WAKING UP TO THE CHANGE IN CANADIAN POLITICS

I have a sense that the political scene has changed and I am just waking up to it.

I hear Liberal companions saying that this is a historic election. This is the first time in Canada's history when a government has been found in "contempt" of Parliament. There is a battle going on here. Do we have parliamentary democracy or not?

When the Parliament was attempting to understand what was going forward with the torture of Afghan detainees, was it proper Canadian protocol for the government to prorogue (close down) Parliament? I don't think so. The government was warned by the Speaker of the house that by denying parliamentary committees access to the Afghan detainee files the government was denying parliamentary privilege. Should a government hide these matters from Parliament? I don't think so.

Electing a majority Conservative government will only give support to this shift toward rule by executive decree. It will weaken representational democracy. I say to myself: wake up John! These are important matters at stake. We are in a shift toward a style of politics familiar to my Mexican friends -- rule by presidential decree. Decisions are made and implemented without proper informed discussion and consent on the part of the elected representatives.

I had something to say about the Mexican scene in my blog "THE IMPACT OF NAFTA": "The Zapatistas understood that the implementation of NAFTA would mean the end of a communal land system that had sustained them and was protected under the Mexican Constitution of 1917. The President of Mexico in 1994, Salinas, had attempted to change the Constitution through presidential fiat; that is, without going through proper legal processes. The campesino small farmer indigenous peoples rose up to say "NO." If the Mexican state would not abide by its own Constitution and protect their interests, what were their options?"

I took a look at the Prince Edward Hastings Liberal candidate's website today. Tinsley comments: "Our Westminster model of parliamentary government has historically served Canada well.  However, as we have seen recently, it is vulnerable to abuse.  It does not have the rigid system of legal checks and balances on which, for example, the US government is based.  Ours is dependant in many ways on respect for 'conventions' and historical practices.  When faced with those who are willing to ignore those conventions, to resort to secrecy and deceit, and to flout the very will of Parliament, we are at risk as a democratic society.


By way of example, Canada does not, as a matter of legal fact, have an 'executive branch' of government such as found in the US with the President comprising a part of government quite distinct from the Congress.  However, we now have a prime minister functioning as if he is a president, but unlike the American system, in ours, President Harper can dictate the sitting schedule of Parliament for partisan political purposes.  We are at risk!"