In a recent Hub article, University of Guelph associate professor and Macdonald-Laurier Institute senior fellow Dave Snow wrote about whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would respond to his party’s dismal polling numbers and the dysfunction in the House of Commons by proroguing Parliament. Snow also looked at how Trudeau might do it, why other prime ministers have prorogued, and what the political backlash for the practice has historically been.
You can read the full article here.
Here are three key takeaways from his article.
1. The history of prorogation
Prorogation, a parliamentary tool to terminate a session and reset legislative agendas, has grown controversial since Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s 2008 prorogation during the coalition crisis, where the Liberal and NDP parties tried to form a coalition government. Since 1984, there have been 12 prorogations (roughly one per parliament).
More recently, prorogation has attracted heightened media scrutiny, particularly during minority governments. Prime ministers have historically used it to manage political challenges, such as halting committee investigations or avoiding non-confidence votes.
Even with its use becoming more controversial, prorogation remains a powerful tool to reset government priorities amidst economic or political crises. Recent discussions have framed prorogation as a potential strategy for Trudeau to manage parliamentary dysfunction or a potential leadership change. Despite denials by Liberal ministers, speculation continues about its use in early 2025.
2. How prime ministers justify proroguing
Harper and Trudeau justified prorogation with two recurring arguments: the need to reset or recalibrate the legislative agenda (a technical justification) and the necessity of focusing on the economy (a policy-driven justification).
Both leaders made use of an economic framing, emphasizing the importance of recalibrating government priorities to address crises. Harper’s 2008 prorogation defused a coalition effort to replace his government, as he said he attempted to focus on the global financial crisis. Trudeau’s 2020 prorogation, during the WE Charity scandal, similarly was pitched as a way to respond to pandemic-induced challenges.
3. Is prorogation an effective political tool?
Despite criticism, prorogation remains effective, particularly during minority governments. It allows governments to navigate political crises and control legislative outcomes. Harper’s prorogations, from thwarting the 2008 coalition to quelling controversies over Afghan detainee treatment, and Senate scandals, achieved their political objectives.
Similarly, Trudeau’s prorogation during the WE Charity scandal allowed his government to shift focus and emerge on the other side of the controversy. Media and opposition outrage has not deterred leaders from using prorogation when advantageous. Its political costs have been negligible.
As Trudeau faces uncertain leadership and economic challenges, prorogation just might resurface as a tool to manage parliamentary dysfunction or prepare for leadership transitions.
ChatGPT assisted in the creation of this article.
