Government Found in Contempt of Parliment

[Dave_ON]

You know that I'm right, that the Speaker declared this a matter of privilege, that our constitution contains no ability for the Executive to withhold information from Parliament, and that quite the opposite, our system was explicitly founded on the notion of Parliament's supremacy over the Crown.

The very fact that you don't even bother to supply an argument suggests that the Tory's position is weak, if not outright non-existence.

While you are quite correct whether or not the government has a leg to stand on at this point in entirely immaterial. The average Canadian seems to lack a fundamental understanding of our system of government as they continue to allow this anathema against the foundation of our society to continue unopposed. We've all seen how very successful the CPC can be when it comes to propaganda, and some Canadians are willing to buy it. They'll let him away with practically anything simply because he's not a Liberal and that's truly sad.

[ToadBrother]

While you are quite correct whether or not the government has a leg to stand on at this point in entirely immaterial. The average Canadian seems to lack a fundamental understanding of our system of government as they continue to allow this anathema against the foundation of our society to continue unopposed. We've all seen how very successful the CPC can be when it comes to propaganda, and some Canadians are willing to buy it. They'll let him away with practically anything simply because he's not a Liberal and that's truly sad.

I don't know how successful they've been. They've pretty much taken a permanent hit from the last prorogation. I can tell you this, if I were your average Tory, I wouldn't want to fight an election over Parliament's rights and privileges. Yes, maybe the Tories could bafflegab the public, but then again, maybe they couldn't. Worse, what if we get almost exactly the same Parliament we got in 2008. Thus we've just fought an election, the matter is still unresolved.

I'm hopeful that the Tories back down, but Harper's a wild card, a dangerous player who does odd and sometimes seemingly irrational things, always with the intent of taking advantage of instability.

[Wilber]

As the fairly apt saying goes, whoever wins the government will still get in. We live under a mutually assured dictatorship.

I agree, the "will of Parliament" has little to do with it, party leaders will still have the same power of political life and death over their caucus, meaning it is in fact, their will, not Parliament's.

[ToadBrother]

I agree, the "will of Parliament" has little to do with it, party leaders will still have the same power of political life and death over their caucus, meaning it is in fact, their will, not Parliament's.

The power of caucus solidarity is something the voter's could fix if they wanted to. It would have been immensely more difficult if the Speaker had permitted this notion that the Crown has even a limited capacity to defy Parliament to restore Parliament's supremacy.

Political parties will never willingly weaken themselves, but an involved and active electorate that made its will known personally to its representatives, that's something else entirely. Maybe it will never happen, Western democracies of all stripes are being undermined by apathy.

[Keepitsimple]

Funny how the "will of Parliament" and "contempt for Parliament" is determined by the number of seats the government holds. Currently the Conservatives are only 10 or 11 seats short of a majority. Theoretically, a government could be only one short and be "defying the will" but on the other hand, have two more seats and not be defying the will of Parliament. Nothing changes but the numbers.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The power of caucus solidarity is something the voter's could fix if they wanted to. It would have been immensely more difficult if the Speaker had permitted this notion that the Crown has even a limited capacity to defy Parliament to restore Parliament's supremacy.

Political parties will never willingly weaken themselves, but an involved and active electorate that made its will known personally to its representatives, that's something else entirely. Maybe it will never happen, Western democracies of all stripes are being undermined by apathy.

The political parties will not, but in this case Parliament will. This will become a firestorm, Harper will claim security reasons and the opposition will claim privilege until they are blue in the face. The result will be a media marvel! I will enjoy watching how this unfolds.

[ToadBrother]

Funny how the "will of Parliament" and "contempt for Parliament" is determined by the number of seats the government holds. Currently the Conservatives are only 10 or 11 seats short of a majority. Theoretically, a government could be only one short and be "defying the will" but on the other hand, have two more seats and not be defying the will of Parliament. Nothing changes but the numbers.

Why is it funny? Where a government has a majority, that majority represents the will of Parliament, and thus, for the most part, issues like the Afghan document issue cannot logically arise. Your point is pretty vapid, kind of like complaining "How come nobody complains there's no orange juice until the bottle is empty?"

But make note here, even in situations involving sensitive documents during majority governments, committees that have Opposition MPs have still found ways to review such documents that satisfied security requirements and still maintained the key issue of Parliamentary privilege.

So I'm not sure what you're complaint is.

