O O Ø O O O O
Hangover
So now that all the election brou-ha-ha has come and gone, it’ll be reasonably quiet for a couple days until Prime Minister Harper kicks things into gear. Any one I’ve spoken with who works in government has said it’s business as usual, and they were well-prepared for the switch. That shouldn’t be too surprising considering they’ve had to do it a couple times in the last eighteen months and I’m sure the practice will come in handy in another eighteen months when we have to go through this yet again.
I don’t really want to go through it again anytime soon, as it’s an awful lot of effort, money, and emotional expenditures every time we get on the ride. Until we get some people really interested in changing how we’re governed and who are able to articulate it intelligently, I don’t see a whole lot changing. That said, there’s a lot that can change about the process we go through, as well as maybe doing some research on who you’re planning on voting for and, more importantly, why.
The first thing I’d like to change is the way Elections Canada pitches voting to the public. I think they do an incredible disservice to the voters in Canada by indoctrinating them with the idea of “Your Vote is Your Voice”. Your vote is simply a choice from a list of eligible candidates of someone you hope will represent your interests in all things parliamentary. The list of candidates may not come close to representing what you believe in, and you may choose not to choose, which is your right.
Your voice is something different entirely, and should continue to be exercised whenever possible through holding your elected representative accountable, asking questions, and telling whoever you please what you believe and why. Don’t trivialise a person’s voice by telling them all they’ve got is a little “X” on a paper once an election, they’ve got the potential to do so much more, and Elections Canada should push that even more. It shouldn’t be about increasing voter numbers, it should be about helping people make an informed choice without all the rhetoric and spin.
I want to get people to question a little more about why they vote for a party instead of a person. Parties are never accountable to the individual, and they certainly don’t take individual ridings into account when formulating strategy. I’m not saying people should vote for an individual instead of a party, but I do believe it should be a combination of the two, and that you should know who you’re voting for. If they’re an incumbent, you might want to take a look at what they have or haven’t done in the past.
Elections shouldn’t always be about your team winning, it should be more about who do you want on the team. I found it interesting that in the first election Martin’s picture was on every candidate’s sign, with the obvious message being a vote for this candidate is a vote for the party. Very true, but a pretty big disservice to the candidates and the electorate when you stop and think about it. Doesn’t the party message just mean that it doesn’t matter who fills the shoes, so long as they toe the line? For my re-elected MP, it sure looks like any monkey in a suit could do what he did in office.
I want people to focus on things that are important to government as well as things that are important to them because, really, they’re one and the same. I find it appalling how quick the party folk are to talk about spiraling costs of education and healthcare, but never, ever mention that a large proportion of these costs are administrative in nature. The size of government and its administrative overhead continues to balloon across the spectrum, and the reaction is always to cut the services, not the congealed mass that serves little purpose other than oversight and policy administration.
Why can’t the operational overhead that makes those services so expensive be cut instead? I agree that some oversight is required, and I think you can maintain a suitable level without requiring five layers of management to approve a fifty dollar procurement. Most of the reviews and subsequent cuts we see now are of programs and services. When was the last time you heard of a review that reported on just how much our bloated government actually costs to run, and what savings could be realised just by cutting out some of the fat?
I don’t want or need a big government, and I think it’s fair to say what we have now is not sustainable. I want my representatives to pay attention to the people who elected them once in a while, as they are supposed to represent us as well as the party. I’d like to see a better balance between individual interests and corporate interests. I need a return to “this is the way it is, and these are the baby steps we’ll take to make it better” instead of “this is how we’re going to try and please everyone while failing miserably as we spend gobs of cash trying to boil all the oceans at once”. I’d like to feel something other than “sodomized” every time I think about our government.
I’m living in a dream world, I know, but it’s the only thing that keeps me from getting so far down the apathetic hole that I really do stop caring, and that would mean they’ve won and I’ve lost. That would be bad, I think.
So, as a favour to me, think about it over the next little while. Write a letter to your rep and remind them of why you did or didn’t vote for them, and tell them what you expect from them as your representative. In eighteen months, go to your all-candidate’s meeting ask them about things that concern you. Write a post about what pisses you off, why it does, and ideally what would make it better. Make these social events, and get your friends and neighbours to participate.
That’s what a voice is, and it’s a hell of a lot more powerful than just a vote. But that’s just my opinion.
Kev Needham
January 31, 2006
OOØOOOODCCXLI