February 23, 2001
Remarks on democracy and Parliamentary reform - THE COMMENTARY
By Joseph Planta
VANCOUVER -- This morning in a political science class, I have the dubious distinction of delivering the following. These are remarks I’ve worked on over the last couple of days with regards to the following question: Discuss the impact and character of democracy. In your opinion, what are the most essential elements for its growth? Is democracy most desirable? Mired in composing this, I shamelessly double dip and post here, to provide your Friday Commentary fix.
Herewith is my spiel, as written. (Note that the delivered form, may differ.)
With the onset of a provincial election, the riding I live in is Vancouver-Kensington. My MLA happens to be the Premier, the Hon. Ujjal Dosanjh. His year in office has been directionless. It has also lacked the fresh and honest start he promised when running for the leadership of his party. There have been opportunities squandered and there is nothing except disappointment for his efforts in distancing himself from former Premier Glen Clark.
It is clear that the BC Liberals, will form the next government and Gordon Campbell will assume the mantle of Premier. (The political climate being what it is, will see Mr. Campbell privy to the same undue criticisms lobbed by the press to the NDP and the Socreds.)
This leads me to the political quandary I will face on election day. Ujjal Dosanjh has been a pretty good MLA. I say that irrespective of his government’s record and his performance as its leader. Having talked shop with him in the past, he is clearly a well-meaning individual.
His government's record clearly demonstrates that the British Columbian public must rightfully send the NDP into political purgatory. The Campbell Liberals would be my choice to form government, yet the bloke they've got running, in my constituency, pales in comparison to that of the current Premier.
I am tempted to vote for Dosanjh if for no other reason that he is an incumbent MLA, let alone a former Attorney General and Premier. Those credentials and any possible influence should be a credit to his constituents. But if I do vote for him, will not my vote be interpreted as supporting the current government, which I clearly do not intend it to?
Also, I shouldn't feel guilty not voting Liberal, as Vancouver-Kensington's loss will not signal their inability to form government if the current polls are to be believed that the NDP will be wiped out.
I raise all of the previous, to preface my argument that the institutions of the country need reform to restore democracy.
Rafe Mair, a political pundit, replied to my dilemma and said that because of our "rotten system" the MLA, irrespective of Dosanjh's credentials is powerless and useless. (He suggested that I merely go into the polling booth, hold my nose and vote for the party of my choice.)
Being that the regular, backbench MP or MLA is powerless and redundant, the swiftest reform to be considered should be that of the separation of powers. Having the executive within the legislative, sees the executive dictating the discourse of the legislature's duties. This is prevalent on the federal and provincial scenes, as we see Parliament’s authority subordinate to that of the executive’s.
With that, how democratically representative is my MLA or my MP? Are my views articulated and represented in Ottawa or Victoria?; irrespective of who’s in power and how I vote?
All the members of Cabinet are selected from government members in the House. Right there, because the ministers themselves must act according to the principle of Responsible Government, it is not unusual for them to often abdicate their responsibility of representing their constituents, to maintain cabinet solidarity or to keep their government from falling.
The Prime Minister or Premier wields immense control over the legislative body.
They either write or approve all legislation. They write or approve the Budget. They also approve or control the chairs of committees, -- Which in actuality should be the other way around. The committee is really a remedy for backbench MP’s to hold the government accountable. Yet, these committees themselves have their agendas drawn up by the chair, who is appointed by either the leader of opposition parties or the Government House Leader. -- In recent years, maverick MP’s who have acted contrary to the wishes of their leader have seen themselves stripped or not considered for membership to committees. -- In British Columbia for example, with the exception of the Public Accounts Committee, no other committee meets on a regular basis. Some, have never even been struck in 10-15 years.
The American model would be most desirable, as we see the President (the Executive) accountable to Congress and the Senate (the legislative.) The notion of check and balances are absent from the Westminster model, thus our democracy is transformed into an elected, 4-year soft-dictatorship. MPs who do speak out against their leaders, are all but few, and do so at their own peril.
Politics has been equated to a greasy pole, and there is no shortage of those wanting a crack at ascending the beam. Politics the operative, to succeed is paramount, and we see many men and women turning their backs on promises and their principles to appease their leaders, to further their own careers. (Stephen Owen, the MP for Vancouver-Quadra, currently is the subject of scrutiny in such a vain. As a former Ombudsman of BC, he voted against a motion that would see the appointment of a federal ethics counsellor, that does not report to the Prime Minister directly, rather Parliament itself; something Mr. Owen did as Ombudsman.)
The rot in our system could be stemmed back to that of how the major parties themselves run. Leaders of political parties have the power to appoint candidates. The Liberal Party did that recently in November with Stephen Owen in Vancouver-Quadra and Sophia Leung in 1997 in Vancouver-Kingsway. Leaders can also refuse candidates. The former Reform Party refused the candidature of Doug Collins in 1993, irrespective of the fact he was endorsed by a majority of the constituency association.
I spoke earlier of the adoption of the American model of governance. Both the major parties, the Republican and Democratic parties function unlike Canadian parties in that they do not focus so much on towing the party line, as is deemed necessary in the concept of Responsible Government. A recent example of this is seen in the confirmation hearings of John Ashcroft as Attorney-General. Those Democrats who did vote in favour of the appointment were not punished. In Canada, should an extreme like that occur, those members are often thrown out of caucus. An example of that was former Liberal and independent MP John Nunziata.
As such, backbench MPs conduct themselves with the power of their leader in mind. Their votes are often in line with the party’s wishes, in fear of the repercussions lobbed by the Whip within Parliament, but the more severe actions of the leader come election time.
It is clear that democracy is paid mere lip service to, as in practice we live in an dictatorship that we merely endorse every 5 years, 3 and a half in the case of the Federal Liberals. Our Parliament must be reformed. Failing to do so would render, perhaps our nation’s highest institution, meaningless if it isn’t already. Democracy is not served by a bastardised government where more and more, citizens of all stripes become disenfranchised, as they are not represented.
Churchill and others have said that democracy is far from perfect, but that the alternatives are much worse. Democracy can work. On paper, the Westminster model can work. However, over time directionless leaders and an apathetic people grow comfortable with the status quo; grow comfortable with democracy forever stunted.
I don’t know what I’ll do come election day. If we were in a desirable system, my choice would be easier and our votes clearer.
Parliament: The House of Commons and the Senate; our Legislative Assembly in Victoria, need reform. If nothing else, doing so would make our practice of voting significant. It would make our elected representatives significant. The views and ideas of mere citizens would, certainly, matter.
Questions and comments may be sent to: editor@thecommentary.ca
An archive of Joseph Planta's previous columns can be found by clicking HERE .