The Point

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Triumph!

Cowing to immense pressure from this blog, of course, Harper and Layton have relented and decided they would probably be sort of okay with going to the debate if Elizabeth May is there too as long as, you know, everybody knows they're not happy about it.

Victory! Further bulletins as warrant.




Sample future bulletin:

Casserole tonight! Saucy!

Labels: ,

posted by Christopher at 4:44 p.m. | link | 1 comments

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Why should the Greens be kept out?

What a strange thing to be envious of Americans for the drama and excitement of the presidential race down there this fall. Whether people will be voting on the basis of ideas, aspirations and values or just on pure personality politics is up for debate, but at least there's something feisty going on in the US. Up here there's such a dearth of inspiring, visionary candidates for the election on October 14th that it's easy to forget there's an election going on at all (is four days in too soon to say that?).

And when did former PM Joe Clark become so interesting? He's had more than a few very thoughtful, incisive things to say in the past little while, not least this current piece he's written about the old boys' club of the Bloc, the NDP, and the Conservatives blocking Elizabeth May from the televised leaders' debates on October 1st and 2nd. He astutely points out in an editorial this week:
Jason MacDonald, a spokesman for the network consortium [that hosts the debates], is quoted as saying that three parties - those led by Stephen Harper, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe - all opposed the participation of Ms. May in the so-called leaders debate, "and it became clear that if the Green Party were included, there would be no leaders debates."

That's blackmail. If these three men want to boycott a genuine debate, let them have the courage to do so openly. Let them also explain why, in a year when U.S. party establishments could not shut out an Obama or a McCain, it is appropriate for the Canadian party establishments to muzzle a significant voice for change.
and more to the point, on the implications of this disservice to us as an electorate in making informed decisions about our federal government:
The tone of federal politics today is the worst I can remember in my 50 years in public life. Of course, there were angry partisan differences before, but they were tumultuous exceptions to a general rule of common public purpose, even civility. By contrast, the standard today has become consistently bitter and negative - personal invective routinely displaces any serious discussion of issues or differences.

This low standard helps corrode respect for the democratic institutions in which this mean drama plays out. It comes at a bad time, because there has been a general decline in the reputation of politicians, parties, legislatures and other institutions. Cynicism grows. Candidates are hard to attract. Citizens turn away from politics - especially young people, who see nothing to attract or inspire them. That constitutes a long-term threat to the authority of the pan-Canadian political institutions that have always been essential for citizens of this diverse democracy to act positively together.
I should mention that although I don't support any of the political parties in Canada, nor do I intend to ever be a member of one of them, I do endorse a lot of the ideas the Green Party has presented in their platform - a shift in overall tax collection to enforce a tax on carbon emissions (I'm willing to debate the desirability of this on a national level), emphasising preventing illness through what they call health promotion, protecting victims of discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression. A lot of this sounds great to me, other things in their platform less so. 

But this is totally beside the point. We deserve to hear Elizabeth May debate the other federal leaders - and be rightly scrutinised in the same light as them. As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Bloc Québecois were allowed to debate in 1993 without a single MP, as was the Reform Party with only a single Member of Parliament, as the Greens have now. We are all owed the opportunity to make an informed decision based on articulation of all of these leaders' ideas, and on critical, incisive probing of them. TV, our great cultural junk food, is one of the most important venues for us to do this. Allow me to tuck this into the bullshit files.

Hat tip to daveberta on the Joe Clark piece. If you're not already, you should be reading Dave Cournoyer's blog for coverage of this election. Lord knows he'll update more in a day than I will this month.

Labels: , ,

posted by Christopher at 2:57 p.m. | link | 1 comments
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.