaking, what Michael Ignatieff's six-point position requires is an opportunity for full debate on prorogation, after 10 days' notice. That comes close to a requirement to consent. But the specifics use the words "unless the House otherwise consents" three times, thus setting the criteria on which MPs could veto a prorogation: if it would occur in the first 12 months of a session; if it would last more than a month; or if a vote of confidence is pending. Any one of these three cases would be grounds for saying no.

Story continues below advertisement

This is a fair and reasonable articulation of sound principles, some of which were set out in this space on Saturday. Parliamentary sessions should not be too short; the intervals between sessions should not be too long; and prorogation should not be used as a device to prevent the majority of the House of Commons from exercising its right - under the unwritten constitution - to oblige a government to resign or face a new election.

To allow committees to continue their work during a prorogation is also a good idea, especially if the government is trying avoid committee hearings. Given that government bills die with the end of the session, however, much of that committee work would be moot, though private members' bills do survive into the next session.

As a party that has often been in power, and expects to govern sooner or later, the Liberals doubtless do not want to unduly fetter their own leaders in the future. That practical motive in no way discredits the proposal; on the contrary, it is all the more respectful of future prime ministers of any and all political parties. At the very least, Mr. Ignatieff has provided a good first draft of a reform of the power to prorogue. The NDP has also declared its support for such a change. Indeed, MPs of all four parties should recognize that parliamentary limits on the power to prorogue is a way to strengthen Canada's democracy.

Does Parliament matter? Share your opinions on our new audio voice recorder, or give us a call and leave a voice message. Join the conversation here.











Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter