Archive for November, 2006

I was talking to some of my Liberal colleagues about their leadership race. Now, for the Liberals involved, it is a serious business. But for other Canadians it is mostly an entertaining parlor game. However, choosing party leaders is a serious business in that it has major implications for democracy in Canada.

The predominant way that party leaders have been chosen over the last 100 years is through a convention of delegates. Party members vote for delegates and the delegates elect the leader at a national convention. While this method often looks democratic to outsiders (and makes for very entertaining television) it has some major problems. The biggest problem is that it allows for party organizers with big bucks to hire people to vote in delegate selection meetings. Also, party officials are often appointed to vote in the convention without having been elected.

The second way is direct election of a leader by members of the party. This method is an improvement over the delegate selection because it makes it more difficult for party big shots to manipulate voting. It also makes it difficult for leadership candidates to cut deals for private gain. In my opinion, direct election is more democratic than the delegate convention system. The one problem with direct election: There is still room for massive manipulation by party officials and organizers who control blocks of voters, thereby subverting the wishes of regular party members.

The third way to elect party leaders: Have Members of Parliament directly elect the leader of their party. This was the way Canadian party leaders were elected until the 1920s. The official reason why this system was scrapped: In order to make party politics more inclusive. When this method of leader selection was abandoned, one unforeseen consequence was that it took power away from MPs and gave it to fundraisers, party staffers and the Prime Minister’s Office.

It is probably the biggest reason why MPs have a difficult time being independent, as they have no control on the leadership—and the leadership controls them.

I hope the above gave you some insight into the way that party leaders, and ultimately the Prime Minister is chosen. No system is perfect and all three have their strengths and weaknesses. But it is important that Canadians understand their democratic process.

I’m Brad Trost your MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, contact my offices anytime, I love to hear from you.

This last week the House of Commons was in recess so I’ve been in and around the riding, doing tours of various towns, meeting with people and listening to their concerns. So this week’s column is just a short report (in a question and answer format) on what your neighbors were asking me in the coffee shops.

There were a few questions on what was happening with the long gun registry. Is the plan to scrap it still going ahead? Yes, legislation has been tabled in the House of Commons to repeal the long gun registry. However, the current vote count in the House of Commons shows that the government Bill to repeal the long gun registry will not pass. Earlier this spring, the government had thought that enough Liberal and NDP backbenchers would join the Conservatives to repeal the registry. However, events over the summer appear to have changed the views of some Opposition MPs.

What is happening with ethanol and bio-diesel? Within the next month or so, I anticipate announcements will be coming out on a national strategy for renewable fuels. The government is committed to having 5% of fuels be renewable by 2010. The details of how we are going to get to that target (and the means by which to make ethanol and bio-diesel a positive economic force in rural Canada) are still being worked on.

Can you do anything to fix the provincial roads? No, unfortunately I only influence the federal, national government. I travel all the roads in Saskatoon-Humboldt and I am as irritated with the provincial road situation as anyone. (I do complain to my provincial MLA, though.)

The number one question that I have been asked all week is: What’s the weather like in Ottawa? The answer: Wetter and warmer than back home in Saskatchewan. Ottawa is an OK place to work but nothing beats Saskatchewan for home.

I’m Brad Trost, your MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, I welcome your feedback, contact my offices anytime.

The following is my Remembrance Day speech:

Today, we are here to remember the service and the sacrifice of Canadian veterans past and present. The men and women of Canada who have stood for, fought for and died for their home, their country, and their values.

Somebody once asked me how many veterans we remember, how many do we honor, how many Canadians have been prepared to sacrifice, to give so that others might live?

My answer is: One, just one. The decision to go, the decision to serve was made by one, by only one. It was not a decision that could be made by anyone else. The sacrifice was made by one.

Yes, they stood and served—one, by one, by one, by one. The ones served as a team and as a unit. The ones bonded with pride and loyalty to become cohesive units, units that functioned as one.

But in the end the sacrifice was born one by one. The gift was given one by one. The gift was given by each one.

How many veterans served? How many should we remember? One, each one: Because the value of one life is unfathomable. Each one gave and each one served.

So how many of us should pay our respects, should remember, and should honor the sacrifice of past and present? One just one: one by one.

We should each remember the sacrifice and gift of freedom and life that was given. Each life should be remembered, and each one of us should say thank you for their gift, one by one, to each one of them.

We must never forget, with gratitude to our veterans: Thank you for everything, and God’s blessing on you.

Greater love hath no man than this that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 13:15

OK, I will admit it. I am a law and order type of guy. I don’t particularly enjoy having my car stolen, or my office vandalized, (both of which have happened at my MP office). I also don’t know anyone who shrugs off criminal acts committed against their property.

The reason I bring this subject up, is a piece of legislation listed as C-9, An Act to Amend Conditional Sentences. The purpose of this piece of legislation is to change the sentencing guidelines for various crimes such as: break and enter, arson, auto theft and drug production.

Now, if someone had stolen your car, set your house on fire, broken into your business and stolen money and property, or was manufacturing crystal meth in your community, what would you do? Would you:

A. Tell them they had to stay home for the weekend, play video games, wear a nice ankle bracelet, and go to bed early.

B. Demand that the knave, who committed these outrages cool his heels in a prison, till he learns to deal with his anti-social behavior.

C. For criminals who commit one or two offenses, you would choose option A., but maybe chose B as a punishment for repeat offenders.

Now think hard and make your choice. If you chose options A or C, you will be pleased with the NDP, Liberals, and the Bloc Quebecois. If you chose B, you will be pleased with the Conservative government’s commitment to get tough on crime.

Now I know I exaggerated slightly (less than you might think), the above explanation of Bill C-9. However, in the House of Commons a few nights ago, the three opposition parties voted to permit house arrest for arson, car theft, B & Es and drug production. They won the vote. As a result, criminals who commit these crimes could end up spending their sentences in the comfort of their own homes. I don’t think that’s right and neither does the Conservative government. These crimes are serious and deserve prison time.

I’m Brad Trost, your Member of Parliament, and I welcome your feedback. Write or call my offices.