Panel data provided by Madison's Canadian Lumber Reporter.

Can we save Canada?

By Jack deWit

With a federal election now interfering with the Christmas holidays (notice the political correctness; it is Christmas and not the Holiday season), can we expect some surprises in politics as we do on gift opening on Christmas morning?

The opposition parties very strategically planned the timing for a non-confidence vote in the House of Commons. Furthermore, it may be the largest mistake PM Martin has made in his political career, for not agreeing with the opposition to delay the election until later into spring. In the five previous winter elections the governing party has been tossed out of office. What is so different this time that would not see history repeat itself? The attitude of Canadians towards politicians and the depression that comes with enduring long winters makes voters an unpredictable lot. Maybe it is the weather that encourages one to sit next to the fireplace rather than go out and vote. If the latter is a key component in this election, it only proves that a small percentage of Canadians control how we are governed. It may be sad, but factual, because under good conditions we are lucky to see 60% of the electorate actually go to the polls.

The blatant dishonesty and unaccountability of many politicians, is in all probability, the major reason the electorate is an unwilling partner on election day. There are serious federal policies and programs that infuriate a huge number of citizens. The continuing debate over native rights, the Quebec conundrum, the bilingual policies, the lack of equal representation by the provinces, the inequity in transfer payments, the immigration policies, the total lack of economic wisdom, the loss of Canadian culture (believe it or not there really was one), the divisive Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and a host of other federal policies have disinterested the public. The list has been endless for decades and is getting longer rather than shorter.

There is an old saying, “You can’t please all of the people all of the time, but you can please most of the people most of the time”. Politicians must be honest, devoted, and represent their constituents, even if it means being not being “politically correct” or controversial at times. Only a coward submits to the political correctness theory.

So when will an election ever change the way Canadians are governed? The resolution, if there is one, is to develop a common incentive to maintain Canada as a confederation of provinces. Unfortunately, with our regional cultural diversity, reality dictates finding such unity is next to impossible. When Canada came into being there were basically two cultures; the French and the English. Since then the federal government has opened its doors to practically any person who wished to settle here. Now we have such a mix of global cultures that the bonding element in confederation is lost. It may sound racist but, in my opinion, many new citizens are more interested in preserving their own culture within Canada than becoming part of the Canadian culture. They have the right you say; so do the founders of this great country! There are many, who after years in this country, still cannot speak English or French fluently at a conversational level. There are those who think that Canada should not be a melting pot. Well just maybe that is why we, and many other countries, are subjected to “culture shock” that is creating an unwelcome environment. Just check out the European countries that are experiencing immigration related dissent.

If our government cannot keep this country together it must then explore an alternative solution would be to split into smaller, more manageable states. It would be more sensible to go through such a peaceful transition than to continue on as is until the animosity results in a revolution.

There are many who may think this writer is total insane, but I challenge those who are quick to criticize to analyze the pros and cons of converting Canada into more geographically and culturally responsible regions. It is a viable option. Economically each territory would be more responsible for developing policies that would be beneficial to its peoples. The reimbursement from resources would remain within its boundaries. The language debate would be much easier to administer reaping huge savings in most states. Trade agreements, and disagreements, could be negotiated with the involvement of those directly concerned with the products. Examples here may include: the softwood dispute, the west coast fisheries, the control of exported energy resources, and perhaps the most controversial issue would be the outsourcing of jobs.

The Bloc has been very successful in getting Ottawa’s attention. They have instituted many policies that don’t fit into confederation, but benefit those in Quebec. What is more, this has assisted Quebec in being acknowledged by Ottawa and benefiting from federal resources.

What we lack in western Canada is a strong organization that is willing to coordinate and negotiate the options of encouraging an independent western union. Such an alliance of western support may very well result in Ottawa becoming more understanding to all the regions of Canada. Providing legislation that would reflect and respect Canada’s founder’s history could become part of the uniting bond. Just perhaps we could force the hand of hackneyed federal politicians to find some common ground that all Canadians could justify as a reason to maintain our present confederation.

The one positive, if there are any good aspects to this election, is that we all have almost two months to debate and think of the issues that may persuade us to get out on a cold January day and cast our ballot.

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home