By Catherine Whelan Costen
Dear Fellow Canadians
This is our time, our opportunity and our responsibility. A fellow Canadian reminded me of our role in this electoral process. She responded to an Op-ed piece, on the threat of elections, title 'Elections are more than Games! (You can read it at this link-
http://coic.ca/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=2 )
by writing to the Governor General. Her letter is below, followed by my own letter to the Governor General. This is an example of how we the people can and do have the ability to be the government we say we are. It is by asserting our democratic right in this manner that we let our politicians know we allow them their positions, we elect them to do their job, in our best interest not for their best interest. This is a critical moment in our history. Please join with me and send your own letter to the Governor General of Canada, (or you can edit one of the two I have copied below) if you believe this is premature election is a waste of our money, a misuse of time, energy and not conducive to 'good governance'.
It is probably most effective to send by fax, and to notify your local media.
Thank you
Catherine Whelan Costen
Letter 1
September 4, 2008
Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean
Your Excellency,
Should the Prime Minister of Canada ask you to dissolve Parliament, please speak with the Leader of Canada’s Official Opposition Party – to learn whether he has sufficient support, from members of the House of Commons, to form a functional Government. Canada’s laws and Constitution allow you both to decide and to act in the best interest of the People of Canada.
Below is a summary of an email from a concerned citizen in the Prairies: Catherine Whelan Costen. It describes the situation as a vast majority of Canadians possibly see it.
Canadians want responsible government, not political war games.
Elections are expensive undertakings and the Canadian public pays for these activities.
Canadians paid for the change to election laws that sets fixed election dates. Politicians argued for and against, but now that it is set -- the governing party has decided it doesn't accept what it won. Rather than threaten to bring down the
government over the issues, our politicians ought to find a method of negotiation to create win-win solutions.
Canada's parliamentary system depends on our elected members of Parliament respecting their positions as public servants. We expect our government to work for us. It's what we want, but not what we see. Government’s role is not to win us over.
Canadians do not understand why they cannot hold elected MPs to their promises to the people. We have very little ability to hold our elected members to act in our best interest. We both can and are demanding that our elected officials resume their duties until the next election in the Fall of 2009. Were only they listening!
Your Excellency, should the PM or other unwilling to resume their duties, Canada’s laws and Constitution allow you both to decide and to act in the best interest of the People of Canada.
Respectfully yours,
(signature)
Catherine Blake
Letter 2-
Her Excellency
The Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, C.C., C.M.M., C.O.M., C.D.
Governor General of Canada
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A1 Transmitted via fax : (613) 998-8760
September 4, 2008
Your Excellency
In the matter of the recent news reports of the Prime Minister of Canada suggesting he will request you dissolve government, due to his lack of confidence. I am attaching an Op-ed I wrote recently, which I feel reflects the feelings of myself and many Canadians.
Canadians have felt powerless for far too long. We are tired of being at the mercy of the whims of our elected officials. We have hired them to do a job, to represent the people of this nation and hold our best interests in the highest esteem. I am requesting that you ask the member of the Official Opposition
whether he feels he has the confidence of the majority of members of the House and if so, allow him to take over as our Prime Minister. (As is part of our Canadian Convention ) If the recent news reports are correct, it is clear then that the current Prime Minister does not want his job and does not feel he can serve. Therefore it is incumbent on you to represent the people’s best interest. I quote our Queen from this government website;
Parliamentary democracy has fostered tolerance and flexibility – a good balance between individual rights and collective responsibilities. And this is because the constitutional monarchy has always placed the emphasis on people in community –
as it were, a national family with the Sovereign as its head.
Queen Elizabeth II
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
October 1987
http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/fr-rf/couronne_crown_canada/4_e.cfm
I submit that it is neither in the best interest of Canadians individual rights nor our collective responsibilities, to be paying for another election at this time. I submit that the House was sitting in the spring and did not lose confidence at that time, they have not resumed the next session and there has
not been a motion which was defeated. The Prime Minister’s meetings with the leaders of the other political parties, requesting a statement of confidence outside the House is not productive to good government. This is not a game. A minority government should not request a blank cheque from the opposition
leaders. This is not responsible government.
I quote from an article on the government website, in bold is the critical point:
“First, in the United States the head of state and the head of the government are one and the same. The President is both at once. Here, the Queen, ordinarily represented by the Governor General, is the head of state, and the Prime Minister is the head of the Government. Does that make any real difference? Yes: in Canada, the head of state can, in exceptional circumstances, protect Parliament and the people against a Prime Minister and Ministers who may forget that “minister” means “servant,” and may try to make themselves masters. For example, the head of state could refuse to let a Cabinet dissolve a newly elected
House of Commons before it could even meet, or could refuse to let Ministers bludgeon the people into submission by a continuous series of general elections.
The American head of state cannot restrain the American head of government because
they are the same person.”
