 |
Mike W. Bryant
Staff columnist
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
I've been talking to a few of our Yellowknife candidates about the topics I've raised in recent weeks: consensus government, direct elections for the premier. I was left with the impression that those who would be MLA agree something is amiss but are uneasy about getting rid of the secrecy as long as the current system remains in place.
The secret ballot for electing the premier and cabinet, I've been told, is necessary because should the MLA wind up on the wrong side of the vote, that person will spend the next four years cutting ribbons for new manhole covers and welcome mats for campground latrines.
In other words, should an MLA publicly vote against the winning candidate for premier, the flow of government largesse to his or her constituency will suddenly dry up because no self-respecting premier of the NWT is going to fork over money to a riding led by some dastardly ingrate.
"It's the constituents who will lose," one candidate told me.
My question then is, if you can't publicly declare your support for those who would serve as premier or on cabinet, how are you going to stand up to them when they are in power?
The idea that the premier would carry out a campaign of victor's justice against those who oppose them is an odd one to me.
For one, I don't think the public would stand for such bully tactics should one riding's needs be ignored over another.
From what I've seen, a bit of squawking in the legislative assembly is often all it takes to get the government to flip-flop and cave in to an MLA's demands for parity.
Witness what occurred when the government announced it was closing Hay River's young offender's facility, or when it told Tulita it would have to wait three years for a new school. The government took very little prodding to change its position on those issues.
MLAs, frankly, have a lot of power, not only when it comes to selecting the premier and cabinet but in shaping policy as well.
We often hear complaints from them that cabinet is too secretive, even though ordinary MLAs are regularly given full disclosure on all sorts of sensitive policy documents - something that never occurs in jurisdictions ruled by party politics.
So why then all the fuss? If the premier and cabinet serves at the pleasure of ordinary MLAs - who hold the majority of seats in the legislative assembly - why would any of them worry about getting the shaft?
Unless, of course, the fix is already in, and that the 15 MLA incumbents who plan to return - and who rarely lose - have already decided how it will all shake down, and that an individual MLA's fears are not based on what will happen to their constituents but what will happen to them should they go against the grain.
Will they miss out on a future cabinet post should they not support the majority? Or the chance to chair a committee? Or perhaps miss the boat for an exotic trip abroad to a Commonwealth parliamentary association conference in Belize or Jamaica?
Maybe I'm just being cynical, but as long as the current system remains in place, we will never know for sure.
There will also be that lingering feeling that weasels have gnawed their way into the legislative assembly to run the show for as long as they can.
- Mike W. Bryant is Assignment editor for Northern News Services