Our prorogued Parliament isn’t a problem, it’s an opportunity.

It’s that time of year again. In what seems to be becoming an annual holiday tradition, Stephen Harper’s Conservative government has once again prorogued Parliament. The House, which was to have returned from its Christmas break on January 25, will instead get back to work over five weeks later, on March 3. In response to this, I’d like to make a modest proposal on behalf of the Canadian public.

Before I get to that, however, it must be acknowledged that, from a strictly tactical point of view, the prorogation was a clever move. It killed the parliamentary committee investigating the Afghan torture scandal, effectively ending the uncomfortable scrutiny that has proven so embarrassing for the government in recent weeks. It ensured that the Military Police Complaints Commission, which was also looking into the matter, remains essentially suspended, as the government must now appoint a new commissioner before it is likely to proceed. It also guaranteed that the government would not have to answer any more questions about Afghanistan, or anything else they would rather not talk about – such as the country’s embarrassing showing/apparent pariah status at the Copenhagen Environmental Conference – in the House of Commons.

As an added bonus, the prorogation will prevent parliamentary consideration, discussion, or debate on the upcoming federal budget, which will be announced on March 4. Usually, the run-up to the budget allows the opposition to raise concerns and stoke public and media scrutiny of budgetary issues in the hopes of putting pressure on the government before the budget is actually revealed. Now there will be no such forum for the opposition parties to utilize. The prorogation will also ensure that by the time the House resumes, the Prime Minister will have had the opportunity to appoint five new Conservative Senators, giving the Tories a governing majority in the Senate for the first time.

In addition, the sheer effrontery of the maneuver is sure to aggravate the opposition parties, something this government seems to relish. Let’s just say a message is being sent as to who is in charge. After all, for weeks now, the Conservatives have been saying that the Afghan matter was “old news” and not worthy of discussion; previously, they had gone so far as to have their MPs boycott the investigating commission to frustrate the proceedings. Now, with the committee killed and Parliament vacant, there will be no discussion. King Stephen the First has apparently spoken.

So make no mistake, the prorogation was a brilliant political maneuver. Of course, it’s also the kind of move one makes only if one has no regard for the political process and a certain contempt for the electorate. Essentially, the government is betting that Canadians are so tuned out of politics, or generally clueless, that they won’t care about the prorogation - particularly as it was announced in the midst of the Christmas holidays. Who knew political apathy could be, from a government’s point of view, such a wonderful thing? One can’t help but feel that the final piece of the analysis was that even if there was an uproar about this, well, the Olympics would soon be coming to town to keep the rubes entertained. Surely, any backlash would be forgotten in the resulting warm glow of national pride. It will be interesting to see whether this calculation pans out. In view of recent polls, it may not. Surprisingly, a grassroots campaign condemning the move seems to be forming, with online petitions and demonstrations springing up to complement the condemnation of constitutional experts. Media coverage has also been generally negative, with outlets as far flung as The Economist magazine blasting the move as motivated by “naked self interest” and declaring that the Prime Minister “is counting on Canadians’ complacency as he rewrites the rules of his nation’s politics to weaken legislative scrutiny.”

But I digress. Let me get to the modest proposal.

It has been prompted by one query: given that the government has now effectively given Parliament an additional five weeks off, when exactly is it that our elected representatives actually work? By my admittedly rough count, our Members of Parliament have a break of approximately 12 weeks during the summer, another six weeks over the Christmas holidays, two more weeks around Easter, plus another few weeks for the usual assortment of holidays throughout the year. According to the Federal government’s parliamentary website, in 2009 Parliament was actually only scheduled to sit for a total of 26 weeks – meaning they were out of session for fully half the year. Now they are going to be on an additional five-week break, just because the government felt like it? Evidently, being an MP is good work if you can get it.

Government spokespeople argue that this is routine – if so, I’d posit that is a little disturbing in itself – but somehow one can’t help but feel that someone is taking advantage of the situation. If anyone reading this column doubts that, then try going into your boss’s office tomorrow morning and telling him or her that since the Olympics are coming, and you could use a little time for contemplation, you’ve decided to take an additional five weeks off, with pay. See how well that goes over. Yes, we’ve elected these guys, but is it really so much to expect them to actually show up at their workplace? Chances are, the aforementioned spokespeople would argue that MPs are still working, even when Parliament is shut down. Perhaps. For all any of us know, every MPs is working hard, meeting with their constituents in their riding offices each and every day they are not sitting in Ottawa. Maybe out of the 26 weeks annually that Parliament is not scheduled to sit, they only allow themselves the three weeks of vacation per year that most other Canadians get.

This could be. Stop laughing, it’s possible. Maybe. Still, even if so, it seems odd that our Members of Parliament – all of whom are paid between $157,000 and $300,000 per year – can end up with what boils down to several additional weeks of paid vacation whenever the party in power decides it would rather not talk to anyone.

That seems like a bit of a waste of our tax dollars, so here is the proposal: Since the Tories are the party of lower taxes and smaller government, I would suggest that from now on, whenever they should decide to shut down Parliament beyond the usual half year that it is traditionally closed, all MPs should forfeit their salary for this extra time out.

So during the present prorogation, for example, all MPs would forfeit, or refund to the government the equivalent of five weeks’ salary. Given the salary levels noted above and the fact that we currently have 308 MPs, the country would stand to save several million dollars, each and every time a prorogation happens. Why, just between last year and this one, Canada would have received a windfall of well in excess of $10 million, had this proposal been in operation.

If you think about it, it’s a win-win proposition. Not only would the vital reasons which we’ve all come to understand always underlie prorogation carry the day, but average Canadians would see a return on their hard-earned tax dollars – which would be recycled back into the federal system and used to fund programs or even reduce taxes.

Far from facing the protests now coalescing against the current prorogation, the government would see Canadians clamouring for further and ever longer suspensions of Parliament! And just think of what we could do for the national debt! As an added bonus, imagine what the lack of hot air spewing from Parliament could do for our carbon emissions. Now that’s a made-in-Canada solution for climate change!

Sure, not everyone will like this plan. The Liberals, NDP, and Bloc can fairly complain that, as they were not responsible for the prorogation and clearly don’t want it, it would be unfair that their pocketbooks should also suffer. Admittedly, that’s a legitimate point, but sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.

So that’s my modest proposal, circa 2010. Now why do I have the feeling this one will go over about as well as that other one we all know?