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

'Very good news' that Supreme Court will hear B.C. mineral claims case, Eby says

The BC government needs clarity from the Supreme Court of Canada on a landmark mineral rights claim, Premier David Eby says. But the lawyer representing the challenger says that they would have preferred the province respect the lower court's decision. Eby said Thursday it is very good news that the court will hear its appeal of a ruling that found the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provincial mineral claims regime are "inconsistent." The BC Court of Appeal ruled in December that the provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or DRIPA, should be "properly interpreted" to incorporate the UN declaration into the laws of B.C. with immediate legal effect. That ruling set off the appeal from the province amid concerns that it could cause economic uncertainty ... CLICK HERE for the full story 

EBY OFFSIDE WITH NATIONAL INTEREST AS CARNEY AND SMITH BUILD BC'S ECONOMIC FUTURE WITHOUT HIM ~~ BC Conservatives

IMAGE CREDIT :  CBC News   Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced a landmark agreement today committing Ottawa to designate a new pipeline to BC's west coast as a project of national interest by October 1, 2026, with construction approval targeted for September 1, 2027. The deal pairs the pipeline with a new industrial carbon pricing framework and a fall 2027 construction start. British Columbia, the province where the pipeline ends, where the jobs would land, and where the export terminal would be built, was nowhere at the table. "This is a nation-building deal, and the BC NDP have been locked out of the room," said Trevor Halford, Interim Leader of the Official Opposition.  "While the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta were doing the hard work of growing the Canadian economy, the NDP is on the sidelines calling this pipeline a 'fiction' and an 'energy vampire.'  He chose petulance over partnership, and now BC ...

Kamloops - North Thompson BC Conservative MLA Ward Stamer speaks to Bill 20 — K’ómoks Treaty Act

The following is a condensed version of Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s remarks, to the BC Legislature, on the afternoon of Tuesday May 19th : I rise today to continue remarks on Bill 20, the K’ómoks treaty, and to address what I believe are some of the most important constitutional, democratic and governance concerns facing this Legislature today. At the centre of this debate are two major issues. First, unresolved overlapping territorial boundaries tied to this treaty process. And second, the growing legal and political consequences arising from the provincial government’s implementation of the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, more commonly known as DRIPA. Much of the government’s defence on DRIPA rests upon references to the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, commonly known as UNDRIP. And this is where we must begin having a more honest and mature conversation in this province. UNDRIP was never originally designed to function ...

Labels

Show more