Author:
Mark-Alan Whittle
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 17:08:09 03/06/03 Thu
Author Host/IP: dhcp-0-50-ba-d2-4a-e.cpe.mountaincable.net/24.215.40.178
I received this press release (copy below) from the Fraser Institute. A sobering analysis of what ails our representative government. It evokes a certain sadness in my heart for what could be achieved so willfully?
I hope our new leader, and those who aspire to be leader of the Progressive Conservatives for Canada, get the drift. Reform of this magnitude isn't for the faint of heart.
Paul Martin Jr., who owes too many, will never be allowed to see this notion of real and effective accountability come to fruition on his watch, if and when he gets one from his Liberal masters.
Who has the 'royal jelly" to see this through and who. Pray tell, "holds the governors accountable to the governed?" Professor Stanbury nails it dead to rights, and I quote;
"Reform depends upon at least a majority of Canadians coming to believe that they are at the apex of the hierarchy and their elected representatives are their agents whose legitimacy of authority comes from citizens. When citizens deeply believe this idea, they will insist on having accountability regimes that properly serve them," he concludes.
It's fair to say that most electors have come to know that real and effective reform is needed, yet the political will of the legitimate agents under our authority seem unwilling, or unable.
What paralyzes them so, this sad lack of moral authority and respect for the voters? I'm of a mind to put my faith in somebody, who can look me in the eye and be forthright in their resolve to begin incremental change to the way we are governed that will get us their within their first mandate as Prime Minister and leader of the Progressive Conservatives of Canada.
Who among the leadership hopefuls has the wherewithal to move forward with leadership and resolve in the face of such a formidable challenge to those in a position of authority within the system of governance we know today?
Such a huge undertaking is the "strong medicine" Canada needs, to restore the electors right of authority over those we elect to lead and govern our country.
I have come to believe, to muster the required faith and foster hope for positive change, renewal and accountability for the governance of Canada.
Respectfully,
Mark Alan Whittle
>
Study Says General Elections a Poor Tool to Hold MPs Accountable
Release Date: February 12, 2003
Vancouver, BC - Canada’s ‘Westminster’ style of parliamentary democracy seriously lacks accountability to voters and is in critical need of reform, according to a new publication Accountability to Citizens in the Westminster Model of Government: More Myth than Reality released today by The Fraser Institute.
“The Westminster model’s main claim to fame -- that it holds the governors accountable to the governed -- is largely a myth and potentially a dangerous one at that,” says W.T. Stanbury, Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia and the study’s author.
Stanbury defines the Westminster model of representative government as based on the accountability of a collective body (the cabinet) to another collective body (the legislature) in the name of yet another collective body (the voters).
The critical flaw is that Canada’s style of representative government concentrates enormous authority and power in the hands of the prime minister. Voters effectively delegate that authority to the party obtaining a majority of the seats in the Commons. The problem is how to hold MPs accountable when the PM dominates both the executive and the legislature.
Stanbury demonstrates that the key mechanism for holding elected representatives accountable to citizens -- a general election -- is crude, indirect, available infrequently, and lacks the means to target those responsible for bad performance.
“The concept of accountability is essential to what we mean by democratic government yet it appears the design by which citizens can hold their elected representatives accountable is seriously lacking,” he says.
According to the study, the problems have been understood for decades, but increasing accountability has proven extremely difficult.
“The prime minister and his cabinet ministers are not the only ones who have a lot to lose if accountability to citizens is improved. The vast public service and the many specialized agencies of Canada’s government would come under more searching scrutiny,” says Stanbury. “Some reputations will be darkened by evidence of poor performance.”
Most citizens, it appears, don’t really appreciate how badly Canada’s version of democracy serves them. Those who do propose serious change are often met with the charge that they want Canada to adopt American political institutions.
“Unwavering and uncritical support for the status quo version of Canada’s political institutions is greatest among nationalists. Their apparently fragile sense of identity requires that Canadian policies and institutions always be different from American ones. To propose to adopt certain aspects of the US model is to be condemned at the outset by such nationalists,” says Stanbury.
Stanbury points out that any serious change in the design of Canada’s political institutions requires that Canadians must cast off their long-held ideas and assumptions.
“Reform depends upon at least a majority of Canadians coming to believe that they are at the apex of the hierarchy and their elected representatives are their agents whose legitimacy of authority comes from citizens. When citizens deeply believe this idea, they will insist on having accountability regimes that properly serve them,” he concludes.
- 30 -
Executive Summary: Governments in western industrialized countries engage a wide variety of activities and account for a substantial fraction of the Gross Domestic Product. In 2000, for the average family, taxes paid to all governments in Canada accounted for 47.5 percent of their gross income (Emes and Walker, 2001). Canada's largest government has a complex organizational structure. In February 1997, the federal government included 24 departments, 37 Crown corporations, 26 tribunals and quasi-judicial bodies, and 48 service organizations of all kinds. These 135-plus organizations employed 370,000 persons, including 170,000 in departments (Jauvin, 1997, p. 55). All of these people, indirectly at least, are said to be accountable to the citizens on whose behalf these government organizations have been established.
Indeed, the concept of accountability is essential to what we mean by democratic government. The need for accountability flows from the delegation of authority, the exercise of discretion and the possibility that such authority will be used in ways not anticipated or approved by those persons who delegated authority in order to achieve the benefits of division of labour. In a popular democracy, citizens, collectively, are the ultimate principal; elected representatives are their agents. These agents are also principals who, through the legislature, delegate authority to a host of departments and agencies that make up the sprawling executive branch of government.
Contact: William T. Stanbury, Professor Emeritus
University of British Columbia, Tel 011-52-376-766-0752
Email: wstanbury@laguna.com.mx
Established in 1974, The Fraser Institute is an independent public policy organization based in Vancouver, with offices in Calgary and Toronto.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 