Thursday, December 3, 2009

Eroding Democracy and General Wishwashiness

I have been following this debate on the HST in BC and Ontario. To be honest, at this point, I don’t see what the huge hoopla is about.

But, I did notice something that bothered me quite a bit. Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party have said they don’t agree with the HST but they will vote for it in the House of Commons.

What…

The…

Hell?

The thoughts on this are that he is voting for it as if he votes against is it may force us into another election. And currently, if they hold another election the polls indicate that the conservatives may gain in seats and get a major. So basically, he is voting that way not out of Liberal party beliefs, but out of political maneuvering. Oh, and one more thing, each Liberal MP had to vote the same way.

This is exactly the problem with politics these days. I am not a Liberal and I don’t even know if I agree with his thoughts on the HST. But regardless, those that are Liberal, and those that voted in Liberal MPs trust in their MPs to vote using those values and principles. By not doing so, the Liberal Party is in fact eroding the democratic process. They are voting not for the people, but for the Liberal Party itself. Their actions forward only the Party, not the People. How can you trust a Party (any of them) that vote simply for political maneuvering? The Liberal Party is not alone here – you have seen the Conservatives and NDP do this too. Perhaps the Green Party will in the future – but at least the deserve a shot at showing the country what true democracy is.

I can promise you I will never act this way if you vote for me. I will never change my vote just for political maneuvering. I will vote according to the principles and values that my constituents voted me in for – end of story. That’s how democracy should work.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Our View of Beauty

Our problem with the environment is, in part, caused by our view of beauty. In ways, what we see beautiful in the public eye comes from a time about 60 years ago. A time where lawns were green, manicured, and lined with a white picket fence. Everyone’s car was shiny for their drive to work and everyone’s flowerbeds were evenly spaced. It sounds nice, and if I lived in that time, I would probably be an advocate of that lifestyle.

But we are not living in that time. We are living in a time where our very environment is threatened by choices we make. Small engine yard devices, like lawn mowers and hedge trimmers, have been reported to pollute as much as a car driven 700 kilometers in one hour of operation. Do we really need that perfectly mowed lawn? Individually, this may not seem to be that much, but as a country this is a whole lot of unneeded emissions. It’s funny, when our government was figuring out how and if it could meet our Kyoto requirements it never considered things like this. They could not imagine asking people not to mow. They were looking for big, uncomfortable, and costly solutions instead.

I read an article yesterday that illustrated this concept nicely. It was about several families that had decided to dry their clothes on a clothes line instead of in a dryer at their residences in the suburbs. Well, this had many neighbors very upset. They found the clothes lines aesthetically displeasing – or in other words ‘ugly’. They wanted laws enacted to prevent clothes lines, etc. This is counter productive to the situation we are in. These people were trying to save electricity by not using their dryer (the green angle was shown in the article). It’s a good idea – why waste energy doing what the sun will do for you. But the neighbors are stuck in an antiquated and dangerous idea of beauty. I have seen similar articles about those who install solar panels: ‘They are an eyesore’, etc.

We need to redefine our view of beautiful. Why is it that we can see the beauty in the wild grasses on an alpine meadow but not in our neighbor’s un-mowed yard? They are essentially the same thing. Why is it that the sail of a sailboat is pleasing to see, yet your neighbors white blouse drying on a line in their yard is ‘disgusting? Why is it that the reflection of the sun off a cool mountain lake is breath taking, but the same reflection off a solar panel array is ‘Hideous’? The reason is simple…we have antiquated ideas about what beauty is in our public spaces. If we shift our views on beauty, we can shift our habits to the positive for our country and our planet. Let us see our neighbors’ un-mowed lawn as that alpine meadow and cherish it! Let us praise the dandelion on his lawn as a badge of being chemical free! Let us see that clothesline as the billowing white sails of progress! Let us honour that solar panel as a gleaming symbol of independence! Let us imagine a whole land where we are proud of our public spaces that look like alpine meadows.

‘But!’ you might be asking ‘What can be done in government to help in this effort’. Other than education, we can look at each new law and make certain that no law favors Aesthetics over Environment and Conservation. We can look at old laws that violate this and repeal them. It’s that simple. We need to bolster national pride in these things. In 50 years, history will judge which countries made the change elegantly to a sustainable future and which were dragged kicking and screaming. My Canada, the Canada I love, and the Canada I wish for, will be the leader in these efforts showing clear vision and wisdom.

Let’s start it here in British Columbia Southern Interior!

Let’s be the change Canada needs!

Monday, November 16, 2009

Change is on the Wind

I remember back in 1992-93 when the Reform Party was picking up steam. There was change on the wind in those days. I was a big fan of the Reform Party and remained so until they melted back into the Conservative soup. There was a grass roots base to the Reform Party that was very attractive and its one of the same things that called me to the Green party.

Anyway, Jim Gouk was the Reform candidate at that time in my home riding (West Kootenay – Revelstoke at the time) and I was discussing with a friend that I was going to vote for Jim Gouk and the Reform Party. My friend got this curious look on his face and replied with an even more curious response:

‘I like the Reform Party, but I am not going to vote for them because they will never get in’

What a very strange statement. The implication being that you should only vote for who you think everyone else will vote for. Like somehow, if you vote for the guy that is likely to get in, he will owe you a favor or something. It is such a wrong way to vote and flies in the face of what true democracy should be. You should vote for the candidate you believe in …even if he or she gets only your vote. Voting for what you believe in is what makes positive change. Even if your candidate doesn’t get in, the other parties will notice any votes they got and they will perhaps adapt policies going forward as a result.

Anyway, despite the voting strategies of my good friend, Jim Gouk and the Reform party did win that seat in 1993. How did this happen? Well people believed in it and voted strongly on what they believed. There was change in the wind.

I can feel that change in the wind again. And again, there will be those that say ‘Don’t vote for the Green Party, they will never get in!’ But people believe in protecting their environment AND their economy. They believe in the Green Party and they will strongly vote for their beliefs. British Columbia Southern Interior can lead the charge in the change our country needs. With your vote we will win!

Monday, November 2, 2009

They are all Politicians!


A colleague of mine has a saying every time it comes to a federal election:

'No matter who you vote for, a politician gets in'

It's funny, but there is a certain amount of truth to it. The government doesn't seem to operate all that differently no matter who is in power. There is a reason for this - you voted for a politician. Politicians are concerned with getting reelected so they make popular decisions when in office (or at least leading up to the next election). They will break promises, go back on their word, and act in ways that are not the height of ethics - just to get those votes. In essence, they are not *serving* their country - they are milking it.

'But Bryan', you are thinking, 'Aren't you just a politician as well?'. It's a valid thought - though there is a big difference. I hate politics. I am not running in the next election because being a member of parliament has been a life long dream. Far from it. I am not in it for money, or power, or glory. If I could see others had things well in hand, I would be happy to leave things as they are. But it doesn't appear to me that way. I think there needs to be changes in how things are run in this country. We are facing some of the most unique challenges in Canadian history - and we are failing. My only reason for running in the next election is that I believe I can help fix this. I will not make decisions based on whether or not it will help or hinder me in getting re-elected. I would rather fix what is broken regardless of how unpopular that might end up being.

In short, I am not a politician - nor will I become one.

That is my solemn promise!