Why have a Parliament anyway?

Roy MacGregor, while largely acknowledging that Stephen Harper seem to have little but contempt for Parliament, insists that no one but Parliament Hill reporters and opposition MPs much cares about prorogation, which is hard to pronounce and just plain boooooring. Few people care about what Parliament does at the best of times, opines MacGregor, Canadians have "tuned out."

Gee, Roy, should we even bother with having a Parliament? Tell us, is it good for anything?

"What, one panel asked the other night, if there was "a national emergency"? Well, depending on what that may entail - a big snowfall in Toronto? Denmark invading Hans Island? - presumably they would get back to work and do whatever might be necessary.
An argument can be made, on the other hand, that this country runs quite smoothly when Parliament is not in session. Rare indeed is the Canadian political crisis that comes along in summer or over the long Christmas break - or, for that matter, during prorogations.
It can even be suggested that the country runs best under a prime minister who treats it as a part-time job."

"A national emergency in Canada? That's unpossible!"

Yeah, forget that Canada has almost 9% unemployment, that the economy is in dire shape, that we are mired in a pointless war halfway around the world with no end in sight or that the government ordered our military to hand over prisoners to be beaten and tortured - especially that last part. No one cares but a bunch reporters and nerds on the internet!

Besides, burning stick soon come!

MacGregor should stick to what he's good at-- writing about hockey--and leave the political commentary to people that understand that democracy is not a just a minor inconvenience that takes up valuable space in the newspaper that could be used for sports stories.