Continuing conversations with Canadians VII

Earlier this spring, Toronto Star columnist Jim Travers wrote a heart-felt rant about the downward slide of democracy in this country. Now the Toronto Star has followed up on that sentiment with a six part series on “Sham-ocracy.” In an introduction to the series, Travers defines sham-ocracy as “the illusion of government accountable to the people.”

The series makes a compelling case. Part 1 looks at MPs expenses and the lack of transparency surrounding them. Only 4 MPs were willing to share their expense claims with the Toronto Star. $128 million was spent in the last fiscal year by MPs, yet Canadians will never know what most of it was spent on.

Part 2 considers the rise in apathy, and the simultaneous decline in accountability. Canadians don’t feel represented, so they tune out, meaning that there is even less accountability for the decisions made by parliament. “We’ve thrown fundamental policy debates out the window,” says political scientist Donald Savoie.

Part 3 examines the disconnect between youth and politics. Many young people don’t feel like getting involved in politics or voting will help to change things. As a result, they don’t get involved, preferring to focus on tangible ways of creating change.

Part 4 takes on the role of the media. Susan Delacourt offers a nice metaphor for pack journalism – journalists chasing the same soccer ball around a field. While the media is guilty of fixating on the scandal of the day, they are hindered from doing good journalism that would help to hold the government accountable by the constant deadlines created by the 24 hour news cycle and the simultaneous cut in resources.

Part 5 explores the current woes of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. A position that was created to improve accountability by providing transparent information on budgets and finances, the PBO has been crushed on all sides as his budget has been cut and the Parliamentary Library struggles to control his office and keep his reports private. Even the creation of the position was an admission that MPs weren’t keeping the government accountable, Savoie suggests.

Part 6 reflects back on the coalition crisis that happened just before Christmas. Failing to understand the rules of our democracy puts us at incredible risk of losing our democracy, Peter Russell argues. The consolidation of power in the hands of the prime minister – in addition to being contrary to the rules of our political system – is fundamentally bad for our democracy.

It’s an excellent series, but it’s missing a Part 7. (Or perhaps, Parts 7-12). What do we do about our sham-ocracy? How do we reverse the trend?