PM seeks Parliament shutdown till March 2010

[Edward Campbell]

Well, despite the best efforts of e.g. the Globe and Mail and the CBC to flog the issue  :deadhorse: this is the horde* of demonstrators that showed up yesterday:

Folks: I live in downtown Ottawa. I walk by the Hill several times a week. This is about as many people as show up on any pleasant summer afternoon - long after the Ceremonial Guard has gone - just to wander around aimlessly. More people would show up to watch the annual parliamentary window washing.

Non event.

But that will not stop the media from moaning and groaning: they hate it when parliament is in recess - no ten second sound bites and no chance for Dosanjh and McCallum to call Canadian soldiers war criminals.


----------
* As described in by one of the Globe's bloggers.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

So... how come no one is asking about Bob Rae's "assault on democracy" for proroguing the Ontario Legislature 3 times while he was premier?

Just sayin...

 

[a_majoor]

A blogger on the Left coast looks for the rally and finds:

http://pragmatictory.blogspot.com/2010/01/vancouver-protest-thousands-of-needles.html

(go to link, lots of pictures)

Vancouver Protest; Thousands of Needles Lost in a Haystack

With the superlative hyping of these mass protests across Canada, I decided that I would visit the Vancouver chapter of Canadians Against Prorogation, excited to see some of the left coast's loonie fringe at their finest. I grabbed my camera, jumped in my car, and took off for downtown. I was listening to the radio en route where they said "we are receiving reports that thousands of people are protesting up Hornby street." But sadly there was a serious accident in the Stanley Park causeway and the Lion's Gate Bridge was shut down to vehicle traffic, so I had to "park'n walk". Thus I arrived at the Art Gallery just under an hour late. I still figured these thousands of people would be easy to find.

As you can see, I was greeted at the meeting place by a massive crowd in a groundswell of public anger (not simply a scattering of tourists taking their picture with the Olympic Clock).  There was nobody holding signs, no musical acts doing live shows, no spontaneous chanting, nothing.  So I figured that these many thousands of people had set off on foot from their initial meeting place.  Surely these thousands of people marching in harmony through the busy downtown core should be easy to find.

I walked up Georgia to GM Place, I walked up and down both Granville and Hornby to Pender the whole while gazing up and down the streets, and there were no protestors.  Finally I did happen to find a gathering of about 30-50 people protesting outside the courthouse a block from where the Prorogation Protest was set to meet.  As it turns out CAP double booked Hornby with Egyptian Christians Against Detention.

On my way home I decided to stop by Stanley Park, near the giant Olympic rings at Cole Harbour.  If there was a great place for these thousands of angry Canadians to congregate at the end of their long march, this must be the place.

Unfortunately there were no protestors at the end of that rainbow. I was very disappointed. I was hoping to see real live protestors frolicking about in their natural environment, but alas all I found were empty streets. As I made my way back across the Lion's Gate on foot, there was a feeling of sadness that I was not able to observe the clowns in action, but also a sense of amusement that I walked up and down the streets of downtown and other than some Canuck fans getting ready for the game, there was no significant gathering of people in sight. I did get a good laugh when I came home and checked The Province newspaper for a report. This is what they had to say about today.

In Vancouver, several thousand protesters urged Harper to get the government back to work.

A large throng marched in Vancouver’s Victory Square with critics saying the Conservatives’ move was anti-democratic and calculated to avoid heated questions during the 2010 Olympics.

One of the Vancouver march organizers, Trevor Fenton, said the move shows Canada is in a “full-blown constitutional crisis.”

 

[Northalbertan]

From the numbers I've been able to put together from the media, and you have to look hard, as for some strange reason there aren't a lot of stories covering the numbers of protesters Canada wide, there were less than 10,000 across the entire country. 

I was at a hockey game in Edmonton the other night watching the (unfortunately) last place team in the NHL lose another one and there were twice as many people out to watch the game as there were protesters in the entire nation.  This is a grassroots rebellion against the conservatives?  In my world it is a nonevent.  I think the real story is a lack of support for the Coalition of the Left. 

Somehow I don't think you will see our MSM making much of a comment on the lack of numbers.

 

[Kirkhill]

Further to your last, from today's Globe:

...Media estimates of the crowds at demonstrations in 13 of Canada's biggest cities ranged from about 10,000 to 14,500. Former NDP press secretary Ian Capstick, compiling figures from protesters, journalists and bloggers, estimated that protests in 32 communities, including New York, exceeded 27,000....

