It is often observed that a country is known by the politicians its citizens elect. As such, Canadians must be a sorry lot. Ultimately, those elected are nothing more than a reflection of the society from which they are elected!
In the past, Canadians have elected some outstanding individuals characterized by integrity, decency, and a sincere commitment to their constituents and the parliamentary system. Today, most (but not all) of Canada’s MPs appear to be cut from a very different cloth—they are meek, unoriginal, mediocre beyond belief, remarkably incurious, and politically correct. They shuffle along, doing whatever they are told to do, deferential to their party leader, his/her unelected advisors, and the party machine, which have complete control over the party, and therefore, legislative agenda. Unfortunately for Canadians, all five of the federal political parties currently represented in parliament (Liberals, NDP, Bloc Quebecois, Green Party, and the “liberal lite” Conservative Party), are basically left-wing/left-of-centre in perspective and legislative aspirations.
These leftist political parties are vigilantly monitored by the mainstream media, which is quick to pounce on any deviation from the woke cancel culture. Those in the media firmly believe that they know what is best for Canadians, and any alternate views must be promptly snuffed out. For example, on June 7, 2021 Globe and Mail columnist, John Ibbitson, criticized Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole for not properly “controlling” his caucus because O’Toole allowed a free vote on the sex-selective abortion bill (C-233). He also allowed some caucus members to obstruct the passage through Parliament of the extremist conversion therapy bill (C-6), which Ibbitson claims is necessary to protect homosexuals. Ibbitson views both decisions as indication that O’Toole is not a good leader because he is failing to keep his caucus in line, in other words, no diversity of opinion should be allowed.
Canada has sadly become a country which is increasingly controlled by little more than a handful of elites, all sharing a group-think mentality and a myopic left-wing perspective, and who do not tolerate any diversity.
There are two main inter-related reasons why Canadian politics in particular, and political discourse in general, have produced MPs who are, in reality, nothing more than mindless robots who do not think for themselves. This phenomenon is not peculiar to Canada as it is prevalent in various degrees, in most, if not all, Western liberal-democratic countries.
The first main reason is that the party leaders exert tremendous control over their caucus through control of the nomination process of the party’s candidates, to say nothing of the power of appointment should the party win the election! Local party members, through their Riding Associations (Electoral District Association, EDA), no longer have the final say on the choice of a candidate. Instead, candidates must get the party leader to sign off on the Riding Association’s choice. Similarly, the Riding Association’s choice can be overridden by the party leader who has the ability to “parachute” into a riding his choice regardless of what the local party members want. Candidates thus become nothing more than programmed robots for the party leader and the party machine. The implications are profound. First, there is the disassociation of the candidates from the people they are supposed to represent. One of the hallmarks of representative democracy’s legitimacy is that the candidate represents their constituents. Instead, the current system ensures that candidates represent the leadership to the constituents! Second, there is a huge disconnect between party policy, which is arrived at through open debate and adoption at the party’s convention, and the leadership’s agenda and platform which is often quite different. Candidates/MPs who have the temerity to support a convention’s policies, often find themselves at odds with the party leader and his unelected advisors. If an MP publicly dissents from the party leader’s position, he/she runs the very real risk of being expelled from the caucus. Effectively, if an MP wishes to remain in office, he/she must do as instructed by the party leader and his staff, no exceptions permitted.
The second reason why many MPs are nothing more than party hacks is social in nature, and concerns the media’s role in covering, and promoting, political discourse. The mainstream media in Canada has control over the public narrative, permitting no space for any dissenting voices or the free discussion of ideas that deviate from the established narrative. The mostly left-leaning and/or woke media (both print and visual) determine what is the “news” that Canadians may hear. The media simply ignores any information that may undermine its own narrative and its accompanying agenda. Long gone are the days when objective reportage was the norm; instead, today the media is nothing more than a storyteller of dubious credibility which treats those with different perspectives with ridicule and contempt.
The Effect of the Controlled Political Discourse in Canada
The total control over policy by the political leaders, and the media’s lack of objectivity, have had profound effects on the Canadian political system, as the following examples illustrate.
The first effect is that party policy can no longer be relied upon to be made in the best interests of society or for the public’s benefit. Instead, today the driving force behind policy development, and its implementation, is winning the next election for the party. This point came into sharp focus on May 26, 2021 when all MPs, from every party in the House of Commons, supported a resolution introduced by the Bloc Quebecois, requesting unanimous support of Quebec’s Bill 96. This bill unilaterally declares that Quebec is a separate nation and that French-only is the official language of Quebec, despite the federal Languages Act which provides that Canada is a bilingual, French and English, country. The reason for the effusive support of this provocative resolution from Quebec, by all federal political parties, was due to the fact that Quebec provides 75 seats in the House of Commons, which the political parties hope to win in the next election. There were two dissenting votes. One was from independent MP Jody Wilson-Raybould, the former Attorney General, who had nothing to lose by rejecting the Bloc Quebecois’ resolution. The second dissenting vote was from independent MP Derek Sloan. This resolution from Quebec will ultimately lead to serious problems in Canada’s national unity, the nature of federalism and the protection of minority language rights throughout Canada, not only Quebec. If Quebec can act unilaterally to benefit itself, why can’t the other provinces do the same?
