Wikis
The 2010 Canada anti-prorogation protests took place mostly on January 23, 2010, in over 60 cities and towns[1][2] in Canada, and internationally in New York City, San Francisco, Dallas, London, Oman,[3] Beijing, Brussels, Amsterdam, The Hague and Costa Rica,[4] to protest the December 30, 2009 prorogation of the 40th Canadian Parliament by Governor General of Canada Michaëlle Jean on the constitutional advice of Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper. The protests and rallies attracted more than 21,000[5] participants, including many who had joined a group on Facebook, known as the "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament" (CAPP).[6][7] At the January 23 rallies in Ottawa and Toronto, Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff, New Democratic Party (NDP) leader Jack Layton, Green Party leader Elizabeth May, and Member of Parliament Bob Rae spoke against the prorogation.[8]
Contents |
The first session of the 40th Canadian Parliament opened on November 18, 2008, after the Conservative Party, led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, won a strengthened minority in that year's election, increasing their seat count by 16. The leaders of the parties in opposition—the Liberal Party, NDP, and the Bloc Quebecois—soon initiated talk of voting non-confidence in the government and offering themselves as a coalition government to Governor General Michaëlle Jean. However, Stephen Harper delayed the confidence vote scheduled for December 1 and advised the Governor General to prorogue parliament from December 4, 2008, to January 26, 2009. The opposition coalition dissolved shortly after, with the Conservatives winning a Liberal supported confidence vote on January 29, 2009.
On December 30, 2009, Prime Minister Harper announced that he had counseled the Governor General to prorogue parliament throughout the February 12–28 2010 Winter Olympics, until March 3, 2010, and Jean signed the proclamation later that day, granting his request, as provided for by constitutional convention.[9][10] The prorogation eliminated 22 sitting days from the Parliamentary schedule.[11] According to Harper's spokesman, the Prime Minister sought this prorogation to consult with Canadians about the economy.[9] However, the move triggered immediate condemnation from Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale, who labelled the Conservative government's move an "almost despotic" attempt to muzzle parliamentarians amid controversy over the Afghan detainees affair.[9] In an interview with CBC News, Prince Edward Island Liberal Member of Parliament Wayne Easter accused the Prime Minister of "shutting democracy down".[12][13] During this time, PMO spokesman Dimitri Soudas pointed out to the media that the Prime Minister was at work in Ottawa while the Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was off at his vacation home in the south of France.[14]
On January 5, 132 political scientists signed a letter condemning the prorogation and called for electoral reform.[15][16][17] This letter was the work of Fair Vote Canada, a non-partisan organization. Among the 132 political scientists signing the statement were 10 professors emerti, including Meyer Brownstone, Peter H. Russell, and John S. Saul; the President-elect of the Canadian Political Science Association (CPSA); six former presidents of CPSA, including John Meisel and Alan Cairns; the current Secretary General of the International Political Science Association (IPSA); and a former Secretary General of IPSA. [16]
On January 5, in an interview on CBC TV The National, Mr Harper said that prorogation was a “routine” move to allow the government to adjust its budget due on March 4.[18] His spokesman stated that the 63-day gap between sessions was less than the average prorogation of 151 days since 1867. However, in the three decades prior to his 2009 prorogation the average was just 22 days.[15]
On January 7, the British weekly news publication The Economist published two articles on the issue, both generally critical of the prorogation. One article stated that "Mr Harper’s move looks like naked self-interest."[19] The other article stated that Harper has, "given the opposition, which is divided and fumbling, an opportunity."[15]
Opposition leaders stated that Mr Harper’s real reason for the prorogation was to end an embarrassing debate on the government’s alleged complicity in the torture of Afghan detainees, and in particular to avoid complying with a parliamentary motion to hand over all documents relevant to those charges. They also stated that the prime minister wanted to name new senators and then reconstitute the Senate’s committees to reflect the Conservatives’ additional representation, something that could not be done if Parliament was merely adjourned. Ned Franks, a historian and veteran political scientist said that no previous prime minister has prorogued the legislature “in order to avoid the kind of things that Harper apparently wants to avoid,"[15]
