Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Senate Reform for the People, Not the Politicians

Reform of the Canadian Senate is long overdue; a respected, elected second house of Parliament is needed more than ever to ensure diverse regional concerns are well-articulated and integrated into national action in order to deal with critical 21st century challenges and to ensure a respected Canadian voice in world affairs.

Yet Canadians are being misled by our Conservative government into believing that mere tinkering -- nine year term limits, à la carte elections -- with a Senate structure dating back to the 19th century is sufficient, and by the opposition NDP and some provincial premiers that believe outright abolition of the Senate is even better.

Both the government and official Opposition are conspiring to dumb down a very important debate affecting the fundamental nature of the Canadian federation and our coherence as a nation. The choice presented between no Senate and a partially reformed Senate, is really not a choice at all. Both options lead to an increasingly dysfunctional and discredited Parliament.

Senate reform is too important a component of any serious plan for improving the functioning of Canadian democracy to be left to legislative fiat by shortsighted politicians. Rather, the people of Canada must be directly engaged in the debate over this vital issue and ultimately consulted through a national referendum.

Without a Senate with more democratic legitimacy, our national leaders have increasingly deferred to provincial premiers on matters of national concern in unaccountable federal-provincial negotiations. The national interest is too often now equated with the haphazard sum of disparate provincial government interests, dependent on highly improbable provincial government cooperation for even minimal lowest common denominator national standards or action.

The result is no national action on climate change, an increasing patchwork of healthcare policies, no national clean energy strategy, crumbling national infrastructure, a stalemate on pension reform. This ongoing drift toward national incoherence has not only failed Canadians but also led to Canada's increasing insignificance on the global stage. Among other things, we are ignored in international climate change discussions and no longer considered worthy of a UN Security Council seat. And with our recent infamous U.N. vote blocking the addition of asbestos as a hazardous chemical, assuring a few votes for the premier of Quebec and the prime minister trumped incalculable damage to Canada's international reputation and any semblance of moral leadership, relegating Canada to the sidelines of history along with Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Vietnam.

The time is overdue to re-imagine a more robust, elected Senate that provides a valuable counterweight to the purely provincialist perspective voiced by individual premiers in current federal-provincial forums. To this end, we have to consider the role of the Senate in representing regional concerns in a more imaginative and truly democratic way. The Senate is not meant for representing the interests of regional economic and political elites as defined by provincial governments. Regionalism is not the same as provincialism. Regionalism at its best reflects the fact that in such a large and geographically diverse country as Canada, with a highly uneven population distribution, national policies will only be effective if regional concerns are acceptably integrated into a workable national framework. And this process will only find success if it is carried out in an open, transparent parliamentary forum committed to the best interests of Canada as a whole, and accountable to all Canadians, not just provincial premiers.

Full Article
Source: Huffington  

No comments:

Post a Comment