Rumours are spreading that we Canadians are close to having a real-live federal election sometime soon.
So now might be a good time to discuss this thing we call a democracy where we get to vote and select who represents us in that Common House.
We glance askance at what is transpiring in the neighbourhood to the south and most of us wince and offer a bit of empathy.
Our American friends are currently dealing with a growing autocracy they can’t seem to halt and with just a two-party system, they are stuck with a wanna be autocrat as their current leader while the other party remains leaderless and apparently will be in that state of nothingness for awhile.
But we have no right to gloat. Our democratic weaknesses can be easily exposed as well.
We may have the benefits of claiming three to six political parties that can spread the voting wealth a little bit more liberally (and please note, that’s a small l liberal).
We have three chambers of rule, as do our American friends, but they at least elect their Senators, giving them some gravitas while our political parties get to appoint ours. Not great, but as opposed to their American counterparts, we have a retirement age for ours.
America is struggling to find a way around or through their autocratic bound president and discovered their democratic system is full of holes. The U.S. is currently being ruled by billionaires who are in the position to call the shots thanks to unrestricted funding of the political spectrums. Their political campaigns last two or more years and cost billions and trillions. Ours run for a couple of months and rack up a few million with funding restrictions.
American Congress people and Senators spend 60 per cent of their time fundraising. Our Senators need not fundraise, they just have to cobble favour. Our MPs do though, but on a modest scale thanks to the rules. Also, Canadian political parties always have a selected leader within shouting distance.
But what if we had a PM who decided to follow the autocracy playbook built like those in Hungary, Turkey, Russia, China, North Korea and now the U.S.? Do we have any stoppers?
Americans have a Supreme Court that is politically motivated, thanks to the above-noted money-class motivators. Our Supreme Court is less enamoured with political stripes, but is still appointed, not elected, which can be a major weakness with the wrong leadership.
What is to stop a Prime Minister from selecting highly paid yes men and women to leadership positions?
When could a Governor General come into play?
Probably never I would think. I mean who is going to listen to the wisdom of King Charles and take the words seriously? GG is a nice ceremonial gig if you land it, but they, much like our Senators, have to sign off on what the ruling party says they have to sign off on, or adios.
Add to these scenarios, the fact that we have a true geographical divide in our great country.
We have to face the facts that our political fate and future are in the hands of two, perhaps three well-populated areas and none of them are in Western Canada, unless you believe Vancouver and/or Calgary hold some clout.
We continually face the fact that southern Ontario, especially around Toronto and Hamilton pretty well gets to call the shots with their 150 or more seats in a 338-seat House of Commons. The ruling crew will grab a few more from Quebec and Maritimes and voila, we have a government.
Saskatchewan and Alberta voters have generally voted in favour of one party over the past few decades with tepid results, even when “our” party (whatever it is) wins. They usually take us for granted and we pose no threats. I mean are we going to vote to leave the Canadian compact like those guys in Quebec? Nope, don’t want to be homeless.
A PM decides what comes next as the fealty crew is selected and the autocracy playbook can easily come into play here.
A Supreme Court can determine that the PM has stepped out of line, defied democracy and must adhere to the written rules.
The PM, like a U.S. President, can reply with a “oh yah, try and stop me!”
What comes next?
In the U.S. the President has already installed his sketchy teammates in the leading roles in judicial, law enforcement, and military, so he’s safe from handcuffs and shackles.
But what about our PM? Is a Mountie going to show up and tell him or her they have to appear in court on Tuesday, or else?
Or else what?
Democracy can be flighty and tricky. It seems we have to be on board with the rules established decades ago and sometimes those rules are flimsy at best and subject to change on whims that are not always follow-ups from democratically gained votes.
But we can’t give up on voting. It’s more important than any alternative.
We have seen the roadmap to “that other place” unfolding right before our eyes just to the south of us.
Do we want to follow that map or ours, as flimsy as it too, maybe?