[Keepitsimple]

Why is it funny? Where a government has a majority, that majority represents the will of Parliament, and thus, for the most part, issues like the Afghan document issue cannot logically arise. Your point is pretty vapid, kind of like complaining "How come nobody complains there's no orange juice until the bottle is empty?"

But make note here, even in situations involving sensitive documents during majority governments, committees that have Opposition MPs have still found ways to review such documents that satisfied security requirements and still maintained the key issue of Parliamentary privilege.

So I'm not sure what you're complaint is.

It's not a complaint...it's an observation..... that a swing of two seats can be the difference between a take-charge government and a two year saga depicting the Government as an evil empire.

Edited April 28, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[eyeball]

The power of caucus solidarity is something the voter's could fix if they wanted to.

I'm reminded of all the error reports I've sent over the years that are supposed to make my computers operating system and programs work better.

It would have been immensely more difficult if the Speaker had permitted this notion that the Crown has even a limited capacity to defy Parliament to restore Parliament's supremacy.

Political parties will never willingly weaken themselves, but an involved and active electorate that made its will known personally to its representatives, that's something else entirely. Maybe it will never happen, Western democracies of all stripes are being undermined by apathy.

I think you're confusing apathy with resigned futility. The way you use it definitely makes it sound like a criticism against people who don't share your enthusiasm.

Perhaps Milliken's ruling will be a clarion call to independents. If they can link this event with the opportunity it offers voters to establish themselves as being supreme to Parliament...it could be like making the jump from Windows to Ubuntu.

[ToadBrother]

It's not a complaint...it's an observation..... that a swing of two seats can be the difference between a take-charge government and an evil Harper Empire.

It's worked pretty well for over 200 hundred years now (prior to that political parties as such didn't exist in the Westminster system). It would still cause a justifiable firestorm if the Government refused to give the committee a peak at the unredacted documents if the Tories had a majority, but it couldn't be a matter of privilege.

But as some commentators have pointed out, it seems clear we're destined for minority governments for some time to come. Whoever forms a government is going to need to deal with Parliament, and visa versa, so we might as well get to know how the Westminster system is supposed to function, as opposed to the bizarre presidential model that the Tories seemed to be suggesting we had. This idea that the only tool that Parliament should have to beat a Government with being confidence votes is idiotic, and would risk severe destabilization of our system, particularly as we seem set for minorities for some to come.

[ToadBrother]

I think you're confusing apathy with resigned futility. The way you use it definitely makes it sound like a criticism against people who don't share your enthusiasm.

No, it's apathy. If the voters wanted a different result, then vote a bunch of independents. There's nothing stopping the House from being filled with 308 independents. I wouldn't recommend it, having read on how Parliament functioned in the century after the Glorious Revolution (there is a reason that parties evolved in the first place), but all it takes is for the voters to put a check mark beside the leading independent in their riding as opposed to a CPC, LPC or NDP member.

[Wild Bill]

No, it's apathy. If the voters wanted a different result, then vote a bunch of independents. There's nothing stopping the House from being filled with 308 independents. I wouldn't recommend it, having read on how Parliament functioned in the century after the Glorious Revolution (there is a reason that parties evolved in the first place), but all it takes is for the voters to put a check mark beside the leading independent in their riding as opposed to a CPC, LPC or NDP member.

And if my granny had wheels she wouldn't bump her ass when she hopped, TB! The average voter just isn't well enough informed and frankly has no desire to change that!

I agree that Harper should be forced to reveal the documents. If some BQ member becomes a security leak then great! We'd have a perfect excuse to hang him for treason! Harper has to assume that a sworn-in MP has integrity and will abide by any security cautions. He's not being asked to publish the documents in the Toronto Star. He's being told to reveal them to members of Parliament. He has to give MPs the respect they deserve for their position, even if some are obviously rather "dodgy".

The difficulty for Ignatieff is that this is a very weak issue for an election. Polls have shown that as far as Canada having turned Taliban types over to an Afghan government that may have tortured them, Canadians really couldn't care less! As a people we are not all dewy eyed and idealistic over an enemy who has violated the Geneva convention almost constantly with terrible atrocities. Canadians tend to be practical in such matters. Only ivory tower academics who think that such an enemy can be reasoned with and gotten to sing Kumbaya in the international choir rate this issue as election-worthy.

Ignatieff knows this and so he has been forced to try another approach. It's not the torture, it's the fact that Harper wants to cover it up 'cuz he's an old meanie with no respect for Parliament!

