views from canada’s left coast

views on movies, sports, and politics

Hopefully Layton has a look at Laxer’s piece

I just read this piece by James Laxer from This Magazine. I found the article very interesting, and it expressed many ideas that I myself have been thinking about but not fully able to express or understand. I have generally been a supporter of the NDP, though I have not been active in the party. In 2006 I was torn about who to vote for. In Vancouver Centre, where I live, Hedy Fry and the Liberals have been in office since 1993, but lately their main electoral opposition has been from the NDP. I considered voting Liberal because I thought it was important to have as many Liberal MPs as possible given the strong chance that the Conservatives would win the election. Ultimately, however, I decided to vote for the NDP (I was more reluctant to do so in 2006 than I ordinarily would have been because Svend Robinson was the local candidate). I voted NDP because they were the party that cared most about the issue that I cared most about, electoral reform.

The NDP officially supports changing the way that Canadians elect the federal government. I feel that the first past the post system of electing MPs is not a very democratic way to select a government. I voted NDP, which ultimately meant little because they were easily defeated by the Liberals in my riding. I voted NDP because they support the policy that I most cared about. Having increased their seat total significantly, which presumably would increase their influence, the NDP went on to do absolutely nothing about electoral reform. I will not park my vote with the NDP again simply because they pay lip service to electoral reform. I am even beginning to wonder if the only way to actually bring about change is to buck up and join either the Liberals or the Conservatives. The NDP seems willing to talk up all sorts of ideas that will grab the attention of some voters, but when it comes time to really discuss those ideas in the House of Commons the NDP is not willing to rock any boats. Electoral reform probably does not register with very many Canadian voters, but then again Canadians are increasingly tuning out politics in general.

Like Laxer’s view, I think that the NDP needs to be more about ideas and less about winning as many votes as possible.  Electoral reform is an idea, that if properly implemented would lead to much greater influence for the NDP and other smallish parties in Canada. The NDP can, and should be a party about ideas. As long as you can get your ideas put into action, who really cares which party actually implements the policy. The NDP has never come remotely close to forming a federal government in Canada, and I am not sure why Jack Layton thinks that they can given 75 years of failure. What the NDP has done in the past, and continue to do, is put forward good ideas, and good policy that will inevitably get taken up by other political parties hoping to steal some NDP thunder. Get the ideas out there, get the ideas implemented, and who cares whether or not it means you win a few more percentage points, or a few more seats in the House.

July 8, 2008 - Posted by caseyleonardsmith | Politics | , , , | 1 Comment

1 Comment »

  1. I have to respectfully disagree with Laxer. Even if one were to give up on the aspiration of forming government a political party still must fight for votes in order to remain relevant so that the good ideas of the party are in fact adopted by others. If a political party is viewed as unlikely to win seats there is little chance that they will have a real impact on political discourse or on the policy direction of other parties. I know that some might argue that the Green Party has had an impact on political discourse without being real electoral contenders but I would argue that general concerns about the environment (Gore, melting artic, 99% of climate change scientists shouting their concerns, etc.) and not the GPC per say have been the driving force and that the GPC have been the beneficiaries not the cause of the shift in perception and policies of the the mainstream parties.

    As adverse to change as many Canadians are there will come a day when all political parties will change, morph or die out. As a progressive Canadian, I have no interest in supporting a party that talks the talk during campaigns but never walks the walk when elected. The LPC has not been a truly progressive party since the 1970s. Even then, they were pushed to the left by a strong NDP that had a healthy seat count in the House of Commons.

    Laxer is so risk adverse that he would sooner maintain Paul Martin-style corporate liberals than see a stronger socially democratic party gain seats and push for needed policies such as electoral reform, real action on climate change, real action on a cities agenda (like affordable housing, public transit, etc.) a real fix to health care.

    He is content to mouth support for Dion’s brand of Artificial Opposition who refuse to vote down the Harper crew no matter how egregious the legislation (anti-democratic immigration reform, budget bill that is designed to limit the federal government’s fiscal capacity to respond to the needs of the country, etc.)

    Laxer is someone who comforts himself with progressive talk from his comfy tenured seat atop the ivory tower. He doesn’t really need what the NDP are fighting for so it is easy for him to jump on the LPC bandwagon whenever an election is in the offing.

    I would sooner vote out of hope and for real change than to have my vote wasted on a party that will simply use me and ignore my concerns should they be elected. That is what has and will continue to happen to progressive voters who vote for Dion’s Liberal Party of Canada.

    Comment by Jay | July 9, 2008 | Reply


Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »