Ethics in Government - NDP's Broadbent rolls out platform

Karlin

Council Member
Jun 27, 2004
1,275
2
38
http://www.rabble.ca/politics.shtml?sh_itm=9ed66d896404dd0bb5fca244e414e70e&rXn=1&
NDP offers ethics package following Gomery

“Honesty, fairness and transparency should be the rule, not the exception in our political life,” said NDP Leader Jack Layton. “It is time we put an end to rules made by Liberal insiders that are designed to protect Liberal friends.”

“Wherever we can, we must put an end to backroom wheeling and dealing in politics,” said Broadbent. “It's time to clean up. It's time we politicians put aside private gain and chose instead the public good.”


Broadbent laid out a seven point ethics package the NDP will be introducing to deal with unregulated lobbying, political cronyism, access to information and other issues the Martin government continues to ignore.

* (1) Democratic accountability should mean no M.P. can ignore his/her voters and wheel and deal for personal gain: No MP should be permitted to ignore their voters' wishes, change parties, cross the floor, and become a member of another party without first resigning their seats and running in a by-election.

* (2) Election dates should be fixed: governing parties should lose their control over when we vote. The date should be every four years. This would add transparency about dates for voters and for other political parties.

* (3) Set spending limits and transparency conditions on leadership contests within political parties: Parties are largely financed by the public and the same principles pertinent to the public good should apply to the internal affairs of parties as they do to electoral competition between parties.

* (4) Electoral reform: A major source of needed democratic reform is our outmoded first-past-the-post electoral system. Our present system does not reflect Canadian voters' intentions. Fairness means we need a mixed electoral system that combines individual constituency-based MPs with proportional representation.

* (5) Unregulated lobbying and political cronyism must end: We need tougher laws requiring disclosure of fees and expenditures of lobbyists. We also need to make illegal the acceptance of profit-based fees. The government must initiate reforms with tough sanctions applicable to wrongdoing in the public sector.

* (6) Government appointments: Unfair and unethical patronage practice must stop in the appointment of thousands of officials to federal agencies, boards, commissions and Crown Corporations. The New Democratic Party proposes that the government develop skills and competence-related criteria for all government appointments, that these criteria be publicly released and that committees scrutinize appointments.

* (7) Access to information: A recent bill introduced by Irwin Cotler contains proposals that would actually reduce Canadians access to information, virtually killing reform until after the next election. Canadians want more access to information about their government

K - all make sense to me. Corporate rule has done enough damage to our social fabric, our environment, and has created such cynisism people won't even vote anymore.
I give the NDP the nod next time...
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Ethics in Government

This is the plan I've mentioned a few times in some other threads. It's solid. Nobody else has come forward with anything else nearly so comprehensive. It's been out for a while now, actually. The post-Gomery announcement was just the official roll-out.

If Harper and Duceppe, who have been playing partisan politics with Gomery instead of addressing the underlying issues, really wanted to solve the problems, they would have been working with the NDP to have this adopted on the first opposition day. No confidence motions, no dicking around, just get together and pass a bill.

Harper came out with his own, much weaker, plan instead. He also never addressed his former support for third-pary advertising, leading me to suspect that he still supports unofficial lobbying and campaigning by wealthy third interests funded by corporations like Cargill.

Harper's weaker plan got far more press than Broadbent's plan though. There were no questions as to why Harper didn't just back the NDP plan. Meanwhile the Conservatives, who could well lose seats to the NDP in the next election, just keep repeating the lie that the NDP don't want to stop corruption.

Funny how that works.
 

Karlin

Council Member
Jun 27, 2004
1,275
2
38
Re: Ethics in Government - NDP's Broadbent rolls out platfo

Harper's weaker plan got far more press than Broadbent's plan though. There were no questions as to why Harper didn't just back the NDP plan. Meanwhile the Conservatives, who could well lose seats to the NDP in the next election, just keep repeating the lie that the NDP don't want to stop corruption.

{That from Rev's reply}

Ya, I had heard Harper sya he had a plan to fight corruption, but it wasn't in the news searches I did. Thats Odd - it probably had to many holes for close scrutiny. Hansard had some of it....

Being the official opposition in Canada has traditionally meant being against everything that comes forward in Parliament. That could change....Backing the NDP's plan would at least get the ball rolling and Harper could hae taken some credit for that.

Instead, we see Harper partnering up with the Quebec separatists, a relationship that is more comfortable than going with the NDP I guess.

The CPC's roots were in that Orchard - Mackay deal where they betrayed him and their promises.

Selections from a letter from Orchard, titled Conservatives' Ethics - an Open letter to Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay from David Orchard campaign.
Dateline: Sunday, May 15, 2005 :

You, Peter MacKay, signed an agreement with PC leadership candidate David Orchard at the convention in May 2003, the main plank of which was that you would NOT merge with the Canadian Alliance and that you would uphold the constitution of the PC Party in order to PREVENT a takeover by the Alliance. (The PC party had adopted in 1999 a constitutional clause which required that the party would run candidates in all ridings in every federal election,) Your agreement with David Orchard and your signature on it enabled you to become the leader of the party.

You were helped in this treachery by Stephen Harper whose Canadian Alliance members were urged to join the PC Party merely to vote it out of existence.

But who are you two to talk about ethics and "moral authority?" Are you not staring yourself blind at the speck in the government's eye, while ignoring — and hoping that no one else would notice either — the beam in your own?
 

MMMike

Council Member
Mar 21, 2005
1,410
1
38
Toronto
RE: Ethics in Government - NDP's Broadbent rolls out platfo

Its a good plan. First comment: what do they mean by "No MP should be permitted to ignore their voters' wishes..."? Our system is representative democracy, far different from direct democracy. What is an MP to do... poll his constituents on every issue and vote accordingly?
Second comment: the longer the NDP continue to prop up an obviously corrupt government, the weaker is their position to be able to talk about ethics and accountibility.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Ethics in Government

That is in regard to MPs crossing the floor, MMMikey. Research shows that most Canadians decide who they will vote for either by party or by leader, with the local representative being a relatively minor consideration more likely to cause a vote against than a vote for. Therefore when an MP crosses the floor without resigning, it goes against the wishes of their constituents.

So when Belinda Stronach crossed the floor, she should have had to resign and win re-election as a Liberal.