This is a much harder row to hoe, even if it's true! Ignatieff will have a hard time convincing die hard Tory voters to switch to him over such an issue. Many swing voters will think that it is just more political rhetoric, that Ignatieff is stretching the point and just trying once again to demonize Harper.

That's leaves only the Liberal supporters who started out with him in the first place!

I understand your outrage over the issue, TB. Still, you only feel that way because you have a much deeper understanding and passion for ethics and politics than most folks. What's more, suppose many people DO agree with you! Is this enough reason to switch your vote to Ignatieff? Could a voter who agrees with Harper on most everything except this ONE issue comfortably switch his vote to the Liberals, who he agrees with on ONLY this ONE issue?

I'm predicting we'll hear a lot more theatre from both sides and they will come to a compromise within the Speaker's deadline. Then each will claim credit for saving us from an unwanted election.

[bloodyminded]

And if my granny had wheels she wouldn't bump her ass when she hopped, TB! The average voter just isn't well enough informed and frankly has no desire to change that!

Polls have shown that as far as Canada having turned Taliban types over to an Afghan government that may have tortured them, Canadians really couldn't care less! As a people we are not all dewy eyed and idealistic over an enemy who has violated the Geneva convention almost constantly with terrible atrocities. Canadians tend to be practical in such matters. Only ivory tower academics who think that such an enemy can be reasoned with and gotten to sing Kumbaya in the international choir rate this issue as election-worthy.

Beautiful, these two passages, the second perfectly underscoring the first; albeit, I believe, unintentionally.

[ToadBrother]

I'm predicting we'll hear a lot more theatre from both sides and they will come to a compromise within the Speaker's deadline. Then each will claim credit for saving us from an unwanted election.

Judging by the stagnant polling, you're probably right. And that's fine. There are any number of compromises that could be made that would satisfy both the recognition of Parliament's supremacy in this matter and the obvious issues of security, both our own and those of our allies.

To my mind, whether Harper decides to flip his finger at the Speaker or not, the battle has been won. He might be able to delay this by way of asking the Supreme Court for a decision, but it would only be a delay. Pretty much all the experts are in agreement that the SC won't override Parliament's will on a question of Parliamentary privilege. He could force an election, but the polls indicate stagnation, so we'd simply end up in the same place after wasting a few hundred million precious dollars. I think compromise is likely.

What makes April 27th, 2010 so important, whether the Opposition goes the distance or caves, is that no less than the Speaker of the House, a man who occupies the most venerable of positions in our system of government, has once again reiterated that Parliament cannot be defied by the Crown. For me, it is a vindication of a system that I know and truly believe, for all its warts, is one of the best governing systems ever created.

Honestly I really couldn't give a damn if a few Taliban got black eyes. I'm not saying I advocate torture, but come on. Afghanistan is a battlefield, and in battle things happen that, while technically wrong, have to be accepted. For me, the issue was never about Afghan prisoners, but always about the single most important principle in the Westminster system of government; that the Crown cannot act in defiance of Parliament, and must always answer when Parliament demands it.

Edited April 28, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Wilber]

The power of caucus solidarity is something the voter's could fix if they wanted to. It would have been immensely more difficult if the Speaker had permitted this notion that the Crown has even a limited capacity to defy Parliament to restore Parliament's supremacy.

Political parties will never willingly weaken themselves, but an involved and active electorate that made its will known personally to its representatives, that's something else entirely. Maybe it will never happen, Western democracies of all stripes are being undermined by apathy.

Once a party has a majority neither the electorate or Parliament count. During the last BC election the provincial liberals claimed they had no intention of bringing in an HST then began negotiations with the federal government to do just that three days after the election and now invoking closure to impose it. There has been no public apathy on this issue with over 80% of voters saying they are against it and a petition that everyone says couldn't succeed looking very much like it will. Liberal MLA's have turned a deaf ear to their constituents, either not caring about their wishes or too afraid of their party leader to stand up for them.

Local federal MLA's justify voting for it in Parliament by saying they did so because the provincial government wants it. Bull crap, they voted for it because their leaders told them to. Who the F do they represent, their own leaders or the provincial government? It sure as hell isn't their constituents. Useless tits, all of them. Regardless of how one feels about this tax, they have been disenfranchised by a bunch of A holes. Provincial and Federal.

The "will of Parliament" is a bad joke.

