Roger Varley has been in the news business almost 40 years with The Canadian Press/Broadcast News, Uxbnridge Times-Journal, Richmond Hill Liberal and Uxbridge Cosmos. Co-winner with two others of CCNA national feature writing award. In Scout movement over 30 years, almost 25 as a leader. Took Uxbridge youths to World Jamboree in Holland. Involved in community theatre for 20 years as actor, director, playwright, stage manager etc. Born in England, came to Canada at 16, lived most of life north and east of Toronto with a five-year period in B.C.
Okay, so I'm flip-flopping
Okay, so I'm flip-flopping
It seems that my brief brush with politics last year has had an effect on me. As many politicians do, I'm about to flip-flop.
I wrote not long ago that I would not vote again in any provincial or federal elections, unless, perhaps, there was an independent candidate. My argument was that it doesn't matter who wins in a riding, their allegiance is not to the electorate but to the party they represent and when they get to the legislature or to Parliament, they vote as directed by their leaders, not their constituents.
In this current federal election, however, I will be voting. The problem I face is deciding who to vote for - and I'm sure I am not alone in that predicament. One thing I know for sure: I will be voting for a candidate and not a party. Which leads to another problem: of the four declared candidates in our riding, there are two about whom I know nothing and one I know only a little about. And I have just five weeks to find out about them and determine whether they have what I think are the necessary qualities and capabilities to be a member of Parliament. Given that in the recent municipal election not one candidate showed up at my door, I don't hold out much hope of seeing any of the candidates in this election.
Being something of a political junkie, I know to a fair degree what the parties' positions are on various issues. What I want to know are the candidates' own thoughts and what they can personally bring to the table.
Now you are asking why have I flip-flopped and decided to cast a vote after all. The answer is that, for me at least, there is an issue of such importance that I cannot ignore it by staying away from the ballot box. That issue is the fact that the Conservative government has been found in contempt of Parliament. But, of more importance to me is that our current representative, International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda, has been found individually in contempt of Parliament.
The government was found in contempt because it would not provide the necessary information on certain spending proposals that would allow Parliament (and Parliament does include the Opposition) to do its job properly. If I wanted to be charitable, I suppose I could characterize that denial of information as political gamesmanship and brinkmanship, something we came to expect on an almost daily basis in the last Parliament. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Harper has not apologized for his government being found in contempt. Instead, he shrugged it off with his infamous “you win some, you lose some” remark, as though he'd just lost a pickup game of hockey.
Ms. Oda, however, was found in contempt for lying to Parliament. I don't think it comes as any surprise to us that candidates lie during election campaigns and make promises they have no intention of keeping. I'm not saying that's good, but we are so used to it that we've come to expect it. But I do not expect an elected representative to lie to Parliament.
I have covered enough sessions of the Ontario legislature to know that politicians on all sides bluster, sidestep, dodge and weave in debates, during Question Period and in committees. But one thing they are not permitted or expected to do is lie.
That is why it is an egregious sin for any member to accuse another in the House of being a “liar” or of “lying” and any member doing so is expelled until such time as they apologize. It's also why members are referred to as “honourable” members.
Ms. Oda quite simply lied to a Parliamentary committee and, by extension, to Parliament itself. And having been found in contempt, she has not even offered an apology for lying. Her explanations regarding the whole sordid affair have been attempts to deflect attention away from the lie by harping on the issue of who made what decision and why.
I believe many Canadians have come to have low expectations of their political representatives and possibly for good reason. Scandals, shady dealings and other unsavoury actions have pretty much stuck to all the major parties at one time or another and, although we might be temporarily shocked, we're not really surprised.
But somewhere, sometime, we have to draw the line and for me the line that must not be crossed is lying to Parliament.
Tell me, am I wrong?
