The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
They say all politics is local, which explains why Northern ManitobaÕs MP hopefuls are tailoring their campaign messages around regional needs. New Democrat Niki Ashton is calling for a major expansion of all-weather roads to link remote First Nations to the rest of the province. Liberal Tina Keeper talks about bolstering public transit in Flin Flon and Thompson. And Conservative Wally Daudrich is voicing concern over the bleak future of the HBMS smelter. But whatÕs painfully clear is that no matter which one is elected, Northern Manitoba will not have a representative who is truly free to stand up for the riding. Instead, we will get a party pawn who is told how to vote on key legislation Ð or else. The most stark evidence of this harsh reality came in 2005, several months before the last election. New Democrat MP Bev Desjarlais voted against legalizing same-sex marriage, saying the contentious move lacked popular support among her constituents. Her claim was backed up by a subsequent poll published in the Winnipeg Free Press. It suggested that just 37 per cent of people in the Churchill Riding support official recognition of gay wedlock. Most of the people who actually put Ms. Desjarlais into office were fine with her stance on this emotional issue. She did what an MP is supposed to do: vote in accordance with her constituentsÕ wishes. But apparently thatÕs not allowed if it goes against the party grain, as it did in this case. After the vote, the eight-year MP was stripped of her criticÕs duties and punted to the NDP backbench. Within months she had lost the party banner, too, saying the catalyst for the nomination challenge was that single ÒnoÓ vote. ItÕs easy to look back and say this was a case of one party being overly assertive with its ideology, but the truth is MPs in all parties have endured similar treatment. Bill Casey, a Conservative MP in Nova Scotia, was ejected from caucus after voting against the Harper governmentÕs 2007 budget, claiming it broke the Atlantic Accord with his province. The Liberals, too, have a history of punishing dissidents, including John Nunziata, who was kicked out of caucus after voting against a budget that failed to rescind the GST, as his party had promised. What happens if thereÕs another same-sex marriage situation, where our ridingÕs will conflicts with that of our MPÕs party? After the Desjarlais experience, itÕs difficult to imagine another MP daring to put the voters first. Complicating matters is the fact that a riding as large and as diverse as ours does not fit in neatly with any one party. Tories favour something we all like, lower taxes, but they are too business-centric for the influential unions. They want to get tougher on crime, but their dream of ending the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly could hurt the Port of Churchill. Liberals pledge billions for much-needed infrastructure, but they want to tax carbon at a great cost to the heavy-polluting main employers in Flin Flon and Thompson. They yearn to take another crack at improving the deplorable conditions on northern reserves, but recent history suggests they donÕt have the courage of their convictions. Then thereÕs the NDP. While they aim to train more doctors and help seniors stay in their own homes longer Ð who can argue with that? Ð they oppose corporate tax cuts that contribute to the health of the mining and forestry industries so valuable to this region. Plus, the bulk of their support is in urban Canada, whose values often clash with those of rural Canada. Which side do you think wins out? In the last election, an independent candidate named Brad Bodnar ran in our riding. He championed the idea of all 308 ridings electing independent MPs so constituents would not be force-fed the party line. Mr. Bodnar barely got any votes, but itÕs hard to argue with his logic. Local Angle runs Fridays.
