2 posts tagged “government”

Observations made during this latest election season.

(Please note that all statements are meant to be general to my population and not specific.)

1. It seems that we do not seem to hold the principles of democracy in high esteem

Democracy means giving voice to the people, even if you don't like what people are saying.  From one conversation, said in a disapproving tone: "Well, STV means someone from the Marijuana Party could get in." * Now, that person is entirely correct - a representative from this party could get in, if s/he had enough votes.  So what?  If enough people vote for it, it can happen. That is how our representative democracy works.  On my part, I certainly don't agree with my fellow voters at every turn, but I must be willing to accept their choices and the outcome. (Until the next election, that is. ;) 

1. We seem to be expecting less and less of our representatives in government.

Let me back me back up a bit:

Under STV and the way we've historically voted, there is a likelihood of returning a minority government to the legislature.  Some see minority governments as ineffectual and that majorities are necessary for "anything to get done.  After all, [the politicians] can't get things done very well as it is."  (Quote from another recent conversation.)  With this (not unwarranted) criticism, I see a lowering of the bar when it comes to the job performance of our representatives - we assume that since they don't get on well right now, having more opinions in the mix (even if they are desired, ie:voted in, by the population) to be a negative thing.  I feel that we have a right to demand our representatives get along and compromise and “get things done” because they are the ones we've asked to it and by taking office, they've agreed. It shouldn't matter if we are asking them to work with a minority or a majority.   Finger pointing isn't the point, getting on with task of governing our province regardless of who you have to work with, is. By saying no to STV simply because we don't have faith in our politicians to get along seems to be flipping our priorities – it's the politicians who need to shape up. 

I first began to really notice the ramifications of this with the confidence crisis last winter. Just like with the outcry with the possibility of a coalition forming (specifially against the idea that such a move would be illegal and/or undemocratic), it would seem that people do not understand how our current electoral system works. If one does not understand how our current first-past-the-post system works, they aren't as likely to understand why it's ineffective. As a result, convincing people why or how change is important meets with resistance. Lack of education seems to leave people open to responding to, what essentially amounts to as fear-mongering. Even I've been struck with doubt after reading a particularly persuasive piece before I head back to the basics of the systems and examine the arguments. The point is, I understand a lot about this and even I fall prey to it; how much easier it would be if I wasn't adequately informed. Just this weekend I read an op-ed piece our local paper that used the Stanley Cup finals as an analogy to STV. Sadly, the analogy is, at best, misleading, and at worst, false. (For those who have seen it, because it's been circulating other places – you can't get SEATS without the VOTES. Votes can't trump seats, no matter what system you're in. Oh, and we're in a multi-party system where there are many winners (of seats), so that muddies the waters, too.)

The current major parties have been pretty quiet about STV overall and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that has spread some mistrust of STV as well. (Without them taking the time to rectify anything.) STV turns out a legislature far more reflective of the majority vote that our current system. Far, far better, in fact. Currently, a government can (and has) gained all of the power with only 30 – 40% of the votes. Therefore it is not in the best interest of the current major parties to change the electoral system. However, it is certainly in the best interest of the electorate, us.

I understand that there are plenty of people out there who heartily disagree with the positions I take. I'm quite alright with that. I don't want to sound as arrogant as some politicians I hear who make out anyone who disagrees with them to be a simpleton, or moronic. However, it is important that the conclusions drawn come from the facts and information even if our interpretations are different.

So get education and get out the vote!

*My apologies to those supporters of this party.  I use it as an example because, you must admit, we're not likely to elect a party whose primary platform has to do with legalizing a drug.  Just saying. 

Man, Canadian politics is getting exciting. 

Yep, that's right.  I used "Canadian politics" and "exciting" in the same sentence without sarcasm. 

I know!

Sure, it's exciting in a geeky, current event watching, this-is-how-a-parliamentary-democracy-can-work kind of way.  But still.

Today's latest is that the Liberals & NDP have been able to form a coalition with Dion at the helm in the event of a non-confidence vote and the GG turns to them instead of sending us back to the polls.  Whee!  Unless, of course, Harper decides to porouge the session, which would either only put off the confidence vote, or else give them a chance to fiddle with their budget/economic package, the bone of contention in this whole thing.

I know that this whole deal is not without its challenges and questions.  Many people don't like the fact that the coalition would be dependent upon the Bloc, given it's basis for existence, but I'm not too fussed over that point.  Maybe I should be.  However, it seems to me that the goals of the Bloc these days have far more to do with looking out for Quebec instead of succeeding. 

Folks are also pointing out that they didn't vote for Dion as PM, which is absolutely true.  However, 60 some percent of Canadians DID NOT vote for Harper... but that's how things work in a parliamentary democracy.  First past the post and all.  Interestingly enough, a coalition gov't taking over in these circumstances... well, that's also the way things can work in a parliamentary democracy, too.

I keep coming back around to the fact that the Conservatives are a minority government.  Good on them for getting to steer the boat, but they don't have complete control over all the oars and so they shouldn't be acting like they do.  Everyone should be, you know, COMPROMISING.

What really gets to me is the stuff the Conservatives tried to pass with a minority government, (taking away civil servants right to strike and removing the per vote funding to parties, for example).  If that's what they try as a minority, I am apprehensive as to the way the wind would blow if they had a majority.

Right now the next 'move' is supposed to come with the vote on Monday the 8th.  Things are looking pretty interesting on the Hill.