![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I'm still not entirely comfortable with how we are being governed since COVID-19 changed all of our lives. We should not become a dictatorship just because there is a need for fast action on certain issues. Our basic human and civil rights and freedoms should still be respected. We should still enjoy transparency of government plans and motives and have free access to the information that directly concerns us and has a major influence on how we live our everyday lives. Our privacy and where appropriate, anonymity, must also be respected.
When Stephen Harper was Prime Minister, we lived through weeks if not months of prorogued Parliaments. Since COVID hit, there is certainly more justification for modifying sittings, procedures and traditions in the name of expediency, but we are after all still living in a democracy and the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, along with Committees and backbenchers are still accountable to you and me - the people who put them into office (or at least cast a vote) and whom they are supposed to serve.
There has been a respectable amount of non-partisan collaboration, I would say, but I believe that regular sessions of Parliament, at least four days a week, need to be put into place as soon as possible, even if the MPs cannot realistically get together in person. Question Period can still take place from a distance - in fact, it might even be more effective that way, without all the petty heckling that usually goes on. Committee work, the thoughtful multi-party strategizing on Big Questions, is probably amongst the most undervalued work that Parliament does - and I'm looking here not just at the House of Commons but also the Senate's big-picture sober second thought. And at the micro level, let's not forget about our hard-working federal public servants crafting the nitty-gritty details of policies to support the legislative agenda.
Legislate in haste, repent at leisure. Except that it's our political leaders (admittedly the ones we elected) doing the legislating and us doing the repenting once the pandemic is over and we see that we may have been a little too hasty in what we allowed and how we reacted. I found this post at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association rather interesting:
https://ccla.org/coronavirus-update-crisis-legislation/
Once a piece of legislation exists, it can be pretty difficult to revoke, even if there's a change of government. I'm definitely thinking time limits need to be there at the outset, although I suppose a certain amount of that has already in fact been provided for.
Perhaps we need to ensure that there's some sort of 5-year (or 2-year or even 1-year) review conducted for any legislation enacted while we're under a state of emergency or otherwise in crisis mode?
I haven't come up with any satisfactory answers yet, but I'm working on it!
When Stephen Harper was Prime Minister, we lived through weeks if not months of prorogued Parliaments. Since COVID hit, there is certainly more justification for modifying sittings, procedures and traditions in the name of expediency, but we are after all still living in a democracy and the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, along with Committees and backbenchers are still accountable to you and me - the people who put them into office (or at least cast a vote) and whom they are supposed to serve.
There has been a respectable amount of non-partisan collaboration, I would say, but I believe that regular sessions of Parliament, at least four days a week, need to be put into place as soon as possible, even if the MPs cannot realistically get together in person. Question Period can still take place from a distance - in fact, it might even be more effective that way, without all the petty heckling that usually goes on. Committee work, the thoughtful multi-party strategizing on Big Questions, is probably amongst the most undervalued work that Parliament does - and I'm looking here not just at the House of Commons but also the Senate's big-picture sober second thought. And at the micro level, let's not forget about our hard-working federal public servants crafting the nitty-gritty details of policies to support the legislative agenda.
Legislate in haste, repent at leisure. Except that it's our political leaders (admittedly the ones we elected) doing the legislating and us doing the repenting once the pandemic is over and we see that we may have been a little too hasty in what we allowed and how we reacted. I found this post at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association rather interesting:
https://ccla.org/coronavirus-update-crisis-legislation/
Once a piece of legislation exists, it can be pretty difficult to revoke, even if there's a change of government. I'm definitely thinking time limits need to be there at the outset, although I suppose a certain amount of that has already in fact been provided for.
Perhaps we need to ensure that there's some sort of 5-year (or 2-year or even 1-year) review conducted for any legislation enacted while we're under a state of emergency or otherwise in crisis mode?
I haven't come up with any satisfactory answers yet, but I'm working on it!
