Trust in Government

Ask yourself. What do these two Guys Have in Common?

It gives us all a warm comfortable feeling when we can trust the government in power. A kind of secure feeling in the face of a world that too often seems like to be caught in a massive downward spiral.

I confess however, that it is becoming tougher and tougher to find that warm feeling these days. We are tested daily by more and more unlikely explanations from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his cabinet colleagues that truly test our ability to suspend our disbelief.

The list is so long it boggles our imagination,

•  the trough Tony Clement rolled for his constituents during the G8, 
• the untendered fighter jet contracts for aircraft that have become white elephants even before the first one comes off the production line,
• The in-out scandal
•  people concerned about our environment being compared to terrorists, 
• Citizens concerns about privacy being called supporters of child molesters,  
• A polling firm tied to the Cons called constituents in Liberal Irwin Cotler's Montreal riding their MP was about to or had resigned and that a by-election was imminent.
•  the supports of the gun registry being compared to Hitler. You know the list. I could go on and on. 

I never recall a government so arrogant.

Even hard line Conservatives are jumping ship.

It is reported in the Toronto Star that it has become so bad that a former Conservative member who was a director of Conservative electoral district association boards in the Ontario communities of Guelph and Kitchener-Center says he regrets every working for Harper’s Party.

Victor Pocaterra of, Kitchener says “They have gone against Canadian values and have made a joke out of our democracy.” He goes on to say “Canada is a great nation, built by a people who value hard work, taking responsibility for one’s actions and above all honesty. The government that sits in Ottawa values only power and cannibalizes its own in order to save face.

As someone who has seen what is talked about in the party, I can only say God help Canada in the next four years. Because it won’t be the country that veterans, like my grandfather fought so hard to protect.”

The last few days have revealed election fraud which Canada's former chief electoral officer says is unprecedented in the country's electoral history.

Elections Canada has traced fraudulent phone calls made during the federal election to an Edmonton company that worked for the Conservatives and for Harper.

During Question Period Monday, the Prime Minister claimed that he had no knowledge of any wrong-doing in the robocalls scandal, and challenged the opposition parties to prove his Conservatives were guilty. I wonder.

If he had his hands on all this, I am sure he would made sure there was a distance between him and who ever initiated the misleading calls in 40 closely contested ridings during the election. Like Tony Soprano, he wouldn't have to be specific. They boys knew what to do.

It is quite a stretch to imagine these that a control freak like Harper would not be aware of this stuff going on.  A massive campaign like this one is not the work of a couple of young over eager rogue part time workers. It smells like something much bigger. It is just how things look. If I am out on a limb here I apologize but let's wait to see what the RCMP have to say.

This contempt for the democratic process and for the people of Canada is too much for me to swallow and should be too much for most Canadians.

Let’s hope it it finally the beginning of the end.

The Ritz Cracker Ignores Farmer's Wishes

The Harper Conservatives made it very clear. Give them a majority, and the Wheat Board's monopoly as a single desk seller for wheat and barley would fade into history. Notwithstanding that, and with typical rural tunnel vision the farm communities pretty much voted as a block for the blue meanies.

Why the surprise then that Harper plans to follow through with his promise to "Give farmers the choice."

Former ostrich farmer, now Agriculture Minister, Gerry Ritz, or as he is fondly known, the Ritz Cracker, is once again carrying the torch for Harper on this issue. I heard him yesterday going on and on about democracy and how they won a majority so clearly Canadians support dismantling single desk selling. That is the democratic process he was saying.

Gerry however doesn't give any credence to the very direct democratic vote undertaken by farmers who actually use the Wheat Board. Given the opportunity to vote on the issue 400,000 farmers cast their ballots  in favor of keeping the single desk. That overwhelming support for the Wheat Board doesn't mean a lick to Gerry. "Our government is committed to giving Western Canadian wheat farmers the marketing freedom they want and deserve" he said while questioning the legitimacy of the plebiscite.

The Wheat Board might not work for farmers close to the American market with low transportation costs but doing away to a cooperative approach to marketing, without question, will slam most farmers hard in the pocket book. You have to ask then, what were they thinking? Those agricultural communities were once the backbone of the New Democrats out here but, corporate farms brings big business thinking. It is everyone for themselves.

The one thing Gerry Ritz and I can probably agree on is "They were warned.". Harper and his cronies made it pretty clear. Did those farmers give a moment's thought about the consequences when they cast their ballots in the last election? My sense is they voted for doing away with the gun registry without thinking about the Wheat Board.

