History of democratic collapse?

With the retreat of the United States into authoritarianism, there seems to be an urge for Canadians to declare that we could have that too.

Adam Dodek, Ottawa law professor, had a long essay in the weekend Globe and Mail arguing "It Can Happen Here" and "it" means Donald Trump, whose name is in almost every sentence of his opening paragraphs. I've also become aware of the forthcoming Democratic Collapse by Quebec City journalist and podcaster Nora Loreto -- which is actually the third book in her series Canada in Decline, the others focusing on the social safety net and corporate control

I've been thinking of a response to some of the points in Adam D's essay that cry out for revision, but parliamentary journalist Dale Smith is way ahead of me with an online takedown today on his website. Dodek in his essay argues that the pathway to salvation is a massive expansion of the Reform Act (2014). For Smith the Reform Act is always "the (garbage) Reform Act," and he goes full-tilt for Dodek's praise of it. 

How exactly Dodek would get the anti-democratic forces to enact such legislative amendments is a puzzle. And Smith's arguments  -- essentially that the Reform Act has put all kinds of limits on parliamentarians that did not exist in legislation previously -- are worth pondering.

Myself, I still rather like the Reform Act, and I admire Michael Chong, Canada's most successful backbencher, for getting it heard and passed (in a weakened form, it is true) against the instincts of most of his fellow Conservatives and most Liberals too.  

What both Dodek and Smith need to recognize is that the Reform Act is like those fixed election laws that Canadian legislature constantly pass, but which premiers and prime ministers ignore whenever it suits them -- without suffering any pushback. 

The Reform Act, like the fixed-election acts, needs to be understood as essentially aspirational. They both urge parliamentarians to follow certain paths. But fixed election laws cannot cancel a premier's constitutional authority to dissolve the house  (as courts have already ruled). And the Reform Act can in way constrain the freedom of MPs to remove their leaders, defy their parties, and even defeat their own government.  Those are the constitutional powers of the elected representatives of the Canadian people and cannot be abridged.  To the extent the Reform Act hobbles them, it is suggestive only and has no power.  

Still the Reform Act urges MPs to be more assertive, and surely that is an appetite that grows with the eating -- and therefore a good start, if insufficient. More assertive MPs is the thing we need -- really, the only thing we need -- not amendments to the Reform Act.