2004 Canadian General Election
Canadians are not dummies. Faced with serious
decision-making in the federal General Election
of 2004, held on Thursday June 28, they proved
pollsters, spin doctors, and other assorted
odd sods and bods wrong in their projections.
Asked to choose between two main parties,
the incumbent, scandal tarnished Liberal
Party, and the newly minted, western-led
Conservative Party, they gave neither one
their wholehearted endorsement. Wisely they
put each on notice.
The overall result is a Liberal minority
government, not dependent on support from
a separatist Québec party.
For that fact alone, Canadians can congratulate
themselves.
"If for no other reason than preventing
a party dedicated to the break-up of Canada
from holding the balance of power in the
next Parliament of Canada with a minority
government in office, we should all participate
in voting on election day."
(Canadian Vindicator. June 2002.)
But, and it is a big but, we did not all
vote. In fact voter turnout was low, very
low, the lowest in well over a century. Reasons
for this are plumbed below.
For all intents and purposes, the balance
of power will now be held by the New Democratic
Party, energized by a new leader, but holding
within its ranks a group of experienced parliamentarians,
at least one of whom, a Manitoban, held a
seat when the last minority Government (the
Progressive Conservatives led by the Right
Hon. Joe Clark) was in power. The new NDP
leader would be wise to heed his counsel.
It is worth noting that, although he is
no longer an M.P., Mr. Clark made a remarkably
weighty contribution during the June election,
quoting the age-old dictum contrasting "the
devil you know" with "the devil
you don't know."
When the new Parliament is convened, Canadians
hope Members will concentrate on making this
minority government as productive as those
in the Pearson and Trudeau eras.
Proportional representation and elected
Senators are attainable through a functioning
democratic House of Commons. There is work
to be done. Let's see if there is leadership
with the will to do it.
Perception and politics
Why was there such a low turnout in the
2004 General Election? Take your pick from
the many theories advanced by academics,
political scientists, elitist pundits and
commentators who have pontificated on television,
radio, in the press, and over the web ever
since the results became known.
Missing from them all is something so obvious
that it has been overlooked.
Canadians, not "average Canadians",
not "ordinary Canadians", were
turned off by overexposure to politicians.
For months the antics of politicians in
the House of Commons prior to the dropping
of the writ were nauseous. The televised
Question Period degenerated into a cacophony
of catcalls, feigned indignation, synchronized
outbursts of applause and standing ovations
on the slenderest of excuses, the whole portraying
a juvenile disrespect for the dignity of
Parliament. Self-control and official control
sank to a new low.
That low was obvious to television viewers.
They did not like what they saw. If this
was all their Members of Parliament were
capable of, if this was what politics and
politicians were all about, they didn't want
any part of it.
Worse was the picture presented by MPs taking
part in the committee proceedings inquiring
into the Auditor General's report dealing
with payment of taxpayers' money to certain
advertising and public relation firms.
There was the unedifying spectacle of MPs
slouching in their chairs, lolling backwards
as they questioned witnesses, and of aides
and hangers-on talking into cell phones,
laughing and conversing with each other,
uncaring that their behaviour was being seen
by viewers across the country.
No sense of occasion. No thought for appearances.
Smirking. Snippety. Supercilious.
The contrast with televised committee hearings
in the United States was stark.
No wonder voters were turned off.
If politicians want Canadians to take them
seriously, they must take Canadians seriously.
They can start by showing some sense of
decorum as they treat with the affairs of
Canadians. Canadians and their Parliament
deserve better.
Election epitaph
The following nursery rhyme may be apt in
explaining why voters were wise in withholding
their wholehearted support for any one leader
or party:
If I do not trust thee, Doctor Fell,
The reason why I cannot tell;
But this I know, and know full well,
I do not trust thee, Doctor Fell.
Mercifully, Canadians can now relax for
the summer, freed from the importuning of
politicians. Their recently elected Parliament
will not be summoned to meet until September
20.
--30--
Home
| About
| Canadian Vindicator
| Literature
| Gallery
| History
|