By Adam Radwanski Globe and Mail February 10 2010
Dalton McGuinty is tying himself into knots to avoid looking like Stephen Harper.
The Ontario Premier wants to put forward a Speech from the Throne this spring - a common way for governments to set the agenda for the second half of their terms and, in his case, to try for a fresh start after a difficult 2009. But the only way to prompt one is through prorogation, a mechanism tainted by the Prime Minister's overuse of it.
Mr. McGuinty apparently grappled with this dilemma for weeks. Yesterday, he announced what his strategists think is a clever compromise.
Rather than putting off the return from recess, as Mr. Harper did, the Premier will have the legislature resume as scheduled next Tuesday. Prorogation will happen in March, and government sources say the ensuing break will last no longer than a week before the Throne Speech.
Unlike the federal government, the province will also avoid having to go back to the drawing board on legislation working its way through the legislative process. Through a motion passed last summer, government bills will be kept alive at their current stage of progress.
So prorogation will have minimal practical impact. It will set back some private members' bills that probably wouldn't have passed anyway. It will permit Bill Murdoch and Randy Hillier, a pair of Tories banished from the legislature, to return to their seats. But mostly, it will allow Mr. McGuinty to get that Throne Speech off his chest.
He could have done that next week by proroguing the legislature now. But the Liberals say they want the speech to get lots of attention, and don't think that will be possible until the Olympics and the federal budget are over and done with.
With all that buildup, one might expect that Mr. McGuinty is preparing something revolutionary. But like most throne speeches, and Liberal ones in particular, it will inevitably be an airy overview that disappoints anyone looking for specifics.
Still, the Liberals think that it will achieve a few key purposes.
First, they want to grab control of the narrative, which they had trouble doing during last fall's scandal-plagued sitting. The theme will be how the government is responding to the changing economy - both what it's done and what's to come.
That's not a fresh topic for Mr. McGuinty, who delivers the same monologue about "old economy" versus "new economy" in most of his stump speeches. But the Liberals expect that by dropping some hints about their coming budget, they'll be able to show they're getting down to business.
As much as toward the public, the message will be geared toward the provincial bureaucracy. Throne speeches, despite their broadness, are meant to provide operating instructions to government departments. With many ministries under new management, even a broad mission statement might be better than nothing.
Then there are the contrasts the Liberals are trying to strike, which are at the heart of their strategizing.
They seem to think they're luring Tim Hudak's opposition Conservatives into a trap. The Tories, they figure, will spend the final weeks of the current session attacking anything and everything the government is doing, without offering many alternatives. Then the Liberals will rise above it all with a positive, forward-looking message.
Of course, it's easier to be positive and forward-looking when you're not staggering under the weight of a $25-billion deficit. But Mr. McGuinty will try to convey he is more serious about addressing it than Mr. Hudak.
If that doesn't work, there's always the contrast with Mr. Harper.
The federal and provincial governments have enjoyed a cozy relationship during their respective second terms. But drawing a direct comparison with Ottawa - "we will not follow the federal example of an extended break before we have that Throne Speech" - Mr. McGuinty showed yesterday that he's not above using the Prime Minister as a foil.
Whether Ontarians will be impressed by all this tactical manoeuvring, or whether most will even differentiate between the two different ways of proroguing, is debatable. But the Liberals might have found a way to regain control by using the procedural tools at their disposal, without being seen to abuse them.