And yet:

....Opposition parties say they don't think Canadians are distracted by Haiti or rebuilding efforts such as today's Montreal conference - which will also feature Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive.

"We're a big and complex country and are capable of following more than one issue at a time," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

He said the Saturday rallies against prorogation that took place across the country are proof Canadians are still angry at Mr. Harper's behaviour....

 

[Jed]

It seems like the MSM is working hard at propaganda techniques to keep this non event 'proroguation' alive. The stretching of statistics is unbelievable.

 

[a_majoor]

Protests in 32 cities, including New York?

Ian Capstick; maybe thet was a T.E.A. party protest in New York. The IA for your head would be "Tap, Rack and Go!" Please carry that out before attempting to continue.  >

 

[brihard]

A blogger on the Left coast looks for the rally and finds:

http://pragmatictory.blogspot.com/2010/01/vancouver-protest-thousands-of-needles.html

(go to link, lots of pictures)

Was it your intent to follow up on this and read the comments to that blog entry which link to accounts and photos of the protest? The author of the blog was caught in traffic and missed the point of departure, then attempted to spin that as if the protest did not occur. Even CTV, who have not been kind to our efforts, estimated the Vancouver turnout at about 2000. The blogger in question is fortunate in that his anonymity shields him from most of the ridicule he deserves for attempting to portray it as not having happened.

There are verified attendance numbers for at least forty different rallies, with the conservative estimates of attendance nationwide being a bit over 27,000- important to note that no-one is contesting the number, but merely the significance of it. For a cold Saturday afternoon in January, that's not bad.

In Ottawa we expected perhaps a thousand. The most conservative media estimates of actual turnout are 3500, and in speaking to the RCMP officers designed to keep an eye on us (who are experienced with this kind of thing) they were privately giving me estimates of five to six thousand. Pundits are attempting to compare our turnout to what the Facebook numbers were as opposed to with our actual publicized expectations and hopes for attendance- which in nearly every case were significantly exceeded. The crowd demographics in Ottawa were interesting too. We weren't even predominately students; most of the folks I saw were young professionals, middle aged, or older. Facebook also cannot account for our attendance, as the numbers greatly exceeded the total number of people who pledged attendance on the Ottawa facebook group.

We pulled off the Ottawa rally with a budget of three thousand bucks that we raised ourselves. We rejected party or union help in organizing, and, hilariously, our two undergrad U of O students who initiated the whole thing read Messrs. Layton and Ignatieff the riot act to keep their speeches on the subject of prorogue and away from too much of a party partisan nature. The claims that this was 'astroturfed' are ludicrous. I was involved with the Ottawa one form the start, as as a conservative voter I would have been out at the first sign of such shenanigans. It was actual honest engagement from a cross section of Canadians, many of us who had never attended any sort of protest before, including amongst organizers.

Mr. Capstick's reference to New York was referring to the approximately 30 Canadians who gathered outside the consulate. There were a handful of expats in San Francisco, a couple in Dallas, and about 30 in London, England.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Ian's dad must be so proud...

 

[Edward Campbell]

I wonder who paid for all the signs here and here, for example.

I especially like the War Crimes one.  :rage:

Non partisan, eh? On topic, eh? Yours, in Ottawa, maybe; others, not so much.

-----
P.S. I'm far away from Ottawa for a while so I didn't see any of this first hand or even second hand, on TV. It was (from a news PoV) pretty much a non-event beyond the reach of the Toronto media.

 

[Infanteer]

I think the argument over the numbers is pretty juvenile - obviously, some event did happen.  At least people give a shit these days; I'll give 'em that.

 

[Edward Campbell]

This, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail is an example of how ludicrous partisan politics in Ottawa, and in the pages of the Globe and Mail, has become:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/prorogation-optics-are-open-and-shut/article1444587/

Prorogation optics are open and shut

Jane Taber

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

The Liberals and New Democrats staged nearly identical photo ops yesterday to illustrate the shutting down of Parliament.

First up was NDP Leader Jack Layton, who stood at a podium surrounded by his caucus, positioned in front of the doors to the House of Commons chamber. A half an hour later Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff arrived. He too was surrounded by his caucus, also in front of the doors to the chamber.

