P is for Populism

It has been several years since we have posted on our political blog but it seems appropriate to anticipate both the federal election and Alberta election gearing up for 2019. 

Since 2016 the rise of what is now being termed “populism” has rapidly increased to the point where it often falls into the more worrying term or xenophobia.  Donald Trump arriving on the political scene has catapulted populism to front and centre not only in the USA but here in Canada.  However he is not the only driving force of populism since it is growing steadily in Europe, and elsewhere in the world, at the same time and with even more speed.

Canadians should be very wary of this trend not only for its immediate effect on society but also the long term effects.  In the foreseeable future many societal advancements (if we use the “liberal” view) of such things as pro-choice, LGBTQ rights, multi-culturalism, acceptance of legal refugees and so forth may be overturned or compromised.  But longer term, if these things are indeed overturned or compromised we could slide onto a slippery slope that may lead us into something a great deal more sinister.  Taking away human rights can lead into a very narrow, regressive regime.

Populism also appeals to many people by using one issue topics to lure people into favoring a candidate or party.  For instance, many people simply abhor paying taxes of any kind so when a politician says he will cut, cut, cut taxes, do be aware that the only way to cut taxes is also to cut programs. Naturally the selfish non-tax payer will be okay with cutting programs that they don’t need because why should that non-taxpayer want to help his fellow citizen? Never mind if he happens to go to the same church as you, because why should he pay for his fellow citizen’s daughter to have an abortion?  And that citizen on the other side him, why should he want to pay for his old age security or his employment insurance?  It’s no skin off the non-taxpayer's nose if his neighbour loses his house or his dignity.  Why should a single mom get cheaper daycare when someone like Doug Ford says a program 4 months old is “not working” – like he would be telling the truth on that one?  Let’s make sure, this populist non-taxpayer kicks everyone who is down, as long as it is not him or his kids. 

Populism is a nasty, nasty movement . . . and we haven’t even touched on refugees in this article.

P is for Parliament

The Parliamentary process is basically simple.

Parliamentary procedure is the body of rules, ethics, and customs governing meetings. It is part of the common law originating primarily in the practices of the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, from which it derives its name. At its heart is the rule of the majority with respect for the minority. Its object is to allow deliberation upon questions of interest to the organization and to arrive at the sense or the will of the assembly upon these questions.

There has been a lot of debate, arguments and concerns regarding a possible coalition government but let us be clear. A Coalition government is a legal form of government and has been used in Canada both nationally and at the provincial level. A coalition government includes members of different political parties and normally appears during crises such as war or political breakdown.

· The fluidity of party lines, the predominance of patronage, and the novelty of responsible government led to several experimental coalition arrangements in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Canada in the 1840s and 1850s. The best known were in 1854 and 1864 (the GREAT COALITION) in the Province of Canada.

· At the national level, the only coalition has been Sir Robert BORDEN'S 1917 UNION GOVERNMENT. At the provincial level coalitions have occurred in western Canada. Manitoba Liberals and Progressives combined in 1931, and in 1940 all the province's parties joined a nonpartisan administration formed to meet wartime demands. In BC a wartime coalition between the Liberals and Conservatives held off the challenge of the CO-OPERATIVE COMMONWEALTH FEDERATION.

Watching the debate tonight it was clear that all parties are attempting to distance themselves from past attempts at a coalition government and a possible future coalition government. We feel that a coalition government could be an effective government for the country, particularly if it would avoid yet another election. Whether a government is elected as a minority and working with another party to stay in power, or whether the 3 with a lesser majority form a government to topple the “minority” government is simply semantics. Frequently governments are formed and yet the “popular” vote would have caused a different outcome.

While we don’t feel there were any clear winners in the debate Prime Minister Harper certainly was not effective with his constant denials of information that is already proved true to the public. It seems certain that Mr. Harper is not living in the real world and giving him a majority government will prove the real disaster for Canada. Mr. Ignatieff reiterated again and again that Harper and his government have been found in contempt of Parliament. Only imagine what may happen if he won a majority.