Canadians who have been taking notice will be aware that C51, the
police state law, has past 3rd reading in the house and
now goes before the Senate for final reading. It will come as no
surprise that the Conservatives vote
en-block for the bill for even if some of them
had actually read the bill and had reservations they dare not vote
except as directed by the PMO if they wished to remain in caucus. It
is not surprising that the NDP all voted against this deeply flawed
bill for it hard to see how any who care about individual freedoms
could vote for it, whether or not they were directed to vote thus is
unknown.
What I find mind blowing is that the Liberal vote
en-block FOR the bill, we know that they are
afraid of being branded pro-terrorist by the Con spin machine but how
is it that not one, not a single Liberal MP. voted against this
legislation, are they also in fear of loosing their jobs if they
actually use their own brains and vote as their conscience dictates.
One would think at least some of these MPs had sufficient concerns
about this bill and its lack of oversight provisions to vote against
it, but not apparently enough to challenge the group think!
It is this group think that I want to bring to your attention in
this post, it is of course nothing new, it is in fact standard
practice. If one looks at how they vote on the fine website
openparliament.ca you will be hard put to find
a piece of legislation where our MPs actually vote as individuals not
as directed by their party whip. This to me highlights one of the
problem with our current parliamentary system, the political partys
have too much power over those that we elect to represent us. We all
understand that as a member of that party and being elected under
that partys banner they will agree with and follow the BROAD
interpretation of their partys platform and ideology, but this group
think when it comes to voting in the house does the public and the
individual MP a grave disservice.
Taken to its logical conclusion we may as well just vote for the
leaders or the party (which many, if not most, citizens do already)
and let them debate the bills (they would then have to read their own
speaking notes) and save the millions we spend on electing and paying
individual MPs. The Leader with the most votes would have the final
say and be able to dictate legislation .......... OH WAIT thats sorta
like the system we have now!
Support Democracy - Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
We have forgotten the meaning of "responsible government," Rural.
Pretty pathetic isn't it rural. I wonder when the last time was when MP's from the same party voted differently. MP's are supposed to represent their constituents not the leader of their party. In fact, they are supposed to hold their leader accountable, not succumb to his demands. It is the MLA's that have the power, not the PM, but things are being done in reverse, where the power is with the PMO and the MP's do what their told. This of course has been going on for a long time starting, I think with PET. I would vote for a leader who talks about parliamentary reform, who actually lays out a plan on how this reform can be done. None of the 4 parties are talking about it. Because all the power is in the PMO, when we vote we pretty well cross our fingers hoping that whoever becomes PM will not turn out to be a power lusting demogogue, which has already happened as we see with Harper. Group think is really not thinking, but rather conformity to someone else thinking, blind acceotance not requiring the use of a critical thinking mind. It also rests on the sacrifice of independent thought and the rejection and exclusion of those who think independently.Thinking after all is a solo act. Welcome to politics in the 21st century!
There has been much talk, but little meaningful action, on Electoral reform (The Con 'Fair' Elections act hardly counts as meaningful reform)and lots of talk, and again little action, on Senate reform but as you say Pamela damn little is said about Parliamentary Reform.
Responsible Government has become an oxymoron, Owen.
Post a Comment