[ToadBrother]

Once a party has a majority neither the electorate or Parliament count. During the last BC election the provincial liberals claimed they had no intention of bringing in an HST then began negotiations with the federal government to do just that three days after the election and now invoking closure to impose it. There has been no public apathy on this issue with over 80% of voters saying they are against it and a petition that everyone says couldn't succeed looking very much like it will. Liberal MLA's have turned a deaf ear to their constituents, either not caring about their wishes or too afraid of their party leader to stand up for them.

They may have circled the wagons, but I wouldn't want to be Colin Hansen or Gordon Campbell during caucus meetings. The pundits are now pretty much in agreement that there's no way in hell that the BC Liberals will be running for re-election with Campbell, and Hansen, who was one of the favorites as a possible successor is just as screwed. There can be little doubt that BC Liberal MLAs are furious and frightened, but like a trapped animal, they'll lash out at whoever threatens them first before they chew off the leg that holds them down.

Yes, technically a majority can defy the will of the electorate, but it does so at its own risk. I think the HST, along with what seems likely to be some pretty damning testimony during the Basi-Virk trial will basically wipe out any prospects for re-election in 2013. The HST looks to be the Liberal's Waterloo. They've managed to come back from some pretty unpopular decisions in the past, but any government that defies the will of the people to the extent that the BC Liberals are with the HST might as well put the noose around their neck and jump.

Local federal MLA's justify voting for it in Parliament by saying they did so because the provincial government wants it. Bull crap, they voted for it because their leaders told them to. Who the F do they represent, their own leaders or the provincial government? It sure as hell isn't their constituents. Useless tits, all of them. Regardless of how one feels about this tax, they have been disenfranchised by a bunch of A holes. Provincial and Federal.

The "will of Parliament" is a bad joke.

But the will of the people isn't. The BC Liberals are in a popularity tailspin very reminiscent of the last few years of the Mulroney Conservatives in Ottawa. In both cases an unpopular tax became the flash point for voter anger and frustration. Obviously Campbell is betting that once the new tax and the payoff the Feds gave the Province beginning showing on the books, and the economy continues to improve, they'll somehow be able to buy off voters, but I think they have substantially miscalculated, and worse, cannot easily extricate themselves even if they wanted to, because the agreement with the Feds includes penalty clauses that would cost the Province at least one hundred million dollars if they changed their mind. Everything they do now is being interpreted badly by the electorate.

In short, it's almost irrelevant how they manage the Legislature. Unless those polling figures improve over the next 12 months, they'll be paralyzed by leadership decisions, which can actually do even more damage to a party that's ailing in the polls.

[eyeball]

For me, the issue was never about Afghan prisoners,

It's weirdly ironic how apathetic you are towards an issue that's apparently provoked the biggest crisis the Westminster system of government has faced since the 1600's and that's left you excited to the point of giddiness.

but always about the single most important principle in the Westminster system of government; that the Crown cannot act in defiance of Parliament, and must always answer when Parliament demands it.

Big whoop-di-do, the fact so many Canadians and our government can just shrug off allegations that we're complicit in torture and the abuse of fundamental human rights reinforces my sense that our system is way behind the times highly over-rated and needs a major upgrade.

Edited April 28, 2010 by eyeball

[ToadBrother]

It's weirdly ironic how apathetic you are towards an issue that's apparently provoked the biggest crisis the Westminster system of government has faced since the 1600's and that's left you excited to the point of giddiness.

I don't think it's particularly ironic. I'm quite sure that many of Parliament's objections to Charles I's exploits were equally frivolous and intemperate. It's not the substance of the argument that bothers me, it's the idea that the Government isn't ultimately answerable to Parliament even in some limited way.

Frankly, I don't know how you could conduct any kind of offensive operation without some abuses.

Big whoop-di-do, the fact so many Canadians and our government can just shrug off allegations that we're complicit in torture and the abuse of fundamental human rights reinforces my sense that our system is way behind the times highly over-rated and needs a major upgrade.

Well of course, because your a very vocal, but ultimately vapid malcontent. You're right up there with Myata in my list of people around these parts who just sort of coast on autopilot. I've never taken you very seriously, simply because I think you're as inflexible as any of the slavish Harperites around these parts.

For myself, I'm contented that our constitution was upheld. As to the Taliban, they are a group of people in desperate need of killing. I only wish we could put more troops on the ground.

I can only imagine how someone like you would have been in WWI. "Oooh, but look how they beat up that German soldier when they captured his unit." "Well, you know, they did invade Belgium, France, Czechoslovakia, Poland and so on, and they are killing Jews by the millions..." "Oooh well, that don't matter, because some guy got a few broken bones. Our democracy is broken, we need a new system of government so that no enemy combatant will ever get beaten up again."

