Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

ADAM OLSEN: Sometimes I wonder whose side the people are on? Who determines if we are on the right or wrong side of history?


There are sides in the BC Legislature. This side and that side. Our side and their side. The left side and the right side. Apparently, two sides. Like binary code, either a 1, or a 0.

I've heard it even when Members introduce visitors to the House they say something like, "on behalf of the Members on this side of the House I welcome so-and-so to the Legislature." Not on behalf of the Members on the other side of the House?

Apparently, the sides are really important. The good side and the bad side. Or maybe the good side and the evil side.

Sometimes I wonder whose side the people are on? Who determines if we are on the right or wrong side of history?

Set in tradition

Our democracy is fuelled by confrontation. 

Our desks are neatly organized into two sides, facing each other and "spaced two sword lengths apart. Historically, this was to ensure that no harm could be inflicted upon a member during a heated debate in the House. In modern times, weapons are no longer permitted in the House, but the two-sword-length spacing tradition continues." 

You can learn more about your British Columbia Legislative precinct here.

But it is not just in British Columbia, the Canadian, British and New Zealand Parliaments all have Members facing off against each other.

The tradition of this seating arrangement comes from "the Chapel of St. Stephen’s at Westminster, where members sat on the chapel benches facing each other. As parliament and parties evolved, members with shared views took to sitting together and across from their opponents. St. Stephen’s was the home of the British House of Commons until it burned down in 1834 and was replaced by the present Palace of Westminster."

How and where we sit has an impact on the quality of the debate. In the nearly 24 months I have been an MLA (Member) in the legislature, we have not stopped to question it. We just continue with the status quo like every Parliament before us.


Are there better configurations? I am under no illusions that re-configuring the rock pile on Belleville is no easy task. But that does not mean we should not challenge it, question it, see if we can get better outcomes.

Verbal sword fights

British Columbia is a democracy after all. It evolved from a decision hundreds of years ago to wrestle power away from a monarch and put it in the hands of the people. To a great extent, that exercise was successful. And our tradition has changed: Members no longer bring their weapons to the Legislature.

So why does the tradition that keeps two sides separate need to persist? There’s no need and yet is does persist, because people think it is just too difficult or too much work change it

We don't bother and we accept the result: debates are confused with arguments most closely resembling a sword fight. Our failure to change also re-consolidates in political parties the power once wrestled from the hands of the Monarch.

I think we should set up our democratic institution differently. Proportional representation is a good idea but it is just one way for our democracy to evolve.


There are other ways that might work that wouldn't require a referendum. For example, we could get rid of the desks. No more hiding, or desk pounding. Or, we could arrange Members alphabetically instead of by Party and in hierarchical ranks. We could get rid of frontbenchers and back-benchers. We could be arranged in a circle or semi-circle with no sides at all.

The point is; we design our outcomes. We should be encouraged to reflect on the kind of outcomes we want our democracy to produce and then explore how we can design our space to achieve it.

In the end, democracy is not about the politicians. It's about the public we are elected to serve. How can we do that better? Would you volunteer to participate in a citizens' assembly to discuss this?



Adam Olsen ... is a Green Party Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia for Saanich North and the Islands. 

Born in Victoria, BC in 1976, Adam has lived, worked and played his entire life on the Saanich Peninsula. 

He is a member of Tsartlip First Nation (W̱JOȽEȽP), where he and his wife, Emily, are raising their two children, Silas and Ella.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Kamloops woman’s cancer test cancelled due to Interior Health mandates for OB/GYNs (iNFO News)

A Kamloops woman’s cancer screening appointment was considered urgent by her doctors and scheduled within weeks, but it was postponed indefinitely when Interior Health ordered her gynecologist take that day’s on-call shift. Troylana Manson now waits with the mystery of whether she might have cancer amid a staffing crisis for women’s health care specialists in Kamloops. “I was happy to have that appointment in December so we could rule this out, but now it’s thrown in the air again. People in Kamloops, certainly people in positions of power, need to realize what Interior Health is doing”  ... CLICK HERE for the full story

One arrested at OneBC event at UVic that draws protesters (Times Colonist)

A would-be speaker was arrested under the Trespass Act after she arrived at the University of Victoria on Tuesday for an event intended to shed light on what the OneBC political party refers to as the “reconciliation industry.”  An officer at the scene initially said two people were arrested, after protesters scuffled with those trying to hold the unsanctioned event. Saanich police issued a statement later Tuesday saying only one person was arrested.  Police did not name the person who was arrested, but OneBC leader Dallas Brodie said it was Frances Widdowson, who was later released ... CLICK HERE for the full story 

Eby misled British Columbians about Cowichan appeal; court records show no stay was ever filed; Conservative leader John Rustad

Conservative Opposition Leader John Rustad says Premier David Eby has been caught misleading the public after court records confirmed the government never filed the stay of the Cowichan ruling the NDP repeatedly promised. “For four months, the Premier said the stay was being sought, the Attorney General claimed the application was underway, and the government told British Columbians that action was coming. The court record shows they did nothing,” said Rustad. “Not one stay, not one application, not one motion. They made promises to homeowners while the registry sat empty.” Premier Eby first promised on August 11, 2025, that a stay would be filed, then again in October, and twice in Question Period when pressured by the opposition. A review of court documents on Friday revealed that no stay has been filed. Rustad said the stay was the single legal measure that could pause the ruling and protect homeowners in Richmond and across the province while appeals move forward. By...

Labels

Show more