Peace Order & Good Governance

Notes for an Address by Hon. David Kilgour

Member of Parliament, Edmonton-Mill-Woods-Beaumont

Organization of Peace, Order & Good Governance Meeting

Cybercinno Café, Ottawa

18 June, 2005

 To say that that this 38th session of parliament has been raucous would be an understatement. During this session we have witnessed devastating testimony at the Gomery inquiry, MP’s crossing the floor, all manner of backdoor dealing and the marked decline of fiscal responsibility. This is precisely why many have referred to this session of parliament as one of the worst in recent memory.

Governance in Canada is in serious need of reform, now more than ever given what we have witnessed since the last election. At that time Paul Martin committed to narrowing the democratic deficit. Since he made that promise I can honestly say that if anything, the democratic deficit has only grown wider and deepened.

It seems more than little ironic to me that the very party that claims to champion federalism has been the one that has done the greatest amount of harm to the cause of federalists everywhere. Federalism is not a commodity that can be bought or sold on the open market; it is something, which arises when all Canadians across the country have faith in the federal government. A government must earn this faith by displaying an evenhanded sensitivity to the needs of all parts of the country.

The Liberal government managed to enmesh itself in the sponsorship scandal in the first place through the mistaken belief that the affections of Quebecers could be bought. As we have seen by the outrage that the fallout from the program has caused, it not only failed to increase support for federalism and has in fact increased doubts about the merits of a federal system.

The continuing widening and broadening of the democratic deficit as evidenced by more recent events as well as other long standing grievances was a major factor in my eventual decision to leave the Liberal party altogether. For years I have advocated on behalf of my constituents and indeed on behalf of a great many Canadians for substantive senate reform. Opinion polls in my riding and far beyond have suggested that Canadians favor an elected Senate much like in other democratically legitimate bicameral systems such as Australia for example.

Brian Mulroney's appointment of the late Senator Stan Waters in 1990, after he'd won an

Alberta-wide election showed that Senate reforms could be accomplished without changing a word in our Constitution. In our most recent Senate nominee election late last year, Betty Unger and Bert

Brown each received more than 307,000 votes; the third place finisher, Cliff Breitkreuz, obtained about 238,000. Accordingly, this trio should have been appointed by Paul Martin to fill the three Senate vacancies from our province but they were not and the will of the people was not respected.

More recently we have seen the principles of democracy undermined as the government has maneuvered to remain in power. After the budget was tabled we saw an agreement struck between the NDP and the Liberal government that was not only fiscally irresponsible but also profoundly undemocratic.

Given that the NDP have a total of nineteen seats in the current parliament, it hardly seems representative of the wishes of the people that they were permitted to spend $4.5 billion or about $236 million per MP. When citizens go to the polls and elect a government they do so with the belief that this government will do what is in their best interests and not merely what is in its best interests. Clearly when this deal was struck it had more to do with political survival than anything else otherwise this money should have been spent as part of the original budget bill

Another issue on which the principles of democracy have been ignored is the government’s same-sex marriage bill. Despite the fact that this bill is clearly a contentious issue and is one that cuts across party lines, the Liberal government has insisted on compelling all cabinet members to vote with their party as opposed to voting with their conscience and constituents. On an issue as important as this, it is clear that party discipline should be relaxed so that members can effectively represent the feelings of their constituents.

The reality of our present system is that the will of the constituents is often “trumped” by party discipline. Ironically, members of the governing party, who should theoretically be in a good position to serve the interests of their constituents, are in practice the least empowered.

The fact that the democratic deficit in Canada is in desperate need of attention is clearly evident when one examines the long-term trends in participation rates. Voter turnout has been steadily trending downward over the last two decades from an average of 75% between 1945 and 1988. Since then, it was recorded at 61.2% for the 2001 election and reached an all time low of 60.5% for the 2004 election despite the fact that it was hotly contested. As Carty, Cross and Young noted in Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics:

“Public opinion and survey data confirm that at the outset of the new century large numbers of Canadians continue to believe their politicians and political institutions are out of touch and unresponsive, and are increasingly dissatisfied with the performance of parliament and political parties.”

This is borne out in a poll Pollara conducted in 2003, which showed that 74% of respondents agreed with the statement “Generally, those elected to Parliament soon lose touch with the people”. Fully 67% agreed that, “People like me don’t have any say about what government does.” If we are to continue to have a vibrant democracy in Canada it is clear that the relaxation of party discipline and the facilitation of greater opportunities for free votes will go a long way toward increasing the degree of engagement that Canadian citizens now have with the political process.

Canadians will feel that our elected representatives have a greater degree of accountability toward them as opposed to their party if a member is empowered by having the ability to vote in ways that accord with the wishes of their constituents on a regular basis. This will be an important step in reversing voter apathy. Increased accountability of MP’s to constituents will increase the degree of engagement Canadians have with the political process; it will encourage them to get more involved not only at election times but in between as well.

Canada is a federal state and federalism means that on some issues the will of the popular majority will be frustrated. If the biggest battalions of voters are to prevail over smaller ones under any circumstances, we should drop the charade that we have a federal system of government that respects minorities in times of stress. The notion that the largest group of Canadians, i.e., southern Ontarians and metropolitan Quebeckers, must be accommodated always has resulted in discontent everywhere and accompanying feelings of regional subordinancy.

In an increasingly interdependent world, many Canadians in our outer eight provinces and territories at least want new or altered institutions that will represent the interest of both "Inner Canadians" (those who live in the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor) and "Outer Canadians" effectively. Unless we move away from the notion that "the national interest" is merely a code-phrase for the most populous region dominating all corners of the country, frictions between Inner and Outer Canada are likely to remain and worsen.

If party discipline is relaxed, representation for all areas of Canada would be improved. It would be easier for, say, Western MPs to defy their party establishments, if need be, in support of Western issues. Coalitions composed of members of all parties could exist for the purpose of working together on issues of common regional or other concern. The present adversarial attitudes and structures of Parliament or legislatures in which opposition parties oppose virtually anything a government proposes might change in the direction of all parties working together for the national good.

-30-