What a trade off.

Here is a Question for you Jack

So here we are. The election is over, Ottawa has a new, but not necessarily better look to it and many of the 60% or so of Canadians who didn’t vote for the Blue Man Group are wondering what happened. More and more are asking themselves, “Isn’t it time we took a hard look at our electoral system.” The first-past-the post system just doesn’t cut it.

All that considered I think that Fair Vote Canada has a great suggestion for Jack Layton’s first Question in the new Parliament. They are nudging the new Leader of the Opposition to ask:

Mr. Speaker, in 1996, when the right was divided and we seemed to be faced with the prospect of “Liberal government forever”, the current prime minister, who was then out of elected office, co-authored and published with Tom Flanagan a remarkable article entitled “Our Benign Dictatorship”. In this thoughtful and well researched article, they decried the way that our first-past-the-post voting system creates one-party rule “beset by the factionalism, regionalism and cronyism that accompany any such system.” They said, and I quote, “For Canadian democracy to mature, Canadian citizens must face these facts, as citizens in other countries have, and update our political structures to reflect the diverse political aspirations of our diverse communities.”

They went on to decry the hugely distorted election results in the 1993 election, in which the Reform party won 52 seats with 19% of the votes, but the Progressive Conservatives, with 16% of the votes, won only two seats, while the Bloc Quebecois, with only 14% of the votes, won 54 seats and formed Her Majesty's “Loyal” Opposition.

“Imposing a first-past-the-post voting system upon a society with deep ethno linguistic and regional cleavages,” they said, “inevitably fragments Canadian conservatism,” adding that, ”Our system has similarly fragmented social democrats.”

They encouraged the Reform and Progressive Conservative parties to advocate electoral reform, and suggested the NDP would vote for it too.

“No one who cares seriously about ideas,” they said, “whether conservative, liberal or socialist, should be happy with the thought of prolonged one-party rule,” because, they pointed out, it leads to cronyism, corruption, cynicism and chaos.” The absence of effective competition,” they said, “is just as bad in politics as it is in economics.”

“Voters on the left,” they pointed out, “are as much entitled as voters on the right to effective representation.”

They went on to point out that, “In today’s democratic societies, organizations share power. Corporations, churches, universities, hospitals, even public sector bureaucracies make decisions through consultation, committees and consensus-building techniques. Only in politics do we still entrust power to a single faction expected to prevail every time over the opposition by sheer force of numbers. Even more anachronistically, we persist in structuring the governing team like a military regiment under a single commander with almost total power to appoint, discipline and expel subordinates.”

They conclude by saying, “Many of Canada’s problems stem from a winner-take-all style of politics that allows governments in Ottawa to impose measures abhorred by large areas of the country,” and “Modernizing Canadian politics would not only be good for conservatism, it might be the key to Canada’s survival as a nation.”

Mr Speaker, we on this side of the House couldn’t agree more with all of that, so my question to the Prime Minister is this: Now that you have won a majority government on the basis of having received less than forty percent of the votes cast in the election, do you still believe in proportional representation?

Then Fair Vote suggests that Jack follow up with the following supplementary.

Mr. Speaker, historically, up to 80% of votes cast for the NDP federally have been wasted votes—they did not help to elect anyone, and our party has always had about half as many seats in this place as we should have won based on the number of votes we received. That has changed, Mr. Speaker, and today, the New Democratic Party is actually slightly over-represented in this House.

But Mr. Speaker, we are willing to put the interests of the country ahead of the interests of our party, and we call on the governing party to do the same.

We do still support proportional representation, Mr. Speaker, and my supplementary question to the Prime Minister is this: When will his government put forward amendments to the Canada Elections Act to give Canadians a modern, fair, proportional voting system, so that every Canadian can have a vote that makes a difference? When they do, Mr. Speaker, we will vote for it.

I don't know if Jack reads what Fair Vote writes about the issue but I hope he does. That question would get people's attention. Let him know this is a great idea.

Brad Wades in

Brad Wall puts on an Angry Face

To no one's surprise, Brad Wall, the consummate right-wing pitchman has jumped into the election fray after promising everyone to steer clear of the Federal race. Brad, who is about as intellectuality deep and complex as your average AM radio, morning show host, told everyone that he was deeply troubled by Ignatieff's musing about what options were open if Harper didn't change his ways bullying ways. Wall suggested that the Liberal leader was planning to "...overturn of democratic results of the federal election." It is obvious from Wall's comments that he doesn't even begin to understand the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy he works under as Premier.

