Once Again, Denley Nails It

Now is the time to lead the country, not pick fights

As I've said before, I don't always agree with Denley, but he nails Harper to the wall on this one.

What in the world motivated Prime Minister Stephen Harper to bring his own government to the brink of defeat? Is he bored? Did he bet one of his colleagues that he could find a way to exhume Liberal leader Stéphane Dion and make him prime minister?

Harper's retraction of his pointlessly antagonistic plan to stop public financing of political parties puts an end to what will long be remembered as one of the dumbest stunts in the history of Canadian politics. Consider it. The guy wins an increased minority and everything is cruising along as he says the right things about the economy, until he comes up with virtually the only issue that could possibly unite the three opposition parties. Then, Harper dares his opponents to defeat his government over political party financing, something that matters not a whit to the average Canadian.

A Coalition!?!

Who would have thought it possible. A demoralized Liberal Party with a lame duck leader joining forces with the 'Dippers' to form our national government, kept in power by the Bloc. Truth is stranger than fiction.

I am part of the majority of Canadians who did not vote for the Conservative Party in the last election. I therefore feel a certain sense of elation at this window of opportunity for the opposition to unite and form a coalition. The question on the minds of many is: Can they pull it off? Cobbling something together, in the short term, although it seemed unimaginable 72 hours ago, I believe will actually prove to be the easy part. It is becoming clear that the 'throwing for the head' approach of Mr. Harper has so incensed the opposition that they now are beginning to dream the impossible dream of replacing the Conservatives. The much bigger question is: Can they rise above the absurd and childish partisanship bickering so prevalent in Canadian politics and be honest with us as they propose a new path for our country? Can they actually start behaving like the consensus building leaders that we need?

Last night, just in time for the supper hour newscasts, Stephen Harper delayed by one week a confidence vote in his government. The headlines read Harper Buys Time.

I have no doubt that his intent is to provide time to demonize the opposition as a bunch of sore losers who want to pervert the results of the last election. (Perhaps he needs to be reminded that a majority of Canadians voted for his opposition in Parliament, yet his party, with about 38% support, gets to run the government.)

I urge the opposition to take this gift of time to properly consider their strategy. What are they going to tell Canadians about how they shall govern as a coalition?

What I am looking for (which sounds laughable even as I try to write this next phrase), is honesty from my politicians, regardless of political stripe. I want politicians to stop pandering to me with nauseating sound bites and start explaining why they think their proposals are correct for our country. (Note to Jack: I know you like to sit around the kitchen table, and that you are trying to build your NDP 'brand', but, really, enough is enough.)

If a coalition is to have any hope of succeeding it must be based on an honest appraisal of the Canadian political scene. A joint statement needs to come from those who propose to lead the coalition that speaks to the aspirations of as broad a base of the electorate as possible. Here are some elements that need to be addressed by the coalition partners:

1. Speak directly to the 38% of voting Canadians who chose the Conservatives and respect their choice.
   
2. Recognize the immensity of the task before them. Acknowledge that they are seeking to do something that has never been done before.
3. Provide concrete examples of what they intend to do with a timetable.
4. Explain how they shall resolve conflict within the coalition.
5. State clearly that they do not want to continually play political chicken with the everyday lives of Canadians. State their intention to rise above childish political oneupmanship and make a solid commitment to principled governance.
   

All of those involved need to take some water with their wine as they proceed. Stephen Harper and the Conservatives may lose their grip on power because they began to act as if they had a majority when in fact they had no such thing. The Liberals and the NDP need to understand this concept if their proposed coalition is to work. With less than 20% of Canadians voting for the NDP, Jack Layton should not reasonably expect to be Canada's next Finance Minister. He needs to remember that more than a third of voters picked the Conservatives, and their right wing approach to economics. A potential coalition needs to present Canadians with a workable plan for the next couple of years and then actually walk the talk on conciliatory consensus building.

I know that this is wishful thinking in the extreme. I realize it is a lot to ask of politicians whose strongest motivation is to seek power instead of building consensus.

As has been said many times, a week is a lifetime in politics. Our politicians have that amount of time to make a case for truly representative political action in this country. I urge the opposition parties to use this time wisely, and change the face of politics in Canada.

Lets see what this next 'lifetime in politics' brings us. It should be an interesting ride. The Conservatives will be out in full spin mode as the PM urges his MPs to "use every tool at your disposal." Will Canadians continue to buy what they are selling?

(Since writing the above, Scott Reid has said it much better than I in a blog posted at the Globe & Mail.)

Retired Carleton professor tackles 'culture of greed'

I thoroughly enjoyed this brief article in this morning's Ottawa Citizen, not so much for what it said, but where it ultimately took me in my search for more information on this intriguing individual.

Retired Carleton professor tackles 'culture of greed'

Someone recently asked anthropology professor Ian Prattis what future society will look like.

"I told him we would have a lower standard of living," Mr. Prattis recalls. "Second car -- no. Cottage -- no. We'd have different infrastructure just to move around, because the infrastructure in our city is not sustainable."

Here are some lines that really intrigued me.

...he sees a lower standard of living as a good thing, in the long run.

...economics is "a failed science" and ... our society suffers from a pathological "culture of greed." He has asked the Nobel committee to stop awarding a prize for economics and give one for ecology instead.

We need to abandon greed and capitalism and return to our instinctive understanding of sustainable, he argues.

Greed "is pathological. It makes people ill. It kills them. It will kill any possibility of our species being alive on this planet past this century."

Once I read this, I knew that I wanted to learn more about Ian Prattis. It turns out, according to his website, that he is

a poet and scholar, peace and environmental activist - has trained with Masters in Buddhist, Vedic and Shamanic traditions and gives dharma talks, seminars and retreats around the world.

He is the founder of Friends for Peace - a coalition of meditation, peace and environmental groups that works for peace and planetary care and also the resident teacher of a Buddhist meditation community in Ottawa, Canada - the Pine Gate Sangha.

I am hoping to meet him in the near future.