The initial organization of the January 23 rallies started with a group on the social networking website Facebook, called "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament" in early January 2010, led by Christopher White, an anthropology student at the University of Alberta.[20][21][22] By January 9, eleven days after the prorogation, it had gained 113,000 members.[23] The group gained public support (at least as early as January 9) from Michael Ignatieff[24], while public support for the Conservatives declined.[23] The Facebook group was criticized shortly after it began for hosting edited pictures of Stephen Harper in a Nazi uniform and for deleting comments that were not favorable of the group. Group administrator Christopher White responded that he was the only person administering the group and that, to his knowledge, no wall posts had been deleted. The offending pictures of Stephen Harper were subsequently removed from the site.[25]
An EKOS poll released January 7 found that Canadians were nearly twice as likely to oppose the December 30, 2010 prorogation than support it.[23]
A poll, done by Angus Reid prior to January 9, found that 38 per cent of Canadians believed that Harper used the prorogation to curtail the Afghan detainee inquiry.[23] On January 11 Ignatieff again stated that the prorogation was to avoid responding to the Afghan detainee issue, and the issue of climate change after the faliure of the Copenhagen Conference in December.[26]
Prior to January 20, comedian Rick Mercer ranted on the Rick Mercer Report, "...Now polls never tell the full story but this much is certain: whenever the party in power drops 15 points in 15 days, you can be assured of one thing – someone in charge just did something really stupid."[24] By January 21, the Liberal Party and the Conservative party were in a virtual tie.[27]
By the time of the January 23 rallies, the Facebook group had over 210,000 members.[20][21][22]
On January 20, 2010, a rally of approximately 60 protesters gathered to greet Prime Minister Harper as he visited the C.D. Howe Institute in Toronto.[28] On that same day NDP leader Jack Layton called for limits to prorogation saying that his party will call for legislative changes that would require a majority vote of MPs for the prorogation of Parliament.[29]
Three days later the main planned rallies gathered across Canada. The rally in Toronto at Yonge-Dundas Square was the largest in Canada, attracting over 6,000 demonstrators, while the one in Ottawa involved close to 3,000.[30][31] The largest per capita turnout was found in Victoria, where 1,500 people rallied under sunny skies.[32] Protesters in many ridings with Conservative Members of Parliament urged them back to work.[33] In Regina, three supporters of Harper counter-protested, and were booed by the main crowd.[6] Protesters determined that Stephen Harper was using voter apathy to his advantage while proroguing parliament.[34] At the Ottawa rally, Michael Ignatieff said that "This is a demonstration that shows that Canadians understand their democracy, care for their democracy, and if necessary will fight for their democracy. This demonstration does not belong to the politicians of any party, it belongs to the Canadian people", while announcing that the Liberal MPs would be back to work on January 25, the original date for the end of prorogation, to hold public meetings.[6] New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton also called for limits to prorogation.[6] During the Toronto rally, Bob Rae commented that he attended "because it's a chance for me to join others who agree that Mr. Harper made a terrible decision."[31] Rae has subsequently been criticized for his controversial use of the power to prorogue when he was Premier of Ontario.[35]
| Anti-Prorogation Protests January 23, 2010 | ||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
On January 23, Norman Spector criticized the NDP proposed reform of prorogation charging that these legislative changes would be unconstitutional. Professor Ned Franks acknowledged that the NDP law would have to be carefully drafted as it would likely be challenged.[36]
On January 25, five days after the NDP's January 20 proposals for prorogation reform,[29] the Liberal Party of Canada also called for limits to the ability of the Prime Minister to advise the prorogation of parliament.[37] The Liberal Party plan would require consent from the Canadian House of Commons, along with ten days of written notice and debate in the House of Commons.[37] Mr. Ignatieff brushed off questions about the constitutionality of the proposed changes, saying if new rules are established, governors general "will respect those constitutional conventions" as they always have. He said, "The problem is not with the governor general. The problem is with the Prime Minister of Canada."[38][39]
The Long Parliament is the name of the English Parliament called by Charles I, on 3 November 1640,[40] following the Bishops' Wars. It received its name from the fact that through an Act of Parliament, it could only be dissolved with the agreement of the members,[41] and those members did not agree to its dissolution until after the English Civil War and at the end of Interregnum in 1660.[42] It sat from 1640 until 1649.
