21 December 2009
Rick Casson,
Member of Parliament
Lethbridge
House of Commons,
Ottawa, Ontario
Dear Mr Casson:
.
Cut it with the partisan crap. Show up for your committee meeting; bring your Conservative colleagues with you; and urge the Prime Minister to stop playing politics with the detainee issue. Conservative MPs' confusion over allegiances may yet be the downfall this government. And they border on treason.
Here's why:
You cannot bear true allegiance to her Majesty The Queen without standing up for Canadian sovereignty and Canadian values and protecting the role of Parliament in our democracy.
Parliament (The Sovereign, House of Commons and Senate) are supreme in Canada, not the PMO or the Conservative Party. Stop insulting Canadians by treating Parliament like an impediment to democracy. It is the basis of Canadian democracy.
You are elected to represent the interests of Canadians in your riding, not to play stupid political games. Remember, it is the voters who hire and fire you, not the party brass.
The irony is this: your political games are blowing any hope of a Conservative majority. Even if you have no respect for our parliamentary system, or Canadian values; sheer self-interest must be telling you that you are acting in a self-destructive manner by treating Parliament as an impediment to democracy, In fact, Parliament is the basis of democracy.
The fact that, even the Prime Minister is 'first among equals', is the strength of our system of government. The fact that the Head of State and her representatives are partisan, protects us from the arrogance of the executive and total partisan dictatorship that, it appears, our current Head of Government would find more efficient.
I love our old-fashioned parliamentary system. It serves Canadians well, and has served us well since before Confederation.
God help us all, if Canada ever strays from our current system either combines the Head of Gov/Head of State functions or turns the Head of State into a partisan, because then Parliament will have lost supremacy. Democracy will be in even more peril than it is today.
It is plain that members of the Conservative party find the opposition an impediment to their will. (That is their job. The Opposition is there to question and hold the government accountable.)
Show up for your committee meeting. Remember that Parliament is supreme in Canada. Democracy may be inefficient when it comes to carrying out a party agenda, but it is the basis of our system.
.
Sincerely,
Jane Harris Zsovan
p.s.
Even Reform MP, Ray Speaker, used to send us actual reports from Parliament instead of advertising flysers. Please return to that time honoured tradition that Mr. Speaker and his predecessor, Conservative MP, Blaine Thacker followed. It is much more befitting the role of a Member of Parliament.
cc. The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minster of Canada
Showing posts with label Parliament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parliament. Show all posts
Monday, 21 December 2009
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
Role of the LOCAL MP
05 July 1858. The Province of Canada's new Inspector General rises to speak in the colonial assembly. He has an idea to end fighting and factions in the Canadian Parliament and to save British North America's economy. Why not federate the colonies? Why not bring Rupert's land into the arrangement? Perhaps even the colonies across the Mountains? Surely such a grand country will not remained embroiled in petty squables.
The House of Assembly (also called the Legislature or Parliament) agree to take a chance on Galt's idea, to move beyond their personal prejudices and grasp a bigger vision. They choose three members of their assembly: John Ross, George Etienne Cartier, and Alexander Torrance Galt put the idea before the British Government.
The idea is so big that, when the MPPs arrive in London, many British officials doubt it can be accomplished. But the Colonial Secretary, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, gives it a fair hearing. He likes the idea even if it is grand. (Not surprising, Lytton is a novelist and a friend of Charles Dickens.)
It take eight more years before Canada becomes the first nation within the British Empire (other than Britain herself). But, without that first vote in the Canadian Assembly, it would never have happened. Without the authorization of ordinary MPPs (MLAs) on all sides of the house, no moves would have been made.
Canada's House of Commons and Provincial Legislatures are the modern version of that 1858 Assembly. We elect members to represent us in these assemblies. No law in Canada can come into effect without their authorization. Or the Senate's. Or Royal Assent. (In short, the Cabinet has no authorization to govern on its own.)
Over the past 60 years, many Canadians have lost sight of the importance of making sure their Member of Parliament (or MP, MPP, MLA or MNA) carries their vote in these assemblies.
The role of political parties (and the highly paid hired hands in these backroom) has impinged upon the role of elected members of legislative assemblies. So much so, that many people no longer vote for their local member, they vote for a party. They accept that their member of the assembly should be follow the dictates of poltical parties and their funders. Several of these political parties capitalize on regional and ethnic divisions within the country to get support. (That's a separate post.)
But political parties have no Constitutional role in Canada. The Prime Minister is merely the Member of Parliament who has the confidience of the House. Much of the powers that job has garnered in recent years are in fact counter to democracy in Canada.
