Parliament might reign supreme in Canada, but you wouldn’t know it from Stephen Harper and his Conservatives continually attempting to circumvent its authority. The latest example is the prime minister’s argument that flip-flopping on Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan is a matter the executive branch — and not legislators — can make without consulting the representatives of the people.
With Canada’s combat mission legislated to end in the summer of 2011, the Conservatives have now decided to keep Canadian Forces’ troops overseas to continue training with the armed forces and police services of Afghanistan. The announcement finally came out last week — on Remembrance Day — after days of speculation.
After being pounded in Question Period by every single opposition party on Monday, the Conservatives were scheduled to announce Tuesday the bulk of the plan, some of which still has to be refined with NATO allies. It appears as of press time 950 troops will be deployed until 2014 and will be tasked specifically with training the Afghan National Army and police. They will be deployed outside Kandahar — which has seen some of the bloodiest fighting of the insurgency, but some troops likely will be stationed at other bases where the potential for danger and combat exists.
This is why a vote in the House of Commons to extend the mission is critical. The Canadian public, already unhappy with Canada’s presence in Afghanistan, which will have almost reached the 10-year mark by the time troops start leaving, is unlikely willing to stomach any more death and destruction in a country that, from its perspective, has hardly changed since our troops first arrived.
The original resolution calling for an end to the mission, passed overwhelmingly in 2008, did contain wording that would appear to indicate any changes to the mission past 2011 can be made without a vote in Parliament, but the wording deals more with finances and aid. Harper himself has been repeatedly quoted as saying after 2011, the mission will become more civilian-driven and aid-focused and that all soldiers will be removed from theatre. What we have now is an astounding political flip-flop that voters and members of the opposition aren’t taking lightly. There is no doubt that pressure from NATO, which sees itself committed to the country until 2014 at least, factored into the decision.
But Harper’s decision to skirt a vote on the issue is another example of the disdain in which he holds the lower house of Parliament. This is the prime minister who was, with his party, almost found in contempt twice, once for not handing over requested documents and another time by refusing to let political staff testify at committee hearings into possible staff wrongdoing. While the Liberals might tacitly support this newest run-around, it is only because they don’t want to face the potential backlash of allowing its MPs to vote on the issue as they please. The Liberal Party is divided enough — the last thing Michael Ignatieff wants is to make that even more public.
There are too many questions that need answering for the public to simply trust Harper to make the decision on his own. There are also the lives of more Canadian soldiers at stake. Voters deserve a say in what happens next and the best way to give them a voice is to allow for a vote in the House of Commons. Anything else is simply another attempt by Harper to circumvent the rules to fit his own agenda.
