URGENT - Harper signing away our sovereignty while parliament is closed

James Laxer: Urgent National Debate Needed on Harper Trade Deal

excerpt:
In return for this “concession” from Washington, Ottawa has agreed to pay an unacceptably high price. Under the deal, Canadian provinces and municipalities will permanently give up the right to favour local companies in awarding contracts. Government procurement at the municipal and provincial levels is an extremely important economic development tool, crucial for job creation, the encouragement of Canadian firms and the development of home-grown technology. At a time when cities are rebuilding their transit systems and are refitting homes to make them more energy efficient, it is the height of folly to open all these contracts to American bidders. (Given the multiplicity of measures used to protect them from outside bidders, it is foolish to imagine that Canadian firms will have an equal opportunity to bid on U.S. state and municipal contracts.)

What makes the Harper government’s deal particularly maddening is that the Buy American provisions in the U.S. Recovery Act violate the spirit if not the terms of NAFTA that guarantee the right of Canadian firms to bid on U.S. federal government projects with the exception of defence contracts. Instead of publicly and loudly asserting that Washington is violating NAFTA, the Harper government is bribing the Obama administration to stop doing that by opening up tens of billions of dollars worth of public contracts in Canada to American corporations.

Harper, accountability and democracy

Accidental Deliberations: The reviews are in
Lawrence Martin:
(The Conservatives) campaigned heavily against Liberal abuse of power and promised a new era of accountability. And the Accountability Act did, in fact, contain many fine reforms. But as Duff Conacher of Democracy Watch (who advised the Conservatives on the legislation) will tell you, a goodly number of the proposed reforms never made it to the table, and others that were enacted have since been violated in spirit. When Stephen Harper's all-controlling proclivities are factored in, the end result has been a further worsening of the problem.
...

"Harper and his too-clever-by-half cronies in the PMO neglected to consider a very important constituency"

Prorogation, Disengagement and Cutting the Democratic Deficit in Canada « bastard.logic
News on an interesting report on Canada and Canadians by the Institute of Wellbeing.

Libby Davies wants to spank Harper

Libby Davies on wanting to give Harper a spanking - Hill Queeries
Interview recently with Libby Davies, NDP House Leader.

Flash protest rallies against prorogation

DAMMIT JANET!: We got 'em on the run!
Reports on recent flash protests at various locations, mainly 2 protests where Tony Clement was speaking.

Parliament carries on, oh, but wait, without the Conservatives.

Impolitical: Back to work aftermath
So how did it go yesterday? The first day on Parliament Hill post weekend prorogation rallies saw the opposition parties arrive to carry on with regular business on matters like youth unemployment, while the government treated us to a pretty coordinated effort to distract from prorogation.
...

The direct cost of Prorogation

The Scott Ross: Actual Cost of Prorogation $130 Million
...

In combining the direct cost of Canadians paying for a Parliament to do nothing for 22 days and the indirect cost of Parliament's lost time due to scrapping a portion of viable Bills, the total cost of prorogation can be justifiably approximated at $130,407,733.
...

More Conservative Spin

Accidental Deliberations: The reviews are in
Yesterday, Conservative anyonymice (sic) were offering a new reason for prorogation. The PM, we were told, wanted to ensure that ministers with new portfolios had time to bone up before facing their opposition critics in Question Period.

Pish.
....
And, Stockwell Day is now in charge of reigning in spending. His experience? He was Alberta's treasurer - the per capita spending then in Alberta was the highest of any province in Canada. They put a big spender in a position to reign in spending.

Only in Canada: Harper's prorogation is a Canadian thing

Yappa Ding Ding: Only in Canada: Harper's prorogation is a Canadian thing

Go searching for the last time a Westminster-style parliament was shut down to free its leaders from unwanted censure or scrutiny — and you'll end right back in Canada, where you started.

It turns out, no other English-speaking nation with a system of government like ours — not Britain, Australia or New Zealand — has ever had its parliament prorogued in modern times, so that its ruling party could avoid an investigation, or a vote of confidence, by other elected legislators.

Only three times has this happened, all in Canada ...

Do the Harperites think nobody gives a damn when you defecate all over those values

Accidental Deliberations: The reviews are in
Column by Rick Salutin on Harper's prorogation move.

MSM beginning to come around?

Revised media reaction to prorogation. « Scott's DiaTribes
It’s kind of amusing to watch the second guessers in the media take aim at their comrades for being wrong on the public’s negative reaction to Harper proroguing Parliament.
...

Worst Governer General Ever?

Pulse Niagara Online Edition

...
Harper deliberately chose to pick a political fight with the opposition just six weeks after promising to work with them. Faced with certain defeat, he demands Jean prorogue Parliament. Did she consult with the leader of the opposition to see if he could lead a government? There’s no sign she did. Instead, she simply gave in.
Fast forward one year and Harper is again in trouble—this time over his government’s handling of the Afghan detainee torture issue. On the last day before the Christmas holidays, MPs passed a motion calling on the government to release thousands of uncensored documents on Afghan prisoners. Harper promised the committee looking at the issue they would receive “all legally available documents.” Instead, he prorogues Parliament, thus disbanding all committees in both the House and the Senate and killing government bills, no matter how close they were to approval.
And as many others have argued, Harper’s timing said everything. He chose to announce on December 30 – the same day five Canadians were killed in Afghanistan and at a time when the public and media were focusing on the announcement of Canada’s Olympic ice–hockey team that Parliament wouldn’t resume until March 3. Even more troubling is that Harper didn’t even bother to follow tradition and make his “request” of the Governor–General in person, instead telling her over the phone. Yet, the Governor General’s official residence is right across the street from the Prime Minister’s Sussex Drive home. Constitutional expert C.E.S. Franks, a Queen’s University professor, called Harper’s actions “an affront to the dignity of the office of Governor General.”

