Swearing an oath to Canada?
Pat Martin, NDP MP for Winnipeg-Centre, has come out with a great idea. Yes I know, I've actually admitted the NDP had a good idea. Anyways, Martin has said he intends to table a private members bill in the House of Commons to require every sitting MP to swear an oath to Canada (ht to Praire Wrangler). Now as some of you may or may not be aware, currently an MP is required (by the Constitution) to swear an oath to the Queen but only to the Queen. His bill would amend the Parliament of Canada act requiring the following oath to be read:
"I, (name), do swear (or solemnly affirm) that I will be loyal to
Canada and that I will perform the duties of a member of the House of
Commons honestly and justly."
If a MP refused to take the oath, they would be prohibited from sitting in the House and would be stripped of their parliamentary budgets (including their salaries). Tom Brodbeck (who wrote the Winnipeg Sun article) notes that this type of legislation has been introduced before in 2003 and made it to a 2nd reading before Parliament was dissolved.
Now obviously this is meant to hurt the Bloc Quebecois, whose goal is the breakup of Canada. And this seems to be Martin's intent:
Now obviously this is meant to hurt the Bloc Quebecois, whose goal is the breakup of Canada. And this seems to be Martin's intent:
"If you won't swear an oath of absolute loyalty and allegiance toCanada, then you have no business sitting in the Canadian House of
Commons," Martin, the MP for Winnipeg-Centre, told the Sun. "We'll fill
your chair with someone who loves this country instead."
Personally I see this as a no-brainer and hope it passes. But one must wonder if it will. The cynic in me observes that many of the bills the Conservatives have passed have only gotten through due to BQ support. If this bill passes, many in the BQ may be opposed to helping the Conservatives get anything else passed. Many accuse/praise Stephen Harper for being a very shrewd politician, would he see this bill as an obstacle? Although his western Canadian base would see this as a must pass issue. Then again, I think this bill would pass with support from all of the parties (minus the BQ obviously) w/o the Conservatives having to take much of a lead on it.
Another issue this brings up is: What happens to those seats? If a Bloc MP is elected and refuses to take the oath, does this seat remain unfilled? Or is another by-election called? And then what happens if the same MP is elected? And what happens in the case of large number of MP-elects refusing to take the oath, does this then affect majority/quorom status in the House?
If any one understands Parliamentary procedure better than I do (which isn't very well) some clarifaction would be greatly appreciated.
Another issue this brings up is: What happens to those seats? If a Bloc MP is elected and refuses to take the oath, does this seat remain unfilled? Or is another by-election called? And then what happens if the same MP is elected? And what happens in the case of large number of MP-elects refusing to take the oath, does this then affect majority/quorom status in the House?
If any one understands Parliamentary procedure better than I do (which isn't very well) some clarifaction would be greatly appreciated.
Technorati Tags: NDP, Pat Martin, Bloc Quebecois
posted by Daz at 3:27 p.m.
3 Comments:
Daz,
My first "h/t"... I'm honoured.
One way to get around an MP's refusal to take the oath once elected would be to require all candidates to take the oath before their names go on the ballot. Have it worded slightly diferent -- an oath to take an oath, if you will.
But I seem to remember that this had been tried at least once before, and a howl went up from the general direction of Ottawa -- can't have elected officials being bound by oaths of loyalty; next thing you know, someone will have them take an oath to tell the truth.
Sounds awfully cynical, I know. But you can blame it on the fact that I'm in the middle of watching the entire series, "Yes, Minister" on DVD... :-D
I have real mixed feelings about this one. I'm no separatist, but I understand--at least sometimes-- anyone who wants to distance themselves from Ottawa. And I don't mean just now 'cause it's the Conservatives.
The catch-22 is that if Bloc members are forced out of Parliament because of their honesty the only real result will be that the situation between the rest of Canada and separatist Quebecers will just get more distanced and, consequently, polarized.
Even Canadians who wish to leave the country deserve Canadian rights while they're Canadian, and that means they deserve representation. Gawd, if was the Bloc, I'd hope for legislation like this.
My suggestion would, instead, to formulate an oath to uphold principles like honesty, integrity and the peaceful settlement of disputes
Post a Comment
<< Home