Civics for the Confused
Dear My Fellow Canadians,*
Here in Canada, our government is a parliamentary democracy. That means, among other things, that when we vote, we each have the choice of sending one representative to represent the interests of our riding in parliament. All of the names that appear on the ballot are people who wish to represent us as members of parliament.
We do not have the option of voting for a Prime Minister, unless we happen to be members of the party with the largest number of members elected to parliament, and we happen to be delegates at a convention at which the leader of that party is chosen.
We may, if we live in the appropriate riding, have the option of electing the leader of a party to serve as a member of parliament. For example, I recently was presented with the opportunity to vote for Jack Layton as my MP. Jack Layton also happens to be the leader of the New Democrat Party; had the NDP formed the government, Layton, as its leader, would have been the Prime Minister. However, even though the NDP did not completely buck history to form the government, Layton still has a job as my MP, because the members of my riding elected him to represent them.
This means that even if you voted Conservative in the recent election, you did not vote for Stephen Harper. The only Canadians who voted for Stephen Harper are those members of his riding who elected him their MP, and those members of the Conservative Party who chose him to lead the Party (and, possibly, those who remained members of the party after his and Mr. McKay's party-forming double-dealing shenanigans, thereby lending their consent to Harper's leadership).
In fact, unless you reside in Calgary west, you may have noticed that Mr. Harper's name was nowhere on your ballot. You were denied the opportunity to vote for Mr. Harper** (though you may have voted for one of his flunkies), because that's not how our government works.
Please also bear in mind that the government is formed by the party with the greatest number of seats in Parliament. It is not formed, necessarily, by the party with the majority of seats-hence the term "minority government," (you know? What the past few Harper governments have been?), referring to a situation in which the party with the largest number of seats still has members in less than half of the seats in Parliament.
When a party forms a minority government, that party has the support of Canadians in fewer than half of the ridings in Canada. That means that a majority of Canadians are unlikely to have voted for that party.
In the current election, less than 35 percent of Canadians voted for a Conservative candidate.
It has been observed ere now that less than 35 percent does not make for a resounding mandate. This remains true.
Saying, therefore, that Canadians voted in a Conservative government, or that you personally voted for Mr. Harper,*** is wildly inaccurate and betrays a sad lack of understanding of how our representative democracy functions. While you may disapprove of the coalition on whatever grounds you see fit, you sound more sensible if you at least take the time to ensure that your arguments have their basis in a rudimentary grasp of our parliamentary system.
It makes me sad that you voted in the recent election at all, given that you fail to understand the most basic principles of the system in which you voted. Please go back to high school, and take Grade 9 Civics, where I'm sure someone will set you straight.
Sincerely,
-Z
[EDIT] CC: Blowhards on the TTC.
* By whom I mean those people who phone into CBC in the morning and make stupid statements about how Canadians didn't vote for Mr. Dion, they voted for Mr. Harper, and how can Mr. Dion presume to think that Canadians voted for him? Last I checked, more Canadians in Mr. Dion's riding of Saint-Laurent-Cartierville did vote for Mr. Dion than voted for any other candidate, allowing him to take his seat in parliament as leader of the opposition. Had he not been elected, then he would not have a seat in parliament. Canadians also voted for Jack Layton-he was elected MP for Toronto Danforth.
** Yes, even if you wrote his name on the ballot, thinking that perhaps Elections Canada had made a mistake.
***Unless, of course, you reside in Calgary West.
Edit: Excellent primer in the Toronto Star:
The no-confidence vote is to take place next Monday. If the government loses that vote, the rules of parliamentary democracy give Harper two options. He can tender his government's resignation to the Governor General and clear the way for Madame Jean to ask Stéphane Dion to form a Liberal-NDP coalition government. Or he can ask the Governor General to dissolve the 40th Parliament so that we can elect the 41st Parliament.
The first option - resignation - would be entirely constitutional. It involves no "usurpation" of power but is an honourable way out of the present impasse.
If Harper were to take the second option, the Governor General would have to consider carefully whether to grant his request for a dissolution. Her primary concern must be to protect parliamentary democracy. A steady diet of elections - four in four years - is not healthy for parliamentary democracy.
If there is an alternative government available that has a reasonable prospect of being supported for a period of time by a majority in the House of Commons, she would have reason to decline Harper's request. Harper would then have to resign, and the Governor General would commission Dion to form a government.
If this happens, again there would be no "usurpation" of power but a proper application of the rules and principles of parliamentary democracy. It has been very disturbing to hear over the last few days, from people who should know better, wild unparliamentary theories about our system of government. Elections are not simple popularity contests in which the leader whose party garners the most votes gets all the power.
(See also me: Parliamentary democracy is not Canadian Idol for Politicians.)