The British magazine, The Economist, an influential and largely right–wing publication, stated in an editorial, “Mr. Harper’s move looks like naked self–interest.” The magazine, which once dubbed former Prime Minister Paul Martin “Mr. Dithers”, said Harper’s a competent tactician with a ruthless streak. “The danger in allowing the Prime Minister to end discussion any time he chooses is that it makes Parliament accountable to him rather than the other way around.”

Top Ten Reasons Stephen Harper Prorogued Parliament

The Top Ten Reasons Stephen Harper Prorogued Parliament | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Comic, but true!
(By true, I mean it had everything to do with the Afghan Detainee Scandal, etc.)

A backgrounder on prorogue this time around.

What’s at stake - Andrew Coyne's Blog - Macleans.ca

... The government’s professed rationale, that this is all about economic planning, is obvious bilge: nothing prevents a government from planning and meeting Parliament at the same time, or certainly shouldn’t. The informal justification its supporters are putting about is scarcely better: it may be inconvenient to the government that its appointees do not yet control all Senate committees, but that is no reason to shutter Parliament. It is a motive, not a defense.

So that leaves the obvious. As KDO has explained, the fact that the government is proroguing in December, rather than in late January, suggest this had more to do with shutting down inquiries into the Afghanistan detainee affair than anything else. Is this what we should now expect: governments shutting down Parliament whenever the questioning gets too intense? What will remain of Parliament’s ability, already greatly weakened, to hold governments to account then?

Each time Parliament allows one of these abuses to pass, its power is reduced a little more. Indeed, so diminished has it become that it is hard for some observers to muster much indignation at this latest assault: it’s only Parliament, after all. It’s exactly this sort of whittling away by degrees that has allowed closure, for example, to be invoked more or less routinely to cut of Parliamentary debates, where once it was to be used only in the most extreme circumstances. It was the improper use of closure, recall, that set off the wild, four-week brawl known as the Pipeline Debate. Now, nobody can be bothered.

The time has long since passed for Parliament to take a stand against its own evisceration. The really substantive issue is whether the government will yield to the Commons demand that it produce the Colvin documents, and perhaps that fight can be resumed in March. But proroguing to delay that day of reckoning, possibly in hopes of sneaking through another snap election in the interval, is worthy of some sort of Parliamentary rebuke, which is why the symbolic measure (and it could only be that) of MPs meeting in another place came to mind.

I recognize that Parliament always retains the ultimate sanction of voting no confidence in the government — or at least, on those days that the government will allow it to do so, or deigns to bring forward legislation, or recognizes confidence votes when they occur (see Paul Martin, above). But this is a very blunt instrument. It shouldn’t have to take a vote of non-confidence to get the government to obey basic norms of accountability. I don’t mean only that the government should observe conventions of respect for Parliament, regardless of whether it is conforming to the strict letter of the law. I also mean there should be mechanisms for curbing such abuses, short of dissolving Parliament.

For example, should the power to prorogue rest solely with the Prime Minister (I know, I know: the Governor General, acting on his advice)? Should it not require a vote of Parliament? Might the same rule not also apply to dissolutions?

No Prorogue! - What's this about?

No Prorogue!
(visit the site for more)

What’s this about?

“When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent is frankly when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.”
Stephen Harper, Canadian Press, April 18, 2005

On December 30th Stephen Harper announced that he will be Proroguing Parliament and suspending democracy until March 3. This is the second time he has done this in under two years.

Proroguing means:

1. All 37 bills being debated in Parliament are thrown in the trash. Discussion on bills starts from scratch in March, wasting months of hard work by all parties. These bills included new crime legislation, limits on credit card insurance rates, etc.
2. Committees investigating accusations of torture of Afghan detainees stop working
3. Discussions and decisions about the pension crisis affecting Canada’s seniors stops
4. Questions about Canada’s inaction at the Copenhagen climate-change summit are silenced. Opportunities to move forward with Canada’s plan for sustainable development are stalled for over a month.
5. Your MPs cannot raise your concerns in Ottawa

Conservative spin losing its thread

Liberal Arts and Minds: Spin, Losing it's Thread
...
There is the need to consult over the economy, but Flaherty put that to rest by saying he'd consult with or without prorogation. Then there is the whole notion that the government has to set a new agenda, 'recalibrate', except they go on to say that it will be business as usual and the plan is simply to implement the second half of the EAP.

There is not one reasonable explanation that has been put on the table and they are now floundering and sound more ridiculous than usual.
...

Conservative use of prorogue is anything BUT routine

The rebuttal to Conservatives who protest that proroguing of Parliament is ‘routine’ « Scott's DiaTribes < read the full post.
...
Conservative apologists for this have been saying, as has become their habit: What’s the big deal? Jean Chretien prorogued a few times too. It’s routine. Except it’s not routine in a minority Parliament. It’s not routine when you have dozens of bills on the table and work left undone. And it’s not routine to do it two years in a row, and in both cases when you’re under intense political pressure from the opposition.
...

Parliament should matter

Parliament should matter
Does Parliament matter? The question might once have been unthinkable; today, however, it's well worth asking.
...

Harper outsmarts himself

Harper outsmarts himself - Winnipeg Free Press

Shutting down Parliament lights a fire under apathetic Canadians...

Time to fire his ass if can't figure it out by now

Hmm, Harper claims he needs almost 3 months to figure out how to govern. « Scott's DiaTribes