RORY MCGOVERN
<Staff Writer>
Professor Craig Scott (MP for Toronto-Danforth) is a living example of the potential power of a good education. Mr. Scott is the New Democratic Party’s Democratic and Parliamentary Reform Critic and was kind enough to speak with the Obiter Dicta before an engaging presentation on Bill C-470. His portfolio inevitably engages his mind in questions about political theory, law, and the state of Canadian democracy. His insights into these topics are inspiring and reveal a forward-looking and rational approach to making political engagement more attractive to the Canadian electorate.
Mr. Scott values reasoned argument and a fair presentation of political opinions and relevant social information and facts. Some would argue that this is an approach to politics which is in stark contrast to the political ethos demonstrated by the Conservative Party.
Intentional irrationality and disinformation have been institutionalized by the Tories, who employ “information distortion” specialists in the PMO. Disturbingly, the existence of this political subterfuge has been openly admitted (albeit after a few too many drinks) by staffers at the PMO. The resulting quality of the rhetoric coming out of the PMO is poor and, as Mr. Scott observes, it is obstinately filtered through its instrumental effects in an “ends justify the means” approach to informing the Canadian public.
When asked about the effects of this kind of activity on the Canadian electorate, Mr. Scott observed several things. Firstly, “it signifies a period of democratic decay for Canadian democracy – a period we have been in for 6 years since the Conservatives took power. Secondly, it engenders a disengagement and alienation of the electorate. This alienation is deepening among young Canadians who feel less and less of a connection to institutional politics. The response of the government and the media is to turn to ‘celebrity’ in order to make politics more attractive and meaningful. Instead of making politics more meaningful, celebrity just makes politics more superficial.”
Mr. Scott’s vision of the future of political engagement sees various Canadian political actors playing a more meaningful role. Firstly, the media must do a more effective job of reporting on the real substance of political happenings in Ottawa. The focus on Question Period by the media is insufficient to properly inform the Canadian electorate as “question period is little more than political theatre.”
In addition, Canadian politicians need to find better ways to utilize the advances in social media which the rest of the world has been using to engage electorates in the democratic process. For the legal community, it is important to be critical of politicians and legislative proposals and find a strong enough voice to speak reason to power.
The endgame of this more meaningful engagement may lead to several different forms of participatory democracy in Canada. As Professor Scott notes, “Canada is far behind other democracies in experimenting and trying out different forms of participatory democracy”. One example of an experiment in a different form of participatory democracy has recently occurred in New Zealand. When drafting their Policing Act in 2007, the New Zealand government opened the legislation up to electors in a “wiki” form, where the electorate could make suggestions and edit the draft law. Perhaps more intuitive for Kiwis due to the anagrammatic relationship with “wikis,” Canada might consider utilizing this method of legislative drafting on an experimental basis as well.
As Scott notes, “one significant challenge to utilizing this kind of method for enhancing participatory democracy is that our current government does not really believe in making critical information available to the public.” Rather, Stephen Harper’s Conservatives intentionally obfuscate facts and relevant social information. When facts become thorns in the side of bad policy choices, the government feels as though it is more prudent to de-fund the organizations which gather those facts.
As a result, it seems that a necessary first step in engaging in meaningful experiments in participatory democracy would be to encourage our government to be more transparent and intellectually honest with both the Canadian electorate and other members of the House. Perhaps encouraging this of our government is the role that future lawyers should play when Osgoode releases us into a profession where we are ethically obliged to serve the public interest and do good wherever we can.