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/idb/forsey/can_am_gov_print-e.asp
Further I quote the importance of minority government (again from a government website) , surely ensures that only legislation that is in the best interest of Canadians can or will be passed. If legislation cannot be agreed to by the
majority of members of Parliament then I submit to you that it is not the will of the people of Canada.
“A reality of “minority governments” is that their life is often quite short. If the government is defeated in the House of Commons or legislature on a vote of non-confidence, the Crown’s representative must either dissolve Parliament by calling an election or call on yet another member to attempt to form a government that would enjoy majority support. Far from existing only in political theory, this prerogative power has indeed been exercised in Canada — for example, in Ontario in 1985.”
http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/fr-rf/couronne_crown_canada/4_e.cfm
In keeping with Canadian tradition, Convention and attitude desiring good, responsible government I am requesting that you act on behalf of the people of Canada, and assert your authority in this matter, sparing the people both the expense and effort of an unnecessary election.
Yours very respectfully
Catherine Whelan Costen
Stumble It!
You wouldn't think this election was a waste of time and money if the Liberals were leading in the polls.
When the Liberals actually show up to vote in the House, I'll care how they do in the polls. Not voting means Harper has a Majority government. So, he has no reason to call an election.
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/2359 ... a#comments
applies as well to the Cons and Libs in this country.
But I am thinking, now that Elizabeth May heads a "real" party (with a genuine MP and all) that the coming leaders' debate will prove very interesting.......
Congratulations to Elizabeth May, of course, of what passes for the political wing of the larger "green movement". Though really, let's face it, she is simply on board with the NDP in playing the corporatist system's version, at this point in time anyway, though stay tuned, of capitalist so-called "democracy". But while, from my perspective, the continuation of the process of fragmentation of the ruling class controlled "party" system is of a useful value likely, over the long haul, which this emergence of the Green Party into "formal" respectability actually represents, I really think that in the context of the lingering limitations of the "times" and my own, more radicalized view of the real direction democratic development needs to move in, the best likely "possible" outcome of this election would be finally the election of an NDP government. This being so if for no other reason than it will explode the myth that the NDP really has anything to offer to the further development of a truly "democratic" society over the Liberal Party view of the capitalist-centric world. It is time for this scale to fall from mass, as in working class society eyes as well. (Mind you, the miraculous election of the Greens unexpectedly to so-called "power" in the established ruling class system would, in my view, have the same effect of exposing their "liberal/conservative" inadequacies as well.)
And I say this as one who has, at least until I see other possibilities that are more inspiring to me, absolutely no intention of participating in this bullshit electoral system. (And percentage-wise, those of us who are non-voting observers of this phony, what passes for "democratic" process, keep in mind, are approaching just about equal numbers to those of you who buy into the mythology of "democratic capitalism". About 40% being so-called "non-participating".)
Like the Roman Empire of now old, this historical time no doubt has its course to run, with those of us who like doubtless existed in that time too, on the sidelines awaiting the emergence of a new opportunity to transform and move society, its economy and relationship with the natural world forward into a new time. Meanwhile, we can only be amused, no doubt, at what passes for "democracy" in the current ruling class dominant system of economic, social and political life.
And make not the mistake of thinking that "non-participation" in a formal context, sometimes, is not in fact "participation" on a higher level. It drives "them" mad to think that there is such a large percentage of the population that, in fact, does not buy into the bullshit.
"If you don't participate, you have no right to complain!"
Horseshit! I complain all the time and am, in fact, highly engaged in the "real" political life of my country.
There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Good to hear your voice again, RickW.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iWs ... QOb_Lyppgg
I would say, in light of the above disrespect for democracy, vote Green, if only to teach the arrogant ba$tards a lesson! I will for certain!
I say better to have none at all, than to have a truncated farce!
This is what passes for democracy in this country.
As for The Bloc, I want to hear them too, even if they only speak for Quebec, they are still relevant to the country as a whole. (I have long been of the view that Canada is, in fact, at least a three nation state/country: Anglo-Canadian speaking, Franco-Canadian and, no less, the Native Nations of Canada. And the sooner we face up to this in, if necessary, a new Canadian Union, that we are a kind of mini-EU, the sooner we will be positioned to stand up to the greatest threat to us all, The US Empire.)
We should see ourselves as Canadians and we, not some foreign sovereign, should own this land.
Still trying to push your sad agenda, while ignoring the difference between 'state' and 'government'.
It's too bad the GG decided to dissolve Parliament. But, it shows Harpers' real commitment to 'change'; that he put a 'get out of jail free' clause in the fixed election date legislation. He had no intention of abiding by the legislation anyhow.
"We should see ourselves as Canadians and we, not some foreign sovereign, should own this land."
However nice such a simplistic view might be mikhailus, wishing does not make a thing true. And when a thing is not true, one is simply left, most often, with the more complex reality. And the reality is, in my view, as I stated above, that Canada is a three nation state/country, at the least.
mikailus" said
"We should see ourselves as Canadians and we, not some foreign sovereign, should own this land."
Maybe he is referring to the US..........?