The second effect of the absolute power held by political leaders and the media’s corruption in failing to hold leadership accountable through objective reporting, has been the shift away from policy towards personalities. The public, of course, may still cast a ballot during an election, but the voter is no longer voting for the candidate’s values, character, integrity, and intellectual capacity, but is casting a ballot for a political leader who is usually operating far away from their lives, and who has no interest whatever in him, except for his vote. The “cult of the leader” has reduced Canadian electoral politics to nothing more than a popularity contest between party leaders.
The third crucial effect of the change in our political system is that legislation is now passed into law without the support of the Canadian public, whose opinions appear to be inconsequential to his/her MP.
Examples of Legislation Lacking Public Support
- Bill C-233, Sex Selective Abortion
On May 28, 2021, private member’s Bill C-233, introduced by Conservative MP Cathay Wangantall (Yorkton—Melville), would have banned sex selective abortions. It was defeated by a margin of 247 to 82. However, a 2020 DART and Maru/Blue Voice Canada poll revealed that 83 percent of Canadians support a law against sex-selective abortion.
The MPs who voted for the bill were 80 Conservative MP’s (which was two thirds of the 119-member caucus) and Independent MP Derek Sloan, who was kicked out of the Conservative caucus because of his social conservative views.
Conservative leader Erin O’Toole
Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole, in spite of his pro-choice stance, did make a concession on Bill C-233, however, since he did not whip the conservative MPs vote, (that is, he did not order his MPs to vote against the bill), unlike all the other federal party leaders, the NDP, the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois, and the Green Party.
- Bill C-7 Euthanasia Law – Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID)
On March 25, 2021, the widest euthanasia bill anywhere in the world became law in Canada. It provides for death on demand. Euthanasia has become, in practice, just another medical treatment from which physicians may choose, without any requirement that other medical treatment first be provided to patients. The new law also provides that euthanasia may be performed for reasons of mental illness, regardless of the fact that such a patient may not be able to provide consent for his/her own death. In effect, the Canadian law on euthanasia normalizes death as being just another medical treatment of “choice.”
- Bill C-6 – Conversion Therapy
Bill C-6 prohibits any kind of counseling or conversation that doesn’t affirm same-sex attraction or transgenderism. It allows an adolescent (usually between 12 and 18 years age), without parental knowledge or consent, to personally decide whether he/she should have hormone treatment and surgery to supposedly change sex. It is biologically impossible to actually change one’s sex since the DNA and reproductive system remain exactly the same as they did at birth. The treatment offered to the adolescent is merely “pretend” or cosmetic and illusory: it does not actually change one’s sex.
The bill also punishes parents, therapists, and pastors with up to five years in prison for trying to assist a child to sort out his/her gender confusion which may affirm his/her birth sex. Further, all literature, books, pamphlets, videos, podcasts, or other material that express a contrary view to Bill C-6 are to be seized, censored and deleted.
The sole purpose of Bill C-6 is to pretend homosexual/transgender is “normal” in accordance with homosexual mythology. This is not supported by scientific evidence. Nonetheless, Canadians are supposed to pretend that this bill is reasonable, when it is absolutely contrary to common sense and science.
The above three bills are just some examples of what occurs when only a handful of individuals control and report on the political agenda without public debate and consultation.
Canada’s future
Is there a future for a Canada that reflects values, such as the dignity of human life from conception to natural death or the importance of the nuclear family of mother, father, and children, as the basis of a sustainable and stable society? How can the power of government and the media be adequately limited and held accountable in a manner consistent with individual liberty and responsible government?
The debate around these and other questions is unlikely to occur, until the undeserved and unwarranted dictatorial powers have been stripped away from party leaders, and a truly free and objective press is the order of the day. The current arrangement where party leaders and their supportive elites enjoy the power to exploit Canadians to their personal advantage and prestige is simply inconsistent with responsible government and the timeless Judeo-Christian values upon which Canada was founded.
To change the current situation requires actions which must include the selection of candidates for public office, including party leaders, who have a profound understanding of, and appreciation for, authentic responsible government and public service, and who have the moral courage to withstand the criticism and manipulation of the media. Whether Canadian society can still produce such men and women remains an open question.