Recently I lamented the US
Supreme Court's legitimization of the heinous process of gerrymandering
-- the rigging of the boundary-setting of political constituencies in
each state by the party in power so that even unpopular incumbents are
guaranteed re-election and so that most voters are effectively
disenfranchised -- and I suggested any country whose judiciary could
find such a travesty was constitutional was effectively no longer a
democracy.
Democracy Watch is a
10-year-old non-partisan, non-profit Canadian organization whose
mission is "to empower Canadians in their roles as voters, citizens,
taxpayers, consumers and shareholders, and help reform Canadian
government and business institutions to bring them into line with the
realities of a modern, working democracy." Its Directors have worked
closely with Ralph Nader. It played a significant role in the
introduction and passage in Canada (this January) of one of the most
progressive campaign finance reform laws
in the world, effectively ending the ability of corporations, unions
and special interest groups to fund and hence 'buy' political parties,
campaigns or candidates.
Proportionate representation and similar reforms to ensure government is fully representative of voter interests.
An accountability process to track performance against
election promises, responsibility for government action, and protection
for whistle-blowers.
Complete prohibition of financial and other involvement by
corporations, unions and special interest groups in the electoral
process at all levels, and creation of a 'level playing field' to
prevent rich and powerful individuals from unduly influencing political
decisions.
Meaningful mechanisms for citizen participation in government policy development and decision-making.
Restrictions on and full disclosure of the activities of lobbyists.
Development of an active, practical civics curriculum for all citizens.
Increased scrutiny and prevention of corporate waste, fraud, abuse and misrepresentation.
Increased accountability of the judiciary to the public.
Removal of protection under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for corporations.
Citizen-controlled, full-access scrutiny of government efficiency, spending and purchasing decisions.
Strengthening of ethical codes and enforcement for government officials and the public service.
Citizen oversight for the management and use of public assets.
Recognition of the inalienable public ownership of the airwaves.
Strengthening of citizens' ability to obtain timely, accurate access all information on government activities.
Public funding and organizational support for consumer watchdog and advocacy organizations.
Recognizing employee ownership and increasing employee control of pension funds and assets.
Increasing the participation of all shareholders in corporate decision-making.
Increasing the rights of non-shareholder stakeholders
(employees, community etc.) in corporations, and extending
participatory mechanisms available to, and accountability to, these
stakeholders.
Setting minimum standards for corporations to invest in the communities in which they do business.
Encouraging the creation of local currency systems (LETS) to support community economic development and community service.
Today, I am proud to report that the Canadian Supreme Court rejected a constitutional challenge
to Canada's election law, and specifically a clause which severely
limits political advertising by special interest groups during election
campaigns. The challenge was brought by the arch-right-wing National
Citizens Coalition, an organization that espouses reducing government
authority, business deregulation, reducing taxes, 'family values' and
other conservative agenda programs, some of them quite extreme. The NCC
was planning on a huge conservative-issues promotion during the
upcoming Canadian federal election campaign. The NCC used to be led by
-- surprise! -- federal
Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper. Had the constitutional
challenge been successful, it would have made a mockery of the new
campaign finance reform laws. And the case was problematic: It's
difficult to say with great clarity what constitutes 'political
advertising' when it doesn't come from a political party or candidate,
and hard to argue why ads that are acceptable at other times unduly
influence public opinion during elections. And the very principle of
banning advertising that isn't fraudulent is troubling. But the Court
struck a delicate balance, and their argument in support of their
decision is compelling, pragmatic, and, well, utterly Canadian.
I'm not bragging, though. Canada still lags behind most European
countries in the introduction of proportional representation, and
majority governments in Canada have a frightening amount of power
(though so far, except for the Mulroneydebacle,
they have had the sense not to abuse it). The Liberals have been in
power so long that they got lazy and complacent and allowed some civil
servants to rob them (and Canadian taxpayers) blind. And as I've reported,
an unholy alliance of animal testing labs, corporate farmers and
hunting organizations have been able to strong-arm Canada's unelected
Senate three times to scuttle a modest, government-supported
strengthening of Canada's 100-year-old, shamefully inadequate animal
protection laws.
But compared to the situation in some countries I need not mention, we don't look too bad.
Postscript: Today the Canadian government also approved the over-the-counter sale of the 'Morning After Pill' without a prescription. In George Bush's repressive America, of course, this is illegal. But it is legal in America to buy semi-automatic weapons, and you don't need a prescription for them. Is it just me, or that seriously twisted?
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts 
