
The federal opposition parties want to continue to exploit significant public dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision last December to prorogue Parliament and, now that Parliament is back in session, they plan to keep that issue as much as possible in front of the public.
NDP Leader Jack Layton this morning tried to convince Commons Speaker Peter Milliken that he ought to convene an “emergency debate” in the House on the issue of prorogation. First, Layton sent Milliken a letter outlining his case. [PDF]. Then, standing up in his place at about 10:30 a.m. today, Layton said:
Mr Speaker,
I rise today to request an emergency debate on recent advice given by the Prime Minister to Her Excellency, the Governor General, requesting that the second session of the 40th parliament be prorogued.
To be clear, Mr. Speaker, I do not make this request out of any question of the role of Her Excellency, but rather because I believe the judgement of the Prime Minister in offering such advice was deeply flawed and we need to debate it here. Such faulty logic could be used again by the prime minister on any given day to prorogue.
Comme vous le savez, la Gouverneure générale n’avait pas vraiment de choix. Mais la grave erreur de jugement commise par le Premier ministre en demandant cette prorogation doit être discutée. Il s’agit de la deuxième prorogation demandée par le Premier ministre, la première ayant été faite en décembre 2008 afin d’éviter un vote de censure qui devait être débattu et mis aux voix.
As I am sure you are aware, this is the second recent prorogation requested by the Prime Minister—the first one was to avoid a vote of non-confidence which was scheduled for debate and decision. The latest prorogation seemed to have been another attempt by the Prime Minister to avoid accountability on matters that are inconvenient to the government.
Ad you are aware, our system is one where the government exists because the Governor General decides it has the support of the House of Commons. It is therefore a fundamental character of our democracy that when a government is appointed, it is to be held directly accountable to the House of Commons.
I submit to you that the recent advice of the Prime Minister to the Governor General to prorogue the second session raises serious questions about the Prime Minister’s commitment to the House of Commons and suggests he believes that this Chamber should exist at the convenience of his government, and not the other way around.
Notre démocratie a comme caractéristique fondamentale qu’un gouvernement élu doit rendre des comptes directement à la Chambre des communes. L’utilisation du pouvoir de prorogation pour se soustraire à cette responsabilité est fort problématique et démontre un manque de respect envers la démocratie canadienne.
It is a fundamental breach of the Prime Minister’s duty to be accountable to the elected representatives of the Canadian people, and as such constitutes an urgent situation. As a former House Leader for my party, Stanley Knowles, is quoted as saying in the second edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice on page 677, “Debate is not a sin, a mistake, an error or something to be put up with in parliament, debate is the essence of parliament.” I make this request in that spirit.
Au nom des centaines des milliers de canadiens qui se sont exprimés en manifestant leur désaccord face à la prorogation, j’espère, Monsieur le Président, que vous considérerez cette requête favorablement.
In an interview outside the House of Commons after that ruling, Layton said, “We have the full arsenal of Parliamentary tools and instruments available to us and, in light of this particular ruling, we'll go back and review them. Fortunately, we know the court of public opinion doesn't agree with the prime minister on this.”