Not surprisingly, Wall along with his best friend and deep blue Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, sees nothing whatsoever wrong with Harper assuming power when 63% or 64% of Canadians voted for a party, other that the one Harper leads. It is the king of pretzel logic we should be used to from this lot by now.

Wall can't seem to grasp that his "close relationship" with Stephen Harper only works one way. The more Brad bows and scrapes and demeans himself - the more Harper ignores him.

Some advice Brad. Stay out of the big boy's sandbox.

John Cleese Explains PR

Canada's electoral system makes very little sense. The first past the post method of electing our parliamentary representatives has been tossed out by most democracies in the world and replaced by some form of Proportional Representation. 

Canadian politicians and pundits argue that it is all too complicated for Canadians to understand.  I for one, have more faith in Canadians' intelligence than most politicians.  

The two large parties in Canada have both taken advantage of the system to form government when most Canadians have actually voted for some other party as their favoured representative. Perhaps that is why they never seem to take the time to explain the options available to us.

A few examples:

• In 1993 the Reform Party won 52 seats with 2.6 million votes. The Progressive Conservatives only won two seats with 2.2 million votes
• The Liberals  got 51% of the seats and formed a majority government in 1997 with just 38% of the popular vote
• In 2004 the New Democrats won 19 seats with 2.1 million votes and Bloc won 54 seats with 1.7 million votes.
• and in the last election, 940,000 green Party voters elected no one while 822,000 Conservative voters in Alberta alone elected 27 MPs

Lucky for us, proportional representation isn't that tough to grasp. If you really want to understand how it all works I offer this short video. It is a bit dated but the principles are the same and who better than John Cleese to explain it, as only he can.

For more information on proportional representation try the Fair Vote Canada site.

Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament

I thought this Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament group warranted a few lines.

I don't remember an issue that caught the interest of Canadians of all political stripes so quickly. Having over 180,000 Canadians sign up to a Facebook site in a few short days is very impressive.

Even here in Saskatchewan where with our badly flawed first past the post voting system has given us pretty near, wall to wall Conservative MPs, there are demos planned for Regina, Saskatoon and Prince Albert.

Take a look at the video and on January 23rd, put on your coat and hat, get a bit of fresh air and let your voice be heard.

Are you fed up with the State of our Democracy?

At the risk of overstating what Canadians think, it is clear to me that most of us are fed up with the state of democracy in Canada. If I have overstated it, I know that at the very least most of my friends are.

On September 23, Maclean's and CPAC hosted a round table discussion entitled our “Democracy is Broken: How do we fix it?” at Toronto's St Lawrence Centre for the Arts.

The round table was moderated by Peter Van Dusen and featured Maclean’s Andrew Coyne and Paul Wells. They were joined by a guest panel made up of former NDP leader Ed Broadbent, former prime minister's chief of staff Eddie Goldenberg, author John Ralston Saul and conservative commentator Rick Anderson.

It was an interesting discussion, a must for political junkies.

It was turned into a television program and you can find it by following this link to CPAC.

Earlier this week, Sunday Edition's Michael Enright moderated a public forum entitled "Canada's Dysfunctional Politics", is There a Cure For Our Failing Democracy" . Sunday Edition hosted the town hall type meeting at St. Paul's University in Ottawa to discuss the issues. It was broadcast September 27 and will soon be available on podcast.

The panelists were:

Jane Taber ,senior parliamentary writer for The Globe and Mail, and co-host of CTV's Question Period.

Duff Connacher , founder and co-ordinator of Democracy Watch

.Charlotte Gray, is one of Canada's best known non fiction writers, and adjunct professor in the department of history at Carlton University.

William Johnson, the author of five books on politics in French and English including "The Future of Canada" and a biography of Stephen Harper.

Manon Conellier, political columnist for Le Devoir.

Elly Alboim, former CBC journalist and current head of Strategic Communications for Earnscliffe Strategy Group.

And

As well on September 27, on CPAC's Goldhawk Live, the topic is Dysfunctional Democracy. They will be taking live calls from viewers. Political scientist and media commentator John Trent, who is on FVC's National Advisory Board, will be a studio guest.

The program should also be available on-line at the CPAC site if you miss it.