- Mr. Harper, What Canadian Minds Need To Know

Submitted: 10:17am ,PDT, 3 Oct.'10 - lets see if the post it the first ttime.

PM gave Jean pledges in prorogation crisis, Harper promised quick return of Parliament and new budget, adviser says, October 2, 2010, Louise Elliott CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/10/01/harper-jean-prorogation.html

If Mr. Russell is of the opinion that the GG had exercised her power properly and come to the proper decisions, in the proper fashion, then why does he feel the need for a "meeting of International experts to try to achieve a consensus about how a Governor General's powers should be used in future cases similar to the 2008 crisis" - the precedent has been set and according to him, properly.

With all due respect to Mr. Russel and the former Governor General, without knowing the contents of what was actually said between Stephen Harper and the GG it is very difficult to view these comments as anything more than rationalizations resulting from continued and severe criticism - something akin to Monday night quarter-backing by the quarterback of the losing team.

Mr. Russell describes the GG as requiring promises from Harper and not simply rubber stamping.

It is hard to reconcile this description of the events with the next prorogation where Harper didn't even bother to go to Rideau Hall to make a formal request.

We simply do not know what arguments Harper actually made, or what compulsions were actually upon her, if any. And this is the important part - the part that every Canada ought to know, given the importance to Canadian democracy.

"She made it clear these reserve powers of the Governor General may sometimes be used in ways that are contrary to the advice of an incumbent prime minister," Russell said.

The GG hasn't made it clear to the Canadian public and that's what counts.

Without knowing what was actually said, how can the Canadian people know that the GG forced such concessions - "that Parliament would return soon, and that his government would then produce a budget that could pass". Perhaps she might well have made the same decision even without such 'promises'.

Mr.Russell suggest the opposite, but he was not, apparently, present at the meeting and as indicated in this article is basing that statement only upon impressions, what he "thought", as opposed to what he knew, there is a difference - vis.: "I think they were extremely important in her weighing all the factors on both sides of the question," Russell said. . . . "I think she would have probably had to make the decision the other way."

There is not even any indication in this article that he discussed this issue with her directly.

Also, the GG's recent statement as set out in this article does not confirm his impressions.

"Jean told The Canadian Press earlier this week she took the time to make the right decision and was using the delay to send a message to Canadians to become more involved in the political process."

This statement does not support Russell's 'thoughts' on the matter. Perhaps she felt she had no other choice and the only power she really had was making Harper wait a bit.

Also, she did not have to make Harper wait 2 hrs to send that message to Canadians. She could simply have gone to the people and stated her case directly. All the camera's were there, with political commentators, treading water. I am sure they would have made room for such a statement.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html