Our first set of MP exit interviews began this week, our first of what will be several dozen interviews with MPs who left public life between 2004 and 2008.
Incidentially, the period of these departures also kicked off what general wisdom has us believe to be a prolonged period of minority government in Canada. After nearly five and a half years of this not-unprecedented situation, recent media attention suggests we are in a period of democractic crisis. Time will tell how our MPs view this situation, but in the meantime, it's worth keeping up with the prevailing views of our national pundits (spoiler alert: I've saved the best for last).
In the same week,
Maclean's and CPAC co-hosted a
panel discussion titled "Our Democracy is Broken," while CBC Radio's The Sunday Edition
broadcast a different panel on "Canada's dysfunctional politics."
The Maclean's/CPAC affair featured eight extremely thoughtful guys who attempted to suggest concrete actions that would fix things. This ranged from specific ideas (e.g., bumping up Question Period from its afternoon slot to earlier in the day so to minimize the time spent prepping for theatrics, theoretically leaving more time for actual Parliamentary business) to broader and more empassioned pleas for a system that would produce outcomes that truly matter to Canadians (e.g., marshalling attention to the reduction and ideally elimination of child poverty in the same way that seniors' poverty was tackled and eliminated in earlier generations).
Unfortunately, however, without a clearer definition of what is actually broken and why, and without someone to forcefully mount a defense of the system and its machinery, the panel seemed to coalesce around the need for electoral reform, ideally a variant of proportional representation. No one appeared concerned that the very minority parliaments that (I think) were seen as at the heart of the apparent "crisis" are certain to increase under this scenario. This is not to opine on the relative merits of PR or of our existing system, but only to ask that we a) identify the problem and link the solution more carefully and b) avoid the view that electoral reform will serve as a silver bullet for that which may ail us.
And I shouldn't have to say this in 2009, but at least one perspective from someone of the female persuation would have been appreciated.
The CBC's panel was wider-ranging (and twice as long), with a variety of perspectives, and touched on issues of culture, history, government rules and machinery, the role of media as well a dose of personality and politics. It didn't come to as clear a conclusion as the CPAC/Maclean's effort, and perhaps for that reason it is worth a
listen.
Admist all this, leave it to veteran CBC personality Don Newman to mount the most elegant discussion on the entire matter at the
Canadian Club (which naturally went largely unreported, save for this
piece). Placing the status of our current political state (critically) in historical context, he argues for what he called the "Pearson Plan," based on an approach to confidence used by former PM Lester Pearson during his minority rule. The Q&A was also fabulous - both funny and touching. You'll laugh at his anecdotes about Brian Mulroney's calls to him during the commerical breaks of his long-running show. Politics from a different era, I'd imagine.
You really must watch it.