Prorogue - Professional Rogue or???

A new word for me - no, it is not a professional scamp or scoundrel. Originated in 14th century it is a word you will never find being used in American politics. It refers to the request to discontinue a session of parliament. In Canada, this request can be made by the prime minister to the Governor General, Queen Elizabeth II's representative in Canada. Her name is Michaelle Jean and today, Stephen Harper, our beleaguered Prime Minister will ask her to "prorogue" parliament for him.

It is a little like the "get out of jail free" card in Monopoly. Stephen Harper has led his party and his country into a corner and now he wants to buy time to figure a way out of it. Truthfully, I feel very angry at the man. He won a minority government two years ago, one of his campaign promises at the time was to limit the frequency of elections to no less than every four years. Within two years he has called another election himself.

Why would Stephen Harper go back on his promise like that? Well, I think he has an agenda and he wants free rein to implement it. I fear that he wants to change the face of Canada. And he doesn't want any pesky opposition parties to stop him. So, he took a chance on an election, hoping the timing of it, shortly after a poll showing Canadians thought him the best leader among the parties, would catapult him into a majority government. It did not. So, after spending $30 million of Canadian tax payers' money, he still does not get the message that Canadians do not want to give him a majority.

Now he is tossing around all sorts of vile accusations that will only hurt Canada, the Conservative party and ultimately him, that is if people see through it. S.H. claims that Canada's relative stability in this time of economic recession, is because of his government's good policies. Yet his government had only been in office for eighteen months, so the good policies are probably more a result of the many years of prior Liberal government.

He claims it is "undemocratic" for the opposition parties to form a coalition government, because the people did not vote for Stephan Dion. No, and they did not vote for Stephen Harper either - they voted for a party. This is not the USA, although I suspect Harper's agenda is to move Canada closer to an American form of government - perhaps in his own mind he's already there.

Clearly, Canadians gave Harper a mandate to govern with the other parties - that's what a minority government is supposed to do. This is not Harper's strong suit. Instead of trying to work with them, he vilifies them. He has said that by making agreements with the Bloc Quebecois, Dion and Layton (the NDP party leader) are threatening the security of the country! How must Quebec voters feel to hear their prime minister essentially accuse their duly elected representatives of being threats to Canada? If this is his attitude towards the representatives of Quebec in parliament, how can he work with them at all? He has no confidence in them, and quite rightly, they have no reason to have confidence in him.

Harper has gotten himself into this mess, first by calling an election so soon after he formed a government. Then, by not taking seriously the message given him by the Canadian people that we want him to work with the other parties that we also elected. We did not give him a mandate to govern with a majority. Now he wants to have the parliament, he went to such great lengths to change, prorogued until he can figure out another way to slip his agenda through.

I was willing to give him a chance to lead Canada, although I did not vote for him, I did think he had the potential to lead. However, he does not have what a truly great democratic leader needs, the ability to listen and to negotiate. I fear that Harper's inner attitude, exposed by the current turn of events, is that of dictator - my way or the highway - and his manoeuverings make me nervous. I feel he is using all in his power to stay in power, so that he can impose his vision of Canada on us unhindered by the pesky demands of his fellow legislators who, let's face it, represent more of the country than his party does.

I am beginning to fear that Harper is a dangerous opportunist, guilty of the very accusations he hurls at those daring to oppose him with this coalition government. I do hope that G.G. Jean will refuse to grant him his request. Perhaps it is a professional scoundrel we are dealing with here in PM Harper.