Direct and to the point, today’s editorial in The Province:
David Emerson is stinking out the House of Commons, whatever the federal ethics commissioner says. But the real issue was, and is, Emerson’ betrayal of the democratic process and his subsequent refusal to acknowledge it.
In our view, any politician switching party allegiance must in future go back to the voters first to solicit their approval.
Without that mandate they are democratic pariahs—symbols of a cynical system that demeans and diminishes the citizens’ role.
No Canadian MP should ever again be allowed to masquerade in Ottawa as the representative of a party rejected by a majority of those who voted for him.
Harper dismisses the controversy as a “partisan effort” to demean Emerson’s “fine record of public service.” The PM could not be more wrong.
Democracy requires that the electorate gets what it voted for. Anything less is unacceptable.
We Conservatives ought to earn, not steal, votes. Anything less is unacceptable.
Yesterday we put out a press release on behalf of Real Democracy, in order to comment on the Prime Minister’s response to the Shapiro inquiry into the Harper-Emerson affair.
This naturally generated questions from the media about how Real Democracy fits in with all the other groups involved in fighting for democracy here in Vancouver.
In a nutshell, Real Democracy is:
- a non-partisan organization, not affiliated with any political party whatsoever
- simply a group of people from diverse backgrounds, most of whom did not know each other before February 6th, who are committed to carry on the fight for democracy in Canada because no one in Ottawa will do the job; many, but not all, of us are involved in one or more of the other groups which have sprung up over the Emerson affair;
- working on a number of projects designed to raise awareness but more importantly understanding of the issues which the Emerson affair has highlighted; first among our projects is the Walk for Democracy, Sunday April 2nd – just over one week from now.
- looking at the big picture – while some groups are single-purpose and have focussed exclusively on the Harper-Emerson affair, there are bigger issues at hand that need attending to even after the fight against Emerson has been won. Harper’s appointment of the unelected Michael Fortier to cabinet by way of a Senate appointment (despite Harper’s specific promise to Montrealers on January 12 2006 that we would not do such a thing) is, like the Emerson affair, but another symptom of a sick democracy.
That’s it. Not too complicated.
Keyvan Ahmadi – BC resident and former senior principal in the BC Auditor General’s office – has put up a simple poll which asks for honest answers to the question:
Would you trust David Emerson to stay in a “Position of Trust”, or has he lost your trust?.
The poll hasn’t received many responses as yet, lets change that: http://emersonissue.com/
The Prime Minister and David Emerson can keep on bleating that public outrage over what they have done is merely partisan politics at work. That’s not true and never has been, and they are fooling no one. But if they actually are so out of touch as to buy their own spin, in the next election the people will give them a reality check they’ll never forget.
Of course, no one expects Emerson to run in any riding, much less in Vancouver-Kingsway.
But unlike Emerson, Stephen Harper has no plans to slink away from politics at the first face-saving opportunity. Unlike Emerson, he has longer term political aspirations and obligations to his party that include bringing home a majority government for Conservatives.
The Party will be unforgiving if Harper fails to bring home the bacon, particularly if his miscalculation over Emerson and Fortier – where he broke party policy and an ethos developed over more than a decade – contribute to a future electoral failure. In arrogantly staking out his claim to appoint anyone to cabinet, democracy be damned in the process, Stephen Harper will be held fully accountable, sooner or later.
Make no mistake about it, achieving a majority Conservative government is in real jeopardy the longer this sordid affair continues. With a minority government that may head to the polls again at any time – most certainly within people’s memory of the Harper-Emerson affair – this issue will play a leading role in determining the outcome of the next election.
Harper isn’t the only one in the line of fire. Politicians at all levels – civic, provincial and federal – who have given Harper and Emerson their endorsement over this affair will pay a price unless they distance themselves from the entire matter and quickly. Their casual back-slapping will cost them votes and seats.
What Harper did with Emerson and Fortier was wrong. It was wrong on day one and continues to be today. It’ll be just as wrong when the next writ is dropped, and there will be people motivated then as we are today to ensure that politicians pay up for their participation in this attack on democracy.
It didn’t have to be this way. Conservatives ought to respect the will of the people, and work to earn their votes in the next election. And Harper always had another, democratic, alternative available to him, if he was intent on obtaining Emerson’s service in government. Harper could have asked Emerson to resign and plopped him into government with almost zero controversy: in the civil service as a Deputy Minister. After all, that’s Emerson’s comfortable home turf.
That option is still open – and would go a long way to restoring people’s faith in our democracy and respect for the Harper-led government – but I don’t expect proud and aloof politicians to take the offer. They’re hoping that we’ll all go away and forget about this issue.
That’s simply not going to happen.
Media Highlights for Wednesday March 22 2006
Media Watch is updated through the day until the end of the day.
March 22 (Gary Mason, The Globe and Mail) Emerson gets votes for de-election
Mike Watkins, a card-carrying Conservative and one of the principals behind the De-Elect Emerson campaign, isn’t concerned that Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro’s ruling this week clearing Mr. Emerson and Prime Minister Stephen Harper of wrongdoing in the party switching will release steam from the de-elect movement.
“Given Mr. Shapiro’s very limited mandate, I’m not surprised by the decision,” Mr. Watkins said yesterday. “I don’t think anyone expected anything different. If anything, it will make people realize there really isn’t anybody in government looking after democracy.”
Which means of course that the people have to carry this task forward themselves.
That said, I don’t think the protests have been a waste of time. It would be wonderful if the cries of disapproval emanating from Vancouver Kingsway laid the foundation for a broader movement calling for changes to federal laws that would prevent this sort of thing from happening again.
David Emerson cheated the 20,064 people who cast their ballots for him out of their vote. Democracy doesn’t, well, shouldn’t work that way.
This issue needs to be studied and addressed, and if the people of Vancouver Kingsway become the catalyst for the legislative changes necessary to ensure this never happens again, then their protest will have been worth it.
This is certainly the goal of many that are involved – demonstrate to politicians that there is a terrible price to pay if they debase our democracy, and use this pressure to push for lasting change. However no one ought characterize a desire for longer-term solutions as a weakening of resolve for those involved in the “de-elect” movement. Politicians who underestimate the tenacity of those who are calling for Emerson’s resignation do so at their own risk, and will themselves eventually pay a price for their tacit or explicit support for Emerson and Harper in this affair.
April 2006 (Ken Alexander – Editor, The Walrus) Election After-Math
But Mr. Harper did his math post-election. “Disallow the Liberal/Bloc potential by bribing Mr. Emersonâwhose Vancouver riding supported us with a whopping 19 percentâto cross the floor. What is one Cabinet position for a turncoat worth?” Harper must have thought. “The natural governing party, the Liberals, asked such questions for years. It served them well and kept us in the principled wilderness. Well, my new hedonic calculus, my will to power, now dictates that I too can hold the electorate in contempt, that voting is nothing but a parlour game that I control.”