Canadian Democracy Cannot Survive Apathy

There are three fundamental pillars of Canadian democracy: active participation by the populace, a free press that is capable of stimulating objective political debate, and an educational system that prepares children to understand and take part in the process. Currently, in Canada, neither of these fundamentals is secure. Canadian voter tounout, never high at the best of times, dropped from 79.0% in 1962, to 64.7% in 2006. It dropped again to 56.8% in 2008, reflecting a lack of interest, by Canadians, in the Canadian political process. Democracy is a privilege and if unused, will be taken away.

The issue of a truly free press in Canada is also in doubt. According to an online article by Steve Anderson, Making the Links for Media Democracy in Canada, dated December 18, 2008, media ownership in Canada is less diverse than anywhere else in the industrialized world. He cites the conclusion of the June, 2006 report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications on the Canadian News Media that there are: "areas where the concentration of [newspaper]ownership has reached levels that few other countries would consider acceptable." Examples are easy to find: government funding cutbacks to the CBC, the purchase by CTVglobemedia of CHUM, and the acquisition of Alliance Atlantis by Canwest Global and Goldman Sachs'.

The most important aspect of a good democracy is its Parliament. Canada has a long and well-rooted parliamentary tradition, but it is questionable whether the institution is working properly. In an Edmonton Journal article dated January 17, 2009, "Canada's Withering Democracy," author Richard Foot, raises the point that contemporary Canadian Parliamentarians no longer have the dignity and influence that they once had. Foot says that this case was illustrated clearly in December, 2008 when Stephen Harper prorogued the House of Commons, preventing the members from exercising their rights in a confidence motion. In the same article, Foot quotes Donald Savoie, a political scientist, as saying that the most damaging setback to MP's power came in 1968 when, in exchange for a longer question period and more funding for opposition parties, elected officials gave up their right to approve government spending. This right dated back to the Magna Carta, and was nearly 1,000 years old. The Parliament no longer has control of the public purse, and without the power of the purse, how can Parliament effectively rule the country? It will be left to a small coterie who make the rules and the political appointments.

Finally, there is the question of educating the young to participate in democracy. Richard Foot, in his article "A Few Ideas to Help Civilize Canada's Politics, "printed in the Edmonton Journal of January 19, 2009, spoke to Tom Axworthy, a former advisor to Pierre Trudeau, and current head of the Centre for the Study of Democracy at Queen's University. Mr. Axworthy feels that Canadian schools do not teach students well about the political system or the values of citizenship. He ties the slide of voter turnout in elections to the poor teaching of history and citizenship in the schools. Mr. Foot quotes Axworthy in the January 19th article as saying: "If you've been able to waltz through school without ever learning what a prime minister is, or how our parliamentary system works as opposed to the presidential system, or what federalism is, then it's quite easy to say: 'I'm going to spend an afternoon in the mall instead of going to vote in an election' because you don't know anything about it."

It is up to Canadians to remedy this problem of apathy. As citizens, Canadians must vote, demand a diversified media, and must educate future voters to respect and participate in a priviledge that many have died to protect.