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

RCMP gag order comes after BC NDP catch heat for diverted safe supply (Northern Beat)

In the wake of several high-profile police drug seizures of suspected safer supply that put the BC NDP government on the defensive last month, BC RCMP “E” division issued a gag order on detachments, directing them to run all communications on “hot button” public safety issues through headquarters in the lead-up to the provincial election. “It is very clear we are in a pre-election time period and the topic of ‘public safety’ is very much an issue that governments and voters are discussing,” writes a senior RCMP communications official in an email dated Mar. 11 in what appears to have gone out to all BC RCMP detachments . . . . CLICK HERE for the full story

KRUGELL: BC NDP turns its attention from BC United to BC Conservatives

The BC NDP turning its attention, from BC United, to BC Conservatives was reported over the weekend from a variety of sources. It is the result of the surge in the BC Conservative's polling numbers and the subsequent collapse of BC United. The NDP has largely ignored the BC Conservatives, instead they opt to talk about issues directly or attack their old foes BC United. Practical politics says that parties closer to the centre tend to ultimately prevail over the long haul. They do wane but often make comebacks. A good example is the federal Liberals going from third party to government in 2015. Centrism has a lot of appeal on voting day. The NDP shifting its fire from United to Conservative is a reflection of reality. BC United did buy advertising online and radio over the last few months. Did that shift the polls back to them? Nope. The reality is today, the BC Conservatives are the party of the Opposition, and day by day the Conservatives are looking like a party not ready to fig

Baldrey: 2024 meets 1991? How B.C. election history could repeat itself (Times Colonist)

NOTE ... not the original image from Keith Baldrey's op/ed 1991 BC general election -- Wikipedia   A veteran NDP cabinet minister stopped me in the legislature hallway last week and revealed what he thinks is the biggest vulnerability facing his government in the fall provincial election. It’s not housing, health care, affordability or any of the other hot button issues identified by pollsters. "I think we are way too complacent,” he told me. “Too many people on our side think winning elections are easy.” He referenced the 1991 election campaign as something that could repeat itself. What was supposed to be an easy NDP victory then almost turned into an upset win for the fledgling BC Liberal Party. Indeed, the parallels between that campaign and the coming fall contest are striking ... CLICK HERE for the full story

Labels

Show more