Back on June 2nd, I had the privilege of being an organizer, with leadnow for the protest against the Omnibus Budget Implementation Bill, a.k.a. Trojan Horse Bill, a.k.a Matryoshka Bill, a.k.a. C38. Across Canada, we gathered at our Conservative MP's offices to ask them to stand against this affront to democracy and to stand for Canada and their constituents. Many showed up but in the end, we failed. The bill passed and Canada is certainly not a better place for it.
My MP, Stephen Woodworth, came out to speak to us. I give the man full credit for that (although, admittedly, he was running a small and completely unrelated event at his office that day). He answered some questions, primarily with talking points. He did relay a theme though and, if you'll forgive my paraphrasing, this is what he was saying.
Essentially, Stephen stated that he could not vote against the budget because he was elected by the people of Kitchener Centre to represent them as their Conservative MP. To vote against the budget is to vote against the party and to vote against the party is to vote against the constituents who elected him.
Here's what I'm not buying; to state that the people have spoken, one time, last year and that is that, is pretty disingenuous. This runs with Harper's repeated statements that any objection to his policies are invalid because he was elected to a majority government (I like to call this the "date rape defense"). If the opinion of the people only matters on election day, then maybe we need to have elections a bit more often.
I like elections but we know a chap that doesn't care for them... Only an aspiring dictator could describe an election as wasteful. Only a willing subject could believe it.
So, one vote, one opinion, carrying an elected official through a full term may seem like a weak argument but it gets weaker, specifically with Stephen Woodworth. You see, he is already pushing his own, personal agenda in parliament. His motion M-312 regarding the legal definition of the beginning of life is a thinly veiled attempt to reopen the abortion debate in Canada. Though Woodworth, a devout Catholic, insists that this is not about abortion but rather about modernizing a "400 year old law" (here in a 145 year old country, if anyone is paying attention). This personal axe to grind on Woodworth's part in contradictory to the Harper Government's™ official stance on the abortion debate. Yet, Woodworth is quite willing to