Yes, it’s that time of the year again. When the pockets of campaign parties are filled with millions of dollars (with limits of course), where several corporations will become conduits for mass laundering, where everyone suddenly becomes an expert in the federal legal framework, where Stephen Harper forgets that he advocated on behalf of Citizens Alliance on the issue of third party spending limits in 2004. This is the most exciting period of the year to me, not only because we get to experience a probable change in power, but also because, for those who take pride in studying human behavior and actions, it is a time when you see how hungry for power people are.
The whole electoral process is very confusing. Earlier on when I wrote about the electoral reform issue, I explained the merits and demerits of the current system which is currently in place both here and in Nigeria – first past the post system. For those who are unaware, in such a system, a party does not have to win by a majority. In fact, this is rarely the case. A party is only required to win more ridings (constituents) than the other, and they will be called on to form a government. As earlier explained, the problem with the system is this: a party does not necessarily have to try to get the popular vote of the entire country; if the party focuses on an area and is able to secure more votes than its opponent, then it forms a government.
Of course, that’s what I’m thinking too! Where is the democracy in that, right?
Another problem with this election system is that it allows for tactical voting. An act which Al Gore supporters will continue to rue, due to the belief that it caused him to lose to Bush during the 2000 presidential elections. I mean, the very essence of a democratic nation is to keep the confidence of its citizens, and tactical voting is a reflection of non-confidence in the system because voters do not believe their votes would matter, thus causing them to vote for the candidate/party who they believe will win.
Through voter turnout for referendums and general elections, it is evident that citizens are not concerned enough with the politics of the country, and as such, efforts to amend such an important aspect of the ‘democratic’ process will remain futile. It seems that the Quebecois ideology of provincial self-governance is more viable. I mean, allowing provinces tax room and allowing them raise tax by any means necessary, thus, allowing them to be self- sufficient both economically and legally. Seemingly practical enough, it would be a more democratic system because the federal officers in these provinces are elected. However, what then is the need for a federal/dominion government, if all provinces are self-governed?
Bottom line is, there are a lot of checks and balances in and across the federal government. From limitation of powers to independence of some arms of government, and this is the only assurance I have that Canada is not operating on a false democracy, and would certainly guide judgement when analyzing the further events during this election.
By the way, who does Harper think he’s kidding? Sending families cheques of a little over a thousand dollars per year for each child? What is that going to pay for? One week of daycare. This has been one of the most abrupt and insulting campaign tactics I’ve seen in a while. But the sad thing is people are still going to buy this trick.
Osivue Thinks. 