The Liberal Focus on Harper's Contempt for Democracy

“There he goes again with this word ‘bickering.’ This is a debate, Mr. Harper. This is a democracy...You keep talking about Parliament as if it’s this little debating society that’s a pesky interference in your rule of the country. It’s not.”

Michael Ignatieff, Leaders' debate, April 12, 2011.

Ignatieff kept returning to this theme of democracy in the debate. Even when asked about Canadian foreign policy, he returned to hammer the idea that Canada cannot advance its values abroad when democracy was being undermined at home. What was he on about, anyway? It is hard to pitch the importance of democracy the way you can tax cuts and raising the employment rates. But it is so much more important. Ignatieff is on to something crucial here, and it is vital that Canadians not miss it.

The issue is political accountability and the realization of deliberative democracy. Which simply means that government in a democracy is supposed to be accountable to the people, and decisions are supposed to made through a process in which the people are able to meaningfully participate. One of the great strengths of democracy rests on the twin ideas that decisions will be better, and will enjoy wider and more enduring support from the public, precisely because they are made through a process of debate and deliberation in which the people play a meaningful role. 

The Conservative Platform on Freedom of Religion

The Conservative Party Platform released on Friday has a curious pledge to create an office within DEFAIT devoted to championing freedom of religion overseas and around the world. It was reported on Saturday that Ignatieff was initially at odds with others in his party on the issue, with Iggy saying that defending freedom of religion is consistent with Canadian values and deserves non-partisan support.

On the one hand Ignatieff was both entirely correct on freedom of religion being one of the fundamental rights in Canada, and his instincts to want to protect this is laudable. Moreover he came across as statesman-like in taking the position that he could support reasonable proposals in the Conservative Party Platform. It was a nice departure from the usual cat-fighting and gainsaying of a political campaign. On the other hand, the Conservative proposal does require consideration.

The Liberal MPs who initially criticized it did so primarily on the grounds that it was cynically motivated. The proposal was seen as nothing more than a crass attempt to win over communities of religious minorities within the electorate. That is obviously a difficult proposition to prove, of course, but it has to be said that religious freedom is a curious right for the Conservatives to champion.