A security guard patrols Parliament Hill on Jan. 6, 2010, a week after Prime Minister shut down the House of Commons till after the Olympics.Fred Lum/The Globe and Mail
Poll results showing that many Canadians think the Prime Minister's Office is too powerful and the House of Commons is not powerful enough suggest that Stephen Harper has inadvertently convinced citizens of the need for parliamentary reform, well beyond his modest goals for the Senate.
The new study, by Nanos Research, found that while 41.6 per cent think the PMO has too much power, only 13.3 per cent think the House of Commons has too much power. People clearly have a nuanced understanding of the state of Canada's democracy, and have correctly concluded that the need to rebalance ought to be focused on the office occupied by Mr. Harper.
Another study, released last month by the Institute of Wellbeing, argued that there has been an increasing democratic disengagement. It noted Canada has seen an erosion in election turnout and a decline in public involvement in formal political activities, including a drop in volunteer hours. The conclusions of the two reports are likely related. They demonstrate discontent over the so-called democratic deficit, and suggest that there might be fertile soil here for politicians committed to reform.
But then, high-minded parliamentary reforms have been proposed before, without registering highly on the list of voter priorities. Here, for example, is a compelling plan to strengthen Canadian democracy and the country's elected legislature:
» "First, we must loosen the hold of party discipline over Members of Parliament."
» "Second, we should boost substantially the capacity of individual Members of Parliament - from all sides of the House - to shape legislation before, rather than after, it gains the imprimatur of legislative approval."
» "Third, we should increase the capacity of individual Members of Parliament to initiate legislation by overhauling the system for introducing private members' bills."
» "Fourth, the House of Commons standing committees should be overhauled to provide increased independence and expanded authority."
These proposals were part of a major address on parliamentary reform delivered in the fall of 2002. The speaker was Paul Martin, and we all know what happened to him. Perhaps the prorogation miscalculation really has caused people to awaken to the need for parliamentary reform. Or perhaps it's only a passing fancy. It is to be hoped it is the former.