No respect, fewer voters,
funding lost
A report from Canada
Elections that neither
the Liberal nor Conservative
Party will qualify in
January for public funding
because of the low turnout
in the June General
Election should be cause
for concern to their
respective treasurers.
When party politicians
suffer a hit to their
pockets they pay attention.
If Canadians were so
turned off by the antics
of party politicians
that they did not vote
in sufficient numbers
to reward them with
the anticipated January
public funding, perhaps
partisan politicians
will seek to understand
why. Simply put, it
is because Canadians
at large were fed up
with their antics, in
the House of Commons
itself and in its committees.
In an attempt to help
the amateur thespians,
"Oh, Oh" orators,
"Bravo" choristers,
and the recently acquired
"Boo" brigade
who turn Question Period
into a childish "Did
too", "Did
not" cacophony
of catcalls, understand
why they don't resonate
with the public, they
might find it fruitful
to reread what appeared
in the July issue of
this e-zine.
"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."
Since the reopening of
Parliament in October
the antics have continued.
It is past time to show
some respect for the
institution, even if
Members show little
respect for each other.
In its latest report
Elections Canada also
noted that overall voter
turnout in the June
election was the lowest
since Confederation
in 1867, at 60.9 per
cent, down 61.2 per
cent in 2000. This decline
would have been even
greater had not 38 per
cent of voters aged
18-30 cast ballots,
compared with 25 per
cent in the same age
group in the 2000 election.
--30--
Home
| About
| Canadian Vindicator
| Literature
| Gallery
| History
|