You remind me of those very earnest, very deluded people that join the Marxist-Leninist Party. You mean well, but you couldn't be more detached from reality than if you dropped acid twelve times a day.

Edited April 28, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Handsome Rob]

They may have circled the wagons, but I wouldn't want to be Colin Hansen or Gordon Campbell during caucus meetings. The pundits are now pretty much in agreement that there's no way in hell that the BC Liberals will be running for re-election with Campbell, and Hansen, who was one of the favorites as a possible successor is just as screwed. There can be little doubt that BC Liberal MLAs are furious and frightened, but like a trapped animal, they'll lash out at whoever threatens them first before they chew off the leg that holds them down.

Yes, technically a majority can defy the will of the electorate, but it does so at its own risk. I think the HST, along with what seems likely to be some pretty damning testimony during the Basi-Virk trial will basically wipe out any prospects for re-election in 2013. The HST looks to be the Liberal's Waterloo. They've managed to come back from some pretty unpopular decisions in the past, but any government that defies the will of the people to the extent that the BC Liberals are with the HST might as well put the noose around their neck and jump.

A rational thinker would think so, but out here the James led NDP has stumbled so badly that to most voters, their is literally no alternative.

Most people still have a bad taste in their mouth's from Glen Clark, and she's just made it worse with things like candidates being pulled for anti-zionist agenda's, the 50% of candidates must be gay/female/non-white/etc policy, bringing back Moe S, candidates being booted for, "Being impressed with Slobodan Milosevic," and testifying to his defense, etc.

People were saying exactly the same things in the last election, but all they brought to the table was, "Gordon Campbell bad, NDP good." 3 years is a long way away.

[Wilber]

But the will of the people isn't. The BC Liberals are in a popularity tailspin very reminiscent of the last few years of the Mulroney Conservatives in Ottawa. In both cases an unpopular tax became the flash point for voter anger and frustration. Obviously Campbell is betting that once the new tax and the payoff the Feds gave the Province beginning showing on the books, and the economy continues to improve, they'll somehow be able to buy off voters, but I think they have substantially miscalculated, and worse, cannot easily extricate themselves even if they wanted to, because the agreement with the Feds includes penalty clauses that would cost the Province at least one hundred million dollars if they changed their mind. Everything they do now is being interpreted badly by the electorate.

In short, it's almost irrelevant how they manage the Legislature. Unless those polling figures improve over the next 12 months, they'll be paralyzed by leadership decisions, which can actually do even more damage to a party that's ailing in the polls.

But we have to put up with them for another three years. It's not just the provincial Liberals but our Federal MP's as well. Instead of listening to their constituents our MP's are just going along with the provincial government. Well if they just represent the provincial government, who the hell needs federal MP's.

For me, it isn't the tax so much as the fact the party I voted for the past four elections flat out lied to me, not just about the HST but the deficit as well. That's just insulting and if they think I am going to reward flagrant dishonesty with my vote they better think again. I would spoil my ballot first. I don't think I am the only one who feels this way and that is why there is so much opposition to this thing.

As I told my MLA, for the next three years I have to sit by and wait to see what his government does because I can't believe a word it says. He hasn't got back to me.

They may have circled the wagons, but I wouldn't want to be Colin Hansen or Gordon Campbell during caucus meetings. The pundits are now pretty much in agreement that there's no way in hell that the BC Liberals will be running for re-election with Campbell, and Hansen, who was one of the favorites as a possible successor is just as screwed. There can be little doubt that BC Liberal MLAs are furious and frightened, but like a trapped animal, they'll lash out at whoever threatens them first before they chew off the leg that holds them down.

So they may but they will still pass the legislation so big hairy deal whether they are eating each other in caucus. You are talking about internal party politics, not representing the electorate. Don't confuse the two.

[ToadBrother]

But we have to put up with them for another three years. It's not just the provincial Liberals but our Federal MP's as well. Instead of listening to their constituents our MP's are just going along with the provincial government. Well if they just represent the provincial government, who the hell needs federal MP's.

Well of course we do, because what's the alternative? Changing our horses every time we get upset. That's not a recipe for government, that's a recipe for chaos.

For me, it isn't the tax so much as the fact the party I voted for the past four elections flat out lied to me, not just about the HST but the deficit as well. That's just insulting and if they think I am going to reward flagrant dishonesty with my vote they better think again. I would spoil my ballot first. I don't think I am the only one who feels this way and that is why there is so much opposition to this thing.