Given the current political crisis in Ottawa, perhaps Canadians will take greater care to elect members of their legislative assemblies that can represent them. Perhaps the role of political parties and ideologues will wane.
And perhaps Canadian kids will be taught how their system actually works.
The House of Assembly (also called the Legislature or Parliament) agree to take a chance on Galt's idea, to move beyond their personal prejudices and grasp a bigger vision. They choose three members of their assembly: John Ross, George Etienne Cartier, and Alexander Torrance Galt put the idea before the British Government.
The idea is so big that, when the MPPs arrive in London, many British officials doubt it can be accomplished. But the Colonial Secretary, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, gives it a fair hearing. He likes the idea even if it is grand. (Not surprising, Lytton is a novelist and a friend of Charles Dickens.)
It take eight more years before Canada becomes the first nation within the British Empire (other than Britain herself). But, without that first vote in the Canadian Assembly, it would never have happened. Without the authorization of ordinary MPPs (MLAs) on all sides of the house, no moves would have been made.
Canada's House of Commons and Provincial Legislatures are the modern version of that 1858 Assembly. We elect members to represent us in these assemblies. No law in Canada can come into effect without their authorization. Or the Senate's. Or Royal Assent. (In short, the Cabinet has no authorization to govern on its own.)
Over the past 60 years, many Canadians have lost sight of the importance of making sure their Member of Parliament (or MP, MPP, MLA or MNA) carries their vote in these assemblies.
The role of political parties (and the highly paid hired hands in these backroom) has impinged upon the role of elected members of legislative assemblies. So much so, that many people no longer vote for their local member, they vote for a party. They accept that their member of the assembly should be follow the dictates of poltical parties and their funders. Several of these political parties capitalize on regional and ethnic divisions within the country to get support. (That's a separate post.)
But political parties have no Constitutional role in Canada. The Prime Minister is merely the Member of Parliament who has the confidience of the House. Much of the powers that job has garnered in recent years are in fact counter to democracy in Canada.
Given the current political crisis in Ottawa, perhaps Canadians will take greater care to elect members of their legislative assemblies that can represent them. Perhaps the role of political parties and ideologues will wane.
And perhaps Canadian kids will be taught how their system actually works.
Friday, 28 November 2008
Canada's Most Successful Coalition Government
Hi, It's late, but with all the hoopla over the possibility of a coalition government in Canada, I have to post this. Mr. Harper suggests a coalition government in Canada would be a violation of the electorate's will and he's blocking a motion of non-confidence for one week.
Is he right?
Since only a minority of Canadian voters voted for his party in the last election, probably not.
More importantly, has Canada ever had a coalition government?
Yes.
What was the result?
Confederation.
In 1858, Governor General Sir Edmund Head asked Alexander Galt, MP for Sherbrooke to form a goverment after the MPs asked the Queen to choose a capital, then brought the government down because they didn't like her choice of Ottawa.
Much like today, Canada's parliamentarians simply couldn't keep it together and the country was sick of elections caused by parliamentary gridlock and fights between MPPs. (One time the legislators actually had to stop John A. Macdonald, MP for Kingston and Colonel Rankin, Member for Essex, from shooting each other on the steps of the legislature.)
Galt, wisely told His Excellency that he was not the man for the job as he could not command the loyalty of the majority of members in Canada's colonial legislature. Instead he recommended a coalition under the leadership of Georges Etienne Cartier and John A. Macdonald.
Ultimately these two men did join forces. Ultimately they did form one party. But in the beginning, Cartier and Macdonald shared power. And Galt joined their team on one condition -- that they made the federation of British North America into on nation their platform.
In our system, governments only stay in power when they can command enough support get their bills through the assembly. In our system, parliamentarians are under no obligation to support the government. Even the Prime Minister is elected to represent ONE riding. In that sense The House of Commons is designed to be an assembly of ELECTED EQUALS.
Unfortunately since the mid 20th Century, political parties (who do not answer to Parliament), interest groups, and backroom strategists have usurped the role of MPS and concentrated power in the Prime Minister's office rather than where it should be -- with the elected members of Parliment.
We can pray the current constitutional crisis will be as significant for Canada's future as the one in 1858. And we can insist that our leaders relearn the lessons Macdonald's generation learned long ago. Parliament only works when the party in power is smart enough to understand that the opposition is not obligated to support bills. They must sell their policies to the opposition and respect the role of Members of Parliament.
I will continue to blog on the this topic all week.
Is he right?
Since only a minority of Canadian voters voted for his party in the last election, probably not.
More importantly, has Canada ever had a coalition government?
Yes.
What was the result?
Confederation.