In spite of the prorogation, the parliamentary committee looking into the Afghan detainee issue resumed its hearing informally in early February. The hearing is considered informal because the committees do not have power to compel testimony or grant immunity and Conservative MPs would not be represented.[43]
On Feb 4, 2010, top constitutional scholar Errol Mendes and military legal expert Michel Drapeau,[44] urged MPs not to abandon their probe into the Canadian Afghan detainee issue.[45] Mendes referred to the Harper government's refusal to hand over uncensored documents, despite a motion passed in the House of Commons to do so: He stated, "The executive is really placing itself above Parliament. For the first time that I know in Canadian history, the executive is saying we are superior to Parliament....This is nothing more than an open defiance of Parliament. Nothing more, nothing less," he said.[43] He said the Conservative government has violated the Constitution of Canada and will be in contempt of Parliament if it continues to refuse to release uncensored documents regarding the Afghan detainee issue.[43]
New Democratic Party foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar sent a letter February 3, 2010 to Rob Nicholson, the justice minister, demanding the documents be released. "If he says 'No' obviously we have contempt of Parliament. And I want it in writing," said Dewar.[44]
On February 4, 2010, the Toronto Star reported that Bob Rae will not rule out a formal censure of the government for blocking a parliamentary investigation of detainee abuse in Afghanistan when MPs return to work in March, 2010. Rae said, "I'm not reluctant to go any route."[45]
On January 24, about five members of Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament gathered at York University during a visit by Minister of Industry Tony Clement.[22] In response to the protesters, Clement commented that "We have a government that is focused on the economy, focused on safer streets and focused on research and development. If you don’t agree with that, which is your right, then you can vote us out of office. That’s democracy."[46] On January 28, in response to the protests, Michael L. MacDonald, a Conservative member who was appointed to the Canadian Senate by Stephen Harper, stated that prorogation is a "common occurrence".[47]
On January 28, results from an EKOS poll showed that the Liberals were ahead of the Conservatives, despite Harper's focus on relief efforts following the 2010 Haiti earthquake.[48]
Also on January 28, Michael Bliss, a historian and member of the Order of Canada, wrote in the Globe and Mail that the opposition's response to prorogation was "to keep the pot boiling, largely by playing on public ignorance of the workings of government" and that the effect of prorogation will be that "Some useful government bills are going to have to be reintroduced. The Afghan hearings, into events of several years ago, will be delayed for a few more weeks. And that's about it.".[49]
Since the prorogation is scheduled to last until after the February 12–28 Olympics, this caused some outrage as some members of CAPP and other Canadians accused Harper of proroguing in order to attend the games.[50] The Conservatives responded to this claim by pointing out that the federal government has relinquished back to the public the majority of tickets it received as a senior Olympic partner, and that Members of Parliament would be required to purchase their own tickets for Olympic events.[51] Organizers have planned further protests, along with a "Torch Relay for Democracy" to coincide with the start of the Olympic Games, concluding in Ottawa by the end of the prorogation.[52]
On February 4, Conservative House whip Gordon O’Connor announced that the one week Parliamentary break scheduled for March and the two week Parliamentary break scheduled for April would be canceled. This would add 25 sitting days to the Parliamentary calender to make up for the 22 sitting days lost due to Parliament being prorogued.[53]
On Feb 12, another poll was done showing that "the opposition Liberals picked up support from 37 percent of decided voters, compared with 33 percent for the Conservatives." This according to Reuters was "a sign of discontent with the prime minister's decision to suspend Parliament until after the Olympics."[54]
On February 11, 2010 when Stephen Harper visited Victoria, British Columbia, he was met by hundreds of protesters representing a range of causes including democracy, opposition to the Olympics, opposition to the seal hunt, opposition to oilsand development, support for safe-injection sites, saving Jordan River and support for medical cannabis. The protest was spearheaded by the Victoria chapter of "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament" with the aim of showing Harper that Canadians are angry about his decision to suspend democracy, said organizer Melissa Farrance. "We want to show him the way back to Parliament so he can get back to work," she said.[55]
On Feb 12, another poll was done by Environics showing that "the opposition Liberals picked up support from 37 percent of decided voters, compared with 33 percent for the Conservatives." This, according to Reuters, was "a sign of discontent with the prime minister's decision to suspend Parliament until after the Olympics."[54]
From February 18 to 22, an Ipsos Reid poll was carried out which showed the Conservatives had regained their lead, with the Conservatives picking up support of 37 percent of decided votes, with the Liberals falling to 29%.[56]
A survey conducted Feb. 18-28 by The Canadian Press/Harris-Decima Research gave the Tories and Liberals 31 per cent each. The NDP had support from 16 per cent of respondents, the Greens 12 and the Bloc Québécois 8. [57]
On March 2, 2010, the protest movement called "Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament" transformed itself into a non-profit group called "Canadians Advocating Political Participation" to encourage further involvement in the political process.[58]
On March 3, 2010, the prorogation debate was still on fire as MPs returned to work. On March 2, NDP Leader Jack Layton said his party wanted an emergency debate to set out rules governing when and how Parliament can be shutdown. Layton said he was discussing with other leaders "how to stop a prime minister from stepping in and putting a stop to the democratic process." On March 2, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said his party supported limits on the power to prorogue.[58]
|
|
Search