If there were a way to force politicians, or anybody for that matter, to be honest, I think we would have heard about it by now.

As I told my MLA, for the next three years I have to sit by and wait to see what his government does because I can't believe a word it says. He hasn't got back to me.

Probably busy with the other thousand angry letters. But that's part of the process too. He may have to make the appropriate noises in public, but in private, you can be sure he's making his anger known. I doubt there are that many Liberal MLAs who are happy with any of this.

So they may but they will still pass the legislation so big hairy deal whether they are eating each other in caucus. You are talking about internal party politics, not representing the electorate. Don't confuse the two.

Suggest an alternative that doesn't end with potential problems worse than the problems they propose to solve.

[ToadBrother]

A rational thinker would think so, but out here the James led NDP has stumbled so badly that to most voters, their is literally no alternative.

Most people still have a bad taste in their mouth's from Glen Clark, and she's just made it worse with things like candidates being pulled for anti-zionist agenda's, the 50% of candidates must be gay/female/non-white/etc policy, bringing back Moe S, candidates being booted for, "Being impressed with Slobodan Milosevic," and testifying to his defense, etc.

People were saying exactly the same things in the last election, but all they brought to the table was, "Gordon Campbell bad, NDP good." 3 years is a long way away.

It is normally, but as we saw in the two years leading up to the 1993 Federal election, there is a line that a government can cross, and when it's crossed, time doesn't heal the wounds, it simply widens them. The BC Liberals are going to go through an incredibly arduous process beginning in about 12 to 18 months that's going to end with Campbell being given a private ultimatum to step down, and likely will also lead to the forced departure of a number of his key allies, in particular Rich Coleman, a minister whose incompetence has only been matched by his odd ability to retain key cabinet posts.

The BC Liberals are in huge trouble, and they've backed themselves into a corner. Just wait until the citizen's initiative succeeds and the Government is basically forced to ignore it. You haven't even begun to see the fear and anger that BC Liberals will be directing at Campbell.

[Wilber]

Well of course we do, because what's the alternative? Changing our horses every time we get upset. That's not a recipe for government, that's a recipe for chaos.

If there were a way to force politicians, or anybody for that matter, to be honest, I think we would have heard about it by now.

Probably busy with the other thousand angry letters. But that's part of the process too. He may have to make the appropriate noises in public, but in private, you can be sure he's making his anger known. I doubt there are that many Liberal MLAs who are happy with any of this.

Suggest an alternative that doesn't end with potential problems worse than the problems they propose to solve.

Or you can just be an apologist for a lack of integrity in government. Sorry but I am not one who believes in the end justifying the means. I can't abide liars and if you think I am bad you should meet my wife.

[Smallc]

The thing is, people, generally, are liars. It's been shown in studies that people lie many many more times per day than even they think. We can't expect anymore than that from politicians.

[ToadBrother]

Or you can just be an apologist for a lack of integrity in government. Sorry but I am not one who believes in the end justifying the means. I can't abide liars and if you think I am bad you should meet my wife.

The best you can do is to build institutions that can survive the lack of integrity. Our system, for the most part, does. Here in BC, the Government lied on two points (the HST, and just as importantly, the extent of the projected hole in government revenues) and they are now reaping the rewards of that deceit, just as the BC NDP did before them. They will learn as so many governments have before them that you can win the battle and still very much lose the war.

But, in reality, look at BC. There was a time when change in party meant every couple of generations, the right-wing party lost for a term, before it came back, and then it would be decades before one could expect another turn around. The BC Liberals will not likely see a fourth term, which suggests that the polarization which so long permitted the Socreds to dominate the political scene is ending. If the BC NDP cannot find a way to ditch its overtly socialist leanings as its counterparts in other provinces have largely done, it will give an opportunity to occupy the new center that has opened up. There is a real opportunity here for a third party to walk up the middle. I think, in a backwards way, the BC Liberals self-immolation over the HST may be one of the best things to come this province's way in a long time.

But back to the real point. There is not a system invented that can overcome dishonesty and self-interest. Even direct democracy is no protection, as the Athenian Republic found out when it lost the Peloponnesian War. It is human nature, sadly, to look out for one's self and those who one considers part of the tribe. As I said, the way to overcome that is not to vainly try to create some perfect system, but rather to build systems that can still provide reasonably good governance over the long term, and I think our system has done that.