In the midst of summer recess when Parliament is technically "closed for business", it is encouraging to witness an emerging public debate about Parliament the state of democracy in Canada.

Stockwell Day and his Canadian Alliance ‘freedom train' have captured this theme with a call for more free votes in the House of Commons. On a parallel track, Tory Leader Joe Clark is pushing for greater empowerment of MPs through more meaningful parliamentary committees. Over in the other yard, backbench Liberal MPs are writing op-eds decrying the heavy-handed tactics of the Prime Minister's office, noting they are nothing more than voting machines to implement the government's agenda. And apart from casting a ballot once every four years, the ownership of Canadian public policy has largely been expropriated from taxpayers.

Admittedly, more free votes, strengthened roles for MPs and a return to substantive debate in Parliament would be an improvement over the current system. However, more free votes, etc.are solutions that have been on the menu for more than 30 years. Yet each change in government seduces once rebellious and reform driven MPs to sacrifice their appetite for parliamentary change with a few nibbles of Parliament's forbidden fruits: a junket trip here, a committee chairmanship there. Add in a House officer position or parliamentary secretary posting, and once again the "system" co-opts those who once so feverishly argued for change.

Returning public policy to citizens will require far more substantive changes than the tired old phrases of "free votes" that they simply no longer believe. They are but symptoms of the larger problem in determining how our democratic institutions should be structured and operate to better serve Canadians. The following four ideas merit consideration.

: Passage of taxpayer protection legislation. Setting legislative limits on the ability of governments to tax, borrow and spend our money is paramount. Further, mandating balanced budgets and giving voters final approval over any proposed tax increase by way of endorsement or veto at the ballot box is necessary.

A glimmer of hope exists for this reform initiative as Ontario and Manitoba have already implemented such laws. Again, it's to be hoped, one day, Ottawa will follow. Ensuring that government works for today's citizens without unduly mortgaging the future for those to come after us is not only the proper thing to do from a fiscal perspective, it is our collective moral duty.

After 30 years of rampant deficits we have painted ourselves into a situation where 26 cents of every tax dollar paid to Ottawa does not purchase public goods or merit services; it pays interest on a massive $577 billion national debt. And the child that is born tomorrow starts life with two strikes against her being on the hook for $19,000 in debt. Allowing citizens to ultimately set limits on what government can do in the sphere of public finances is essential. It should be noted that the World Taxpayers Association recently passed a resolution calling for the constitutional entrenchment of balanced budgets and taxpayer protection laws in the constitutions of its member associations' countries, including Canada.

: Citizen initiatives and referendums. Allowing citizens to place questions on the ballot when politicians will not address key financial or moral issues and subsequently holding legislatures to respect binding referenda on these questions would also stimulate democratic participation. Moreover, referenda, as divisive as they sometimes can be, ensure the broadest public debate participation. The decisiveness of referenda can also bring generational closure to contentious questions that can paralyze governments for years.

: Voting reform. By now, we've all heard the Canadian Alliance mantra that the Liberal Party only received 38% of the popular vote in 1997 yet rule with 100% majority power. But let's not stop in Ottawa. The Harris Tories in Ontario rule with 100% absolute majority power even though 56% of Ontario voters did not vote for round two of the Common Sense Revolution. And both the B.C. and Quebec Liberal parties received more votes than the current governing party in their respective provinces, yet they languish in Victoria and Quebec City in opposition. This is due to the absurdity of our first-past-the-post electoral system where a majority of Canadians are routinely denied a say in who governs them.

Abandoning the first-past-the-post voting system in favour of another model (run-off elections, transferable ballots, proportional representation, mixed-member proportional) is long overdue and almost assuredly provide a more meaningful role for our legislators because the current system, which breeds party discipline, would be changed.

: Recall. Politicians are supposed to represent the people in Ottawa. For too long our MPs have, you guessed it, represented Ottawa to their constituents. Recall is a mechanism that allows citizens to gather signatures to remove their MP - at a point of their choosing - and for reasons determined solely by them. Of course the parliamentary purists always complain that the existence of recall forces MPs to reflect the wishes of their constituents and always be mindful of the perception of their actions ‘back home.' Is this something we should discourage? With proper thresholds in place to discourage vexatious recall campaigns, recall does work, as evidence south of the border clearly indicates.

Adoption of the four reforms outlined above would restore a balance between those who govern and those who are governed. Repatriating public policy to its rightful owners - voters and taxpayers - is necessary if Parliament is to once again truly serve Canadians. Canada is far behind in retooling its democratic practices. It's time to reengineer our institutions, throw away Parliament's ‘closed for business' sign and place our democracy ‘Under New Management'.