Scott Stinson: McGuinty silences legislature in parting gift to his successor
National Post
Scott Stinson | Oct 16, 2012 9:45 AM ET | Last Updated: Oct 16, 2012 10:27 AM ET
More from Scott Stinson | @scott_stinson
More from Scott Stinson | @scott_stinson
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Nathan Denette
I'm going to tell them I want to spend more time with my family, Dwight. It's not true, but what else is new?
When Dalton McGuinty announced
last night at around 6:30 p.m. that he had asked the Lieutenant-Governor
to prorogue the provincial legislature, the instant reaction was: guess
he’s not quitting.
Prorogation is a big deal, big enough to have warranted the surprise evening caucus meeting, big enough to have merited calling the media in to the government caucus room to witness the premier’s remarks.
Then he went and quit anyway. Coupled with the cleverly timed leaks from Liberal insiders that speculated about a possible McGuinty run for the federal party leadership, it was enough to distract most of the attention from the prorogation itself.
Shutting down the legislature, which is what the move does, is worrisome in its own right for what it says about the importance of our elected representation. If the thing can just be shuttered and the government left to chug along in the hands of the bureaucracy, then why did we have that election only a year ago?
The response from provincial Liberal supporters is, not surprisingly, almost exactly the same as the response from federal Conservatives back when Stephen Harper sought and obtained a prorogation in 2011 (and before that, in 2008). They say the minority government is unworkable, and so best to close it down and sort things out, then bring it back when the air is clear and we can all get on with our business. Opposition politicians are outraged that they are now being prevented from doing any work — and no less outraged that the prorogation allows the government of the day, as was the case federally, to elude further scrutiny of scandals at the committee.
Fans of irony will note that the cheerleaders of one side have more or less switched teams this time around (with the exception of the NDP, which is outraged all around.) It’s been suggested to me that it’s unfair to lump Dalton McGuinty in with Stephen Harper, however, because there are clear differences with the Ontario premier’s situation. He’s not planning to survive the prorogation, for one, and there’s no immediate election in the offing.
Both these arguments are true, but I don’t see how they reflect better on the premier. Whatever one wants to say about the affront to democracy caused by the last prorogation on Mr. Harper’s watch, he at least staked his government and his job on the outcome of the ensuing election, although it didn’t immediately follow it. Canadians had an opportunity to reject his justifications for it and put someone else in charge; instead they handed him a majority government.
Ontario voters have no such opportunity. Mr. McGuinty’s wish, explained Monday night, is that it will be up to whomever replaces him as premier to bring the legislature back. That could be several months from now: the Ontario Liberals have to determine how and when to hold a leadership race that is coming out of nowhere first.
In the meantime, the scandals that have been front and centre in the Liberals’ terrible fall will not be fully explored. This can’t be emphasized enough: it is possible that the government position on the cancellation of two gas plants has been fully explained, but there is more than enough reason to believe that further embarrassments would have been unveiled by a Finance Committee probe of the affair. The final cost to taxpayers could be revealed as far higher than the $230-million cited by the Liberals. And the amount of political influence on the decision could be firmly established as wide and deep.
Mr. McGuinty said last night he was motivated simply by a decision to spend more time with his family and a desire to see his party begin an important renewal process.
It’s an altogether too innocuous explanation for a prorogation that is a deeply cynical move.
National Post
Prorogation is a big deal, big enough to have warranted the surprise evening caucus meeting, big enough to have merited calling the media in to the government caucus room to witness the premier’s remarks.
Then he went and quit anyway. Coupled with the cleverly timed leaks from Liberal insiders that speculated about a possible McGuinty run for the federal party leadership, it was enough to distract most of the attention from the prorogation itself.
Shutting down the legislature, which is what the move does, is worrisome in its own right for what it says about the importance of our elected representation. If the thing can just be shuttered and the government left to chug along in the hands of the bureaucracy, then why did we have that election only a year ago?
The response from provincial Liberal supporters is, not surprisingly, almost exactly the same as the response from federal Conservatives back when Stephen Harper sought and obtained a prorogation in 2011 (and before that, in 2008). They say the minority government is unworkable, and so best to close it down and sort things out, then bring it back when the air is clear and we can all get on with our business. Opposition politicians are outraged that they are now being prevented from doing any work — and no less outraged that the prorogation allows the government of the day, as was the case federally, to elude further scrutiny of scandals at the committee.
Fans of irony will note that the cheerleaders of one side have more or less switched teams this time around (with the exception of the NDP, which is outraged all around.) It’s been suggested to me that it’s unfair to lump Dalton McGuinty in with Stephen Harper, however, because there are clear differences with the Ontario premier’s situation. He’s not planning to survive the prorogation, for one, and there’s no immediate election in the offing.
Both these arguments are true, but I don’t see how they reflect better on the premier. Whatever one wants to say about the affront to democracy caused by the last prorogation on Mr. Harper’s watch, he at least staked his government and his job on the outcome of the ensuing election, although it didn’t immediately follow it. Canadians had an opportunity to reject his justifications for it and put someone else in charge; instead they handed him a majority government.
Ontario voters have no such opportunity. Mr. McGuinty’s wish, explained Monday night, is that it will be up to whomever replaces him as premier to bring the legislature back. That could be several months from now: the Ontario Liberals have to determine how and when to hold a leadership race that is coming out of nowhere first.
In the meantime, the scandals that have been front and centre in the Liberals’ terrible fall will not be fully explored. This can’t be emphasized enough: it is possible that the government position on the cancellation of two gas plants has been fully explained, but there is more than enough reason to believe that further embarrassments would have been unveiled by a Finance Committee probe of the affair. The final cost to taxpayers could be revealed as far higher than the $230-million cited by the Liberals. And the amount of political influence on the decision could be firmly established as wide and deep.
Mr. McGuinty said last night he was motivated simply by a decision to spend more time with his family and a desire to see his party begin an important renewal process.
It’s an altogether too innocuous explanation for a prorogation that is a deeply cynical move.
National Post
Labels: Communication, Conflict, Crisis Politics, Democracy, Economy, Education, Energy, Environment, Ontario, Politics of Convenience
posted by Pieface | 9:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home