(Through Rose-Coloured Glasses)
Events of the last three weeks are really eye-openers. Right from the start, Harper came out charging, yelling “the Coalition”, as if it is a four letter word. Ignatieff responded by announcing there will be “No Coalition” in his government. Duceppe and Layton waved their 2004 joint letter (with Harper’s signature) to the then GG, Adrienne Clarkson. Such talks gradually died down. Until Harper once again warned us of the badness of a minority government, that may again lead to, yes you guessed it, a coalition; as if this is the end of the world, the inevitable collapse of our Canadian parliament, and the split of our beloved country.
Also it is really confusing too, when we are watching the news on coalition. On the one hand we were warned about the evil Coalition, but at the same time, Canada is part of a coalition force under UN, fighting in the war of Libya, against their dictator Gaddafi.
So is it wrong to have a coalition? It seemed the core of the problem, is one of cause and purpose, the reason why we need a coalition in the first place, and have nothing to do with the members involved. If the cause is noble and just, then go for it. (In the Second World War, the coalition included different ideologies, e.g. the US and Russia, and no evil members were ever mentioned at all)
Forming some kind of alliance and compromise between different political parties, with common consensus, in order to govern and run the country, for the common good of its people, is actually the foundation of our democracy (UK and Australia are doing just that now). If someone is trying to twist this concept around to make believe that it is evil, for his own gain that is total BS and dishonesty.
Harper also raised this problem with minority. Again, the word seems like something to be scared of. As a matter of fact, Canada is a multicultural society, and composed of many different minorities, and hence the so called ethnic votes all politicians were clamoring for. So minority is not a bad thing, but a reality of life here.
The Canadian Parliament is made up of members of parliament (MP) and they are our representatives. They work on our behalf. Almost all of them belong to a party and the party with the most number of MPs can form the government. And obviously, the party with more than half the total number of MPs as party members will be able to pass any policy and take any action their party wants. That’s the majority Harper is yearning for.
With such a majority, like the Chinese one party rule, we are at the mercy of the ruling party, no matter what our own views are on any particular policy. But we want to have our say and our MPs should represent us in parliament, this will be possible only if we have a minority government, no party can dominate any parliamentary processes, and the ruling party can only rule by common consensus and voting. That is the very essence of democracy.
What Harper wants is a one party rule. To other countries like China, he was complaining and spoke against their undemocratic government, speaking out about human right. But when a similar situation is happening at home, he turned around and asked exactly the opposite — a one party rule, i.e. his majority. When asked if he will be working with the other parties if he got another minority government. He was arrogant enough to dismiss that as a non-question.
Of course, a leopard doesn’t change its spots. He is asking for a majority, but what for? So that he can have a one party, iron fisted rule and can ram down our throat, his hidden agenda easily, and without proroguing parliament?
Watch out Canada, pretty soon we will have our own Ai Wei Wei. (Remember Guergis)
Wake up Canada.
Rise up Canada.
Vote on May 2.