The End of Democratic Accountability in Canada

Right Hook JJ McCullough, OP Columnist

Why do we even have democratically elected govern- ments in the first place? The purpose is supposedly twofold: first, to provide representation for the masses; and second, to allow those same masses a means by which to hold politicians accountable for their deeds in office.

In Canada, we have long since abandoned the first purpose. Today our members of parliament are power- less party pawns who only speak, act, and vote when the leader says it’s okay, risking severe career conse- quences whenever they dare deviate from the party line. This is hardly a new phenomenon, but over the years Canadians have managed to make peace with the “dem- ocratic deficit” provided by our parliamentary institu- tions. Lacking effective representation, we’ve instead had to rely on the principle of accountability; but in the wake of the Gomery inquiry, that once basic democratic value seems to be going the way of the Dodo as well.

As Justice Gomery’s investigation has shown, the Liberal Party of Canada is now an unquestionably cor- rupt institution. By stealing millions of dollars from tax- payers to finance their own campaigns, they have violat- ed the public trust in the most blatant way imaginable and spat in the face all voters who entrusted them with

their confidence. Yet in the end, the party still got away with it and there will be no accountability for their actions.

Why? The left-wing Ontario media establishment loves to endlessly repeat the mantra that “there’s no alternative.” Corrupt and incompetent as the Liberals may be, there is supposedly no credible alternative party, so we may as well hold our noses and vote Liberal once more. This sort of circular reasoning provides a con- venient security blanket for Liberal voters who can’t look themselves in the mirror, but one has to really stop and question just what sort of logic these sweeping statements are based on. An alternative, by definition, is a change. The Conservative Party, or even the NDP, possess a whole host of unique people, principles, and policies that are in stark contrast to those currently offered by the Liberal Party. Ergo, they are an alterna- tive who could create a change.

In reality, of course, a lot of people don’t really care one way or another about alternatives, credible or other- wise. On the contrary, it seems most voters in Ontario are petrified with fear of even the slightest change to the political status quo. The supposed un-electability of the Conservative Party continues to be blamed on its “radical policies” and “hidden agenda,” or in other words, the fact that they are too different from the Liberals.

Of course, these perceived radical tendencies within the Conservative Party are becoming harder and harder to articulate as the years go on. The party has already publicly refused to regulate abortion in any way if elect- ed, and their historic opposition to gay marriage has become meaningless since legalization has already occurred.

So what’s left in the scary column?

Nothing really, but within the Ontario political echo chamber, the press and the public are still free to go

about denouncing the horrible, weird, Western, redneck Conservatives, and the Handmaiden’s Tale-esque night- mate they will impose upon Canada if elected. Even if you're not a left-winger (and indeed, many Ontarians aren’t), this mythos of fear surrounding the Conservative Party is so strong, and so widely accepted, that it represents the key stumbling block to the party’s electoral future in this country. At this point it really matters little what the CPC platform says, since no mat- ter what they do the deep conspiratorial bias against them will always remain.

The Liberals have painted themselves as the only patriotic party, the only party that understands Canada, the only party that can take a hard line against the devil Americans, and the only party that can define the Canadian identity. How are Conservatives supposed to win any election when the terms of debate automatical- ly define them as the party of treason, self-hatred, and evil?

In the end, the Gomery saga seems to have done little more than prove that most Canadian voters are simply irrational. Voters are no longer casting ballots based on any sort of logic about what we should expect from government in terms of accountability, honesty, or fairness, and are instead relying simply on stubborn emotional biases and conspiracy theories.

After this next election—which we can only assume the Liberals will win handily—Canada will have official- ly crossed the line into one-party state world. The ruling regime will be kept in place sorely because the people have been successfully conditioned to the point where the Liberal Party and Canada are regarded as synony- mous. Canada will be forever defined as a nation which is fundamentally too weak and immature to sustain even a minor ideological shift in its government without throwing the country’s entire national identity into tur- moil. We will become a democracy in name only.

Gomery in Da Hizzie

Da bomb drops on Liberals

Left Overs

lain Reeve, OP Columnist

So after several months of nail biting, chair shifting, and floor crossing, the Canadian government had the bomb of the year dropped on it. With all the hoopla, hesitation, and hate speech going around in the House it was a sure bet that this puppy was going to blow the lid off Ottawa. So did it live up to expectations? Heck no. Wait...what?

Let me be honest with you. I could do what every news publication in Canada has done and fly off the handle with attempts to sensationalize the preliminary

report of Justice Gomery, but there is really nothing

earth shattering to report. Most of what was revealed was things we already know. Chrétien may be held responsible as it was on his watch. The current Liberals are essentially uninvolved; of particular note, neither is our PM. Most of those assumed guilty, Gagliano et al, had been declared responsible beforehand. Once again, nothing earth shattering.

What needs to be considered is how the party spin machines are going to work this puppy to their advan- tage. With that in mind let’s glance at each of the par- ties.

Bloc Quebecois:

They'll use the scandal—and everything else—as a means to criticize federalism, make the government look bad in Quebec, and thus encourage separatism. This should come as no surprise because this is what they do with EVERY ISSUE. Next!

Conservative Party of Canada:

The last time I wrote extensively about the situation in the Canadian parliament, I said that the only way to move forward was to await the final ruling, encourage cooperation, set aside partisan politics, and do what is best for Canadians. I am plainly surprised and, to be

honest, a little hurt that Stephen Harper either didn’t read my article or didn’t take my sagely advice to heart. As could be easily expected, the Conservatives used the preliminary report to launch all new attacks on the Liberals crying corruption this, illegitimate that.

Hey, I'll be the first one to admit there is severe cor- ruption that took place, but the current members of the party have been almost entirely exonerated. To suggest that there is some innate factor of being a Liberal party member that instills corruption is a little naive. What causes corruption is greedy, rich, self-centered morons who do not actually care about the noble purpose of the post they take so much as they care about lining their pockets and those of their friends. So before the Conservatives continue with their bi-weekly “bring down the government” campaigns, they should remem- ber that their party is full of these same screw-the- tich/save-the-poor types who would have done exactly the same thing as any Liberal in the same situation. It’s the pot and the kettle, my friends.

Liberal Party: Some papers—and remember how sensational they can be—have said Gomery’s preliminary report

was continued on page 10