In 1858, Governor General Sir Edmund Head asked Alexander Galt, MP for Sherbrooke to form a goverment after the MPs asked the Queen to choose a capital, then brought the government down because they didn't like her choice of Ottawa.
Much like today, Canada's parliamentarians simply couldn't keep it together and the country was sick of elections caused by parliamentary gridlock and fights between MPPs. (One time the legislators actually had to stop John A. Macdonald, MP for Kingston and Colonel Rankin, Member for Essex, from shooting each other on the steps of the legislature.)
Galt, wisely told His Excellency that he was not the man for the job as he could not command the loyalty of the majority of members in Canada's colonial legislature. Instead he recommended a coalition under the leadership of Georges Etienne Cartier and John A. Macdonald.
Ultimately these two men did join forces. Ultimately they did form one party. But in the beginning, Cartier and Macdonald shared power. And Galt joined their team on one condition -- that they made the federation of British North America into on nation their platform.
In our system, governments only stay in power when they can command enough support get their bills through the assembly. In our system, parliamentarians are under no obligation to support the government. Even the Prime Minister is elected to represent ONE riding. In that sense The House of Commons is designed to be an assembly of ELECTED EQUALS.
Unfortunately since the mid 20th Century, political parties (who do not answer to Parliament), interest groups, and backroom strategists have usurped the role of MPS and concentrated power in the Prime Minister's office rather than where it should be -- with the elected members of Parliment.
We can pray the current constitutional crisis will be as significant for Canada's future as the one in 1858. And we can insist that our leaders relearn the lessons Macdonald's generation learned long ago. Parliament only works when the party in power is smart enough to understand that the opposition is not obligated to support bills. They must sell their policies to the opposition and respect the role of Members of Parliament.
I will continue to blog on the this topic all week.
Monday, 30 June 2008
Happy Canada Day!
July Ist, 1867 was a party up here. But the fireworks, poetry, and parties were hardly noticed in Britain, the United States or elsewhere. In her typical invisible way, Canada became the first British colony to transition into an independent nation state while remaining within the British Empire.
Our ancestors had to fire shots to keep republican invaders and Fenian terrorists from forcing their ideology on us. But, unlike other colonial nations, we never fired shots against an imperial master to gain our nationality. In fact, British North America survived because imperial links made its people less vulnerable to invaders.
On July 1st 1867, not many outsiders took the Canadian experiment seriously. Canadians celebrated, but the noise didn't wake up the neighbours. Lucky for us!
In the next few decades, Canada's success led to the creation of many nations. It also redefined what it meant to be loyal to the Sovereign. Colonials could build their own nations. They could redefine the role of parliament, classes, and the Crown without destroying relationships with their imperial cousins. (Deep study of Canadian history is the best way to understand why we choose the political and cultural institutions that have been rejected by our southern neighbour. It also helps explain the reasons Canadians often differ in their outlook from other nations.)
In 2008, Canada continues to be part of the Commonwealth of Nations, proving that interdependence is a valid path to Sovereignty! We continue to be a constitutional monarchy by order of our own parliament and provincial legislatures. Our system of government was entrenched in our Constitution in 1982 and cannot be changed without the consent of the federal parliament and every provincial legislature.
Our choices may bewilder our neighbours. But they are choices we have made. Canada's success proves independence can result from loyalty to old friends.
Happy Birthday Canada.
Our ancestors had to fire shots to keep republican invaders and Fenian terrorists from forcing their ideology on us. But, unlike other colonial nations, we never fired shots against an imperial master to gain our nationality. In fact, British North America survived because imperial links made its people less vulnerable to invaders.
On July 1st 1867, not many outsiders took the Canadian experiment seriously. Canadians celebrated, but the noise didn't wake up the neighbours. Lucky for us!
In the next few decades, Canada's success led to the creation of many nations. It also redefined what it meant to be loyal to the Sovereign. Colonials could build their own nations. They could redefine the role of parliament, classes, and the Crown without destroying relationships with their imperial cousins. (Deep study of Canadian history is the best way to understand why we choose the political and cultural institutions that have been rejected by our southern neighbour. It also helps explain the reasons Canadians often differ in their outlook from other nations.)
In 2008, Canada continues to be part of the Commonwealth of Nations, proving that interdependence is a valid path to Sovereignty! We continue to be a constitutional monarchy by order of our own parliament and provincial legislatures. Our system of government was entrenched in our Constitution in 1982 and cannot be changed without the consent of the federal parliament and every provincial legislature.
Our choices may bewilder our neighbours. But they are choices we have made. Canada's success proves independence can result from loyalty to old friends.
Happy Birthday Canada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)