There was one subtle difference, however. The big ornate wooden ornate doors to Commons were shut tight for the NDP photo op. Those very same doors, however, were wide open for the Liberal version.

Last night, an NDP official was gloating slightly, criticizing the Grits for the staging of their photo op. The official, who didn’t want to be named, said that it was the closed doors that told the story of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his decision to prorogue Parliament. He couldn’t understand why the Liberals would leave them open.

A Liberal official said this morning they opened the doors to show the sad, empty, lifeless chamber. “We wanted to show that the room where we are supposed to be working was ready, lit, but empty,” the official said. “We wanted people to see that it is idle.”

It was also noted that press cameras “fought” for position to shoot extra footage of the empty chamber. The problem is, however, that Mr. Ignatieff was not in that empty chamber shot.

Global National led its prorogation piece on its broadcast last night with pictures of the NDP caucus and Mr. Layton. Images of Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals were farther down in the story.

All this is to say that photo ops are important and carefully thought out. Indeed, while in opposition Dave Penner, who is now a senior member of the Prime Minister’s Office, was known to get out an iron when they were on the road and make sure there were no wrinkles in the Canadian flags that were positioned behind Stephen Harper.

My photo-op is bigger than your photo-op … this is the best Taliban Jack and Iggy Iffy Icarus can manage? Let’s keep the damned house in recess until we elect adults.

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

Taliban Jack and Iggy want to have the House of Commons decide when to meet instead of the Governor General.  Is this another coup attempt?  That would require a Constitutional ammendment and I don't see one of those on the horizon.

 

[a_majoor]

While the Vancouver guy was caught in traffic and missed the start, his point is pretty clear; large groups of people should be easy to find, and he went from place to advertized place and photographed....no one.

While I obviously was not there (not living on the left coast), perhaps some persuasive wide angle photographs showing these crowds would be a convincing rebuttal. I noticed no one in the comment thread (when I read it) had any links to such documentary evidence, which leads me to believe the blogger's contention that only a very small number of people were actually in attendance.

 

[brihard]

Here's a link to one of many stories about the Vancouver protest. Best photo I found in a couple minutes of looking.

http://www.globaltvbc.com/Prorogue+protesters+take+over+Vancouver+Victory+Square/2478034/story.html

It's one of many stories about the prorogue. It reports at least a thousand.

This article cites the Vancouver Police as estimating approximately 2000: http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/rabble-staff/2010/01/voices-from-rally

Here's The Province, the major Canwest paper out of Vancouver: http://www.theprovince.com/technology/Thousands+turn+Vancouver+rally+protest+Harper+decision+prorogue+Parliament/2477710/story.html

They report 'several thousand'.

Those represent the high end and low end estimates I've seen for Vancouver, with the actual attendance probably being something on the lower end of the middle.

I'm not sure what the blogger in question considers 'a very small number of people', but I'm gonna go with several bylined news stories with photos and the personal accounts I've heard over an anonymous blog.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It's easy enough to miss a large event in Vancouver if you don't happen to run across it.  A crowd which moves from one place to another is actually easier to miss.

Undoubtedly there is a cross-section of Canadians dissatisfied with prorogation; the poll numbers I think are too high for it to just be a matter divided along partisan lines.  However, I doubt many people have a substantial beef.  People who routinely object to the Conservatives find it to be another useful Nerf bat; people who don't routinely object to the Conservatives may be upset by the trivial impression of the House taking an unwarranted vacation.

For my part, if it cuts out four or five weeks of whinging about detainees in Afghanistan between the originally scheduled January stand-to date and whenever a budget is tabled, it's a good thing.  I would be very happy if we had one of those Parliaments that sits for a few months in spring to pass a budget and deal with the year's business with a sense of purpose, then largely shuts down leaving government in maintenance mode until the next year.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Like Infanteer, I'm unconcerned about the numbers, in fact I wish more people had turned out, and I am also glad that some Canadians are interested in some political issues.

My big worry is: why this prorogation? What makes it so special? What about the last one or the 100+ before it? Why did they not matter? Why is this prorogation an affront to democracy, itself, when the others passed by with a big yawn from the media?

My second, lesser worry is: do those objecting so vociferously really understand the situation to which they object? Is it the fact that the recess is extended by a few weeks? Is it because the business of parliament - 30+ bills dying on the order paper, no committees, possibly new senators and new Senate committee chairs - has stopped? Which takes me back to my first worry: why is this prorogation special? If it's not so special then are the honest, earnest people who, in their tens of thousands, went out to demonstrate being manipulated by political operators and the media?

Everyone knows where I stand.

 

[Rifleman62]

Take a couple of minutes to listen to this:

Grassroots Fury:  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/blogolitics/audio-charles-adler-on-the-grassroots-fury/article1421564/

 

[Rifleman62]

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/25/darcy-meyers-ignatieff-proposals-are-pleasant-but-largely-pointless.aspx

Full Comment
Darcy Meyers: Ignatieff proposals are pleasant but largely pointless

Posted: January 25, 2010, 5:00 PM by NP Editor
Full Comment, Darcy Meyers

"If these rules were in place in 2008 Canada would have had Prime Minister Stephane Dion, with Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton around the cabinet table."


Whenever changes are proposed to address a particular issue, one of the first things that should be asked is what are the unintended consequences of such actions?

It is not suprising, given the recent headlines, that today Michael Ignatieff has produced some suggestions to limit Prime Ministerial prerogative and the power to prorogue.  While his suggestions appear to hit the right populist notes, and attempts to address the major concerns put forward by the anti-proroguers, they may lead to significant governance challenges down the road.

While the actual legislation or procedures will have to be Constitutionally tested, let’s assume for the time being that they respect the Constitution and our conventions and still carry some authoritative weight (this is highly unlikely).

Mr. Ignatieff has asked for 10 days written notice of prorogation, and a full debate in the house and achieve consent of a majority of MP’s.  He has also proposed that committees continue their work until the next session opens, that the delay between sessions be no longer than one month, and that prorogation not be used to dodge a confidence vote.

That all sounds nice and dandy.  Of course, if these rules were in place in 2008 Canada would have had Prime Minister Stephane Dion, with Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton around the cabinet table.  Mr Ignatieff has acknowledged that coalition attempt was irresponsible, but with these rules in place, it would be non-preventable by a responsible Prime Minister acting in the best interest of the nation.

Another argument against prorogation has been that the executive draws authority from parliament and parliament being shut down diminishes that authority.  In the case of the Prime Minister, even though the house is not sitting, he still enjoys the confidence of the house allowing him to act and govern responsibly.  Committees continuing after a prorogation would not maintain the same parliamentary authority, essentially rendering them powerless.  There would be no point continuing an investigative committee that can’t compel witnesses to testify.

My largest concern though is that in our current age of minority governments, that the government could become subject to the tyranny of the majority (which progressive coalitionists would love).  It’s not that I believe the majority is tyrannical, but that the majority gaining such power over a minority government could paralyse the agenda, lead to irresponsible government, and likely produce even more elections.  It is the governments job to govern responsibly, the opposition does not have to meet the same standard-and this risks diminishing our responsible government.

If a paralytic legislative situation arises in the future, which an obstructionist majority opposition could easily engineer, the only choice left for an obstructed government would be to request an election to refresh the agenda.  This could go on and on, unless a coalition is formed, or electors select a majority.

Similarly, if a crisis arises and the government needs to adapt the agenda in response, (like a speedy budget in an economic crisis) it would be forced into an election, unless the majority opposition cooperates.  Not the best time to increase the likelihood of parliamentary games.

It is unlikely any proposal here can have much more authority than the fixed election law legislation (Bill C-16).  If legislated, it will need to specifically indicate that the role of the Governor General is not altered to remain constitutional.  It will likely provide no structural change to our governance practices.  While there may remain a political price to pay for prorogation, even breaking these potential laws, it will likely remain Constitutionally legitimate as is, and luckily part of our system of responsible government.

National Post

Darcy Meyers is a freelance writer, commentator and blogger based in Saskatoon. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

I don't think there is anything constitutionally coherent in either the Layton or Ignatieff proposals and, despite the fact that I am not a lawyer I am confident that the lowest court in the land would toss either out, if, by some remote mischance one or the other became law, and every higher court, all the way to the Supremes would agree. Iggy Iffy Icarus and Taliban Jack are just grandstanding, preaching to the media choir, there is nothing of political substance in their proposals, despite three internally inconsistent Globe and Mail editorials in support of one and then the other.