A post on a private forum gave me this little inspiration…
No. It annoyed me. Why? The poster of the comment made a true statement.
When legislators try to bring in further infringements of our lives, people don’t look at it and then refer to the Constitution.
Some laws/bills are necessary. It’s the bad laws/bills that have to be spoken against.
While they are in the legislative womb. On the table. At Commitee. Sitting on the Order Paper.
If people made even a small effort to look and see what’s brewing, some things would die on the table.
I’ll admit it. I can’t keep on top of everything either. So, I’m just as guilty as the next person for missing things.
We’re supposed to rely on our legislators to act in our best interests. It is up to us to keep an eye on them and prod them when necessary. A supportive and kind word or gesture. An “attaboy” or “good job”. Also, an elbow here, a kick in the shins there. When something really infringes the line? Loudly vocalizing while standing on their desks and quoting from the Constitution. Melting their phones, fax machines, jamming their e-mail inboxes with our “concerns” about Bill “ABC” or Regulatory amendment “XYZ”.
By the way, that works both ways. Support or opposition to something. Without our input? They will proceed. They can’t please everyone all of the time. Without serious input from the constituents for sober consideration? They also can’t properly do the job they were elected to do.
That “loudly vocalizing” part should be coming into play more often when something takes a run at or blatently ignores our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. It shouldn’t be left up to a “learned” group bedecked in robes to decide. Our abdication of our power as the citizens is troubling. We have abdicated our say to a House or a Chamber and maybe, if we’re lucky, a legal challenge.
The Senate poses it’s own interesting challenges in that they are appointed rather than elected. In times past, it wasn’t so much of an issue to us. With the complexity of issues today? Perhaps a further “voice of the citizens” is needed over the practice of “sober second thought”.
When things reach a legal challenge right up to the Supreme Court? We have left a decision to people that are unelected. Not the elected houses. Appointed people. There are no recourses at that point except new legislation or legislation repealing old legislation.
Many things shouldn’t have had to reach legal challenge. They should have died on the order paper had people noticed, realized and spoken up.
Even then when people speak up? Those who don’t understand the implications are spun to sleep, bleating the placations they were spoon-fed. Lullabyed into sweet, blissful, ignorance.
If there was something wrong, the media would alert us? Wouldn’t they? Aren’t they the watch-dogs?
When you buy [into] a dog that doesn’t bark when it should or even at all? Don’t blame anyone but yourself when someone makes off with your rights in the middle of the night.
Speaking up is shockingly “un-Canadian”. We’re too polite. Assertiveness is not what we are known for. Some characters in history have learned that Canadians can be quite assertive and determined. Our lads at Ypres, Passechendael and Vimy, in the worst possible conditions showed that. Moments in time that forged Canada as it’s own nation.
We’ll fight over hockey, but not over the things that really affect our lives here. Things like poorly drafted, knee-jerk legislation. Like “bans”. Like regulations slipped in under the cover by bureaucrats with political loyalties.
Like quasi-judicial bodies whose self-importance strokes their egos to the point they believe they are the judiciary and can direct our lives in the way “they” deem we should live. Un-elected, unneccesary and unwanted.
ooops…off on a tangent there.
It isn’t perfect, but it’s what we have until something better can be found and drawn from as a template.