Here in Canada, our government is a parliamentary democracy. That means, among other things, that when we vote, we each have the choice of sending one representative to represent the interests of our riding in parliament. All of the names that appear on the ballot are people who wish to represent us as members of parliament.
We do not have the option of voting for a Prime Minister, unless we happen to be members of the party with the largest number of members elected to parliament, and we happen to be delegates at a convention at which the leader of that party is chosen.
We may, if we live in the appropriate riding, have the option of electing the leader of a party to serve as a member of parliament. For example, I recently was presented with the opportunity to vote for Jack Layton as my MP. Jack Layton also happens to be the leader of the New Democrat Party; had the NDP formed the government, Layton, as its leader, would have been the Prime Minister. However, even though the NDP did not completely buck history to form the government, Layton still has a job as my MP, because the members of my riding elected him to represent them.
This means that even if you voted Conservative in the recent election, you did not vote for Stephen Harper. The only Canadians who voted for Stephen Harper are those members of his riding who elected him their MP, and those members of the Conservative Party who chose him to lead the Party (and, possibly, those who remained members of the party after his and Mr. McKay's party-forming double-dealing shenanigans, thereby lending their consent to Harper's leadership).
In fact, unless you reside in Calgary west, you may have noticed that Mr. Harper's name was nowhere on your ballot. You were denied the opportunity to vote for Mr. Harper** (though you may have voted for one of his flunkies), because that's not how our government works.
Please also bear in mind that the government is formed by the party with the greatest number of seats in Parliament. It is not formed, necessarily, by the party with the majority of seats-hence the term "minority government," (you know? What the past few Harper governments have been?), referring to a situation in which the party with the largest number of seats still has members in less than half of the seats in Parliament.
When a party forms a minority government, that party has the support of Canadians in fewer than half of the ridings in Canada. That means that a majority of Canadians are unlikely to have voted for that party.
In the current election, less than 35 percent of Canadians voted for a Conservative candidate.
It has been observed ere now that less than 35 percent does not make for a resounding mandate. This remains true.
Saying, therefore, that Canadians voted in a Conservative government, or that you personally voted for Mr. Harper,*** is wildly inaccurate and betrays a sad lack of understanding of how our representative democracy functions. While you may disapprove of the coalition on whatever grounds you see fit, you sound more sensible if you at least take the time to ensure that your arguments have their basis in a rudimentary grasp of our parliamentary system.
It makes me sad that you voted in the recent election at all, given that you fail to understand the most basic principles of the system in which you voted. Please go back to high school, and take Grade 9 Civics, where I'm sure someone will set you straight.
Sincerely,
-Z
[EDIT] CC: Blowhards on the TTC.
* By whom I mean those people who phone into CBC in the morning and make stupid statements about how Canadians didn't vote for Mr. Dion, they voted for Mr. Harper, and how can Mr. Dion presume to think that Canadians voted for him? Last I checked, more Canadians in Mr. Dion's riding of Saint-Laurent-Cartierville did vote for Mr. Dion than voted for any other candidate, allowing him to take his seat in parliament as leader of the opposition. Had he not been elected, then he would not have a seat in parliament. Canadians also voted for Jack Layton-he was elected MP for Toronto Danforth.
** Yes, even if you wrote his name on the ballot, thinking that perhaps Elections Canada had made a mistake.
***Unless, of course, you reside in Calgary West.
Edit: Excellent primer in the Toronto Star:
The no-confidence vote is to take place next Monday. If the government loses that vote, the rules of parliamentary democracy give Harper two options. He can tender his government's resignation to the Governor General and clear the way for Madame Jean to ask Stéphane Dion to form a Liberal-NDP coalition government. Or he can ask the Governor General to dissolve the 40th Parliament so that we can elect the 41st Parliament.
The first option - resignation - would be entirely constitutional. It involves no "usurpation" of power but is an honourable way out of the present impasse.
If Harper were to take the second option, the Governor General would have to consider carefully whether to grant his request for a dissolution. Her primary concern must be to protect parliamentary democracy. A steady diet of elections - four in four years - is not healthy for parliamentary democracy.
If there is an alternative government available that has a reasonable prospect of being supported for a period of time by a majority in the House of Commons, she would have reason to decline Harper's request. Harper would then have to resign, and the Governor General would commission Dion to form a government.
If this happens, again there would be no "usurpation" of power but a proper application of the rules and principles of parliamentary democracy. It has been very disturbing to hear over the last few days, from people who should know better, wild unparliamentary theories about our system of government. Elections are not simple popularity contests in which the leader whose party garners the most votes gets all the power.
(See also me: Parliamentary democracy is not Canadian Idol for Politicians.)