Four Reasons I’m Not Voting Conservative
D September 17th, 2008
Thinking of voting for the Conservative Party? I challenge you to look past the “political theater” we Canadians are unfortunately being fed, and read up on some of the issues that I’m passionate about.
I’ve written some basic summaries of a few of the issues, and a bunch of resources for further reading. For the sake of brevity and clarity, I’ve kept it down to four reasons, but am toying with writing further articles if there is interest.
1. Unethical (‘almost’ illegal) Election Call
Bill C-16 [parl.gc.ca] was given royal assent on May 3, 2007. It was a law that enforced fixed election dates, and stopped the acting Government from calling an election when it was politically convenient to do so. In the past the Liberals under Jean Chretien had used their ability to call elections in order to immobilize their opponent – at that time Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day.
If the current parliamentary session were to last without a non-confidence vote the next election should have been October 19, 2009.
So why are we voting on October 14, 2008?
Turns out that it is politically convenient to do so for the Right Honorable Stephen Harper. He used a loophole that allowed him to subjugate the new law that his own government passed, by asking the Governor General to call an election on his behalf.
The ethics of any organization are only as strong as their chief officer.
Not a leader nor a party I want in power.
Quotes from Conservative MPs supporting fixed election dates [Globe and Mail]
Election call could be illegal: experts [Edmonton Journal]
Early election call would be illegal: Professor [Ottawa Sun]
Conservative columnists even agree:
National Post
Edmonton Journal
2. American-style copyright bill
On June 12 2008, Industry Minister Jim Prentice introduced Bill C-61, a series of copyright law reforms that would essentially give us a US-style litigious copyright witch-hunt.
The larger concern here for me is not the many flaws the bill contains, but the fact that Jim Prentice submitted a bill made to satisfy the US lobbyists. This wasn’t a bill crafted out of direct concern for an equitable relationship of protecting content owners as well as the consumers of content. It was expressly designed to placate the demands placed on our government by the US Ambassador to Canada, and the talking heads of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. As the election was called, it has not been voted into law, but will no doubt be re-visited in the next parliamentary session (likely to be another Conservative minority).
They aren’t standing up to the U.S. for real Canadians.
Micheal Geist is the most rational voice on this issue:
Why it’s bad: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3025/312/
How we got it: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3040/308/
A variety of YouTube opinions: http://www.youtube.com/user/faircopyright4canada
3. Insite
The first of its kind in North America, Insite is a safe injection site located in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside – home to thousands of drug addicts. The basic idea? That addicts have a safe place to go get high. They bring their own drugs, get a clean brand new needle from the clinic, and shoot up, all under the supervision of qualified medical staff.
The advantages are simple:
- reduce the strain on the health-care system of addicts who would otherwise contract HIV/AIDS, other infections and accidental overdoses through intravenous drug use
- be a ground level point of contact for addicts who really want out of the cycle of drug abuse, and refer them to rehabilitation centers and restore them to productive members of society.
Clearly, there are some strikingly polarizing arguments for both sides. The World Health Organization has recommended safe injection sites as one of the “priority interventions” that nations should adopt to slow the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Currently, the Conservative government has been attempting to order the Insite clinic closed, use a variety of imprecise and weak arguments. It is still open after a BC Supreme Court ruling [cbc] “that struck down sections of Canada’s drug laws as unconstitutional because they prevent the facility, known as Insite, from operating”.
Health Minister Tony Clement attended the XVII International AIDS Conference in Mexico City, where he makes some very murky (and somewhat bizarre) statements [Globe and Mail] in opposition to Insite and WHO recommendations. He believes “I’m on the side of compassion and on the side of the angels”. That is certainly the kind of rational argument I want to hear from my Health Minister.
Closing down Insite will bring out the angel of death [Vancouver Sun]
Clement’s Insite attack leaves WHO red-faced [Globe and Mail]
B.C. doctor calls Clement’s Insite comments ‘repugnant’ [Globe and Mail]
WHO FAQ: [PDF - World Health Organization - who.int]
Polls show Canadians support Insite [Macleans]
Insite [Wikipedia]
4. Character
My fourth reason is the way the Conservatives are running their campaign. They had a head start over the other parties in getting ready, so they have a fairly elaborate website setup. And if you take a look at the conservative sites, you’ll notice they aren’t appealing to Canadians intellect. They aren’t presenting grounded logical arguments. They are using the politics of fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Their Dion smear website is the best example of this (http://www.notaleader.ca). A lot of quotes out of context, a lot of attacks, and very few intelligent rebuttals. What I found even more bizarre was on http://conservative.ca they don’t state what they *will* do when we elect them. They state what they *have* done, a little bit of fluffy marketing text, and then proceed to say why the other parties are total screw ups.
My favorite admission is on their “Accountability” [conservative.ca] page under the last point for the Conservatives:
“Instituted fixed election dates”
They are trying to emotionally manipulate you. How very American.
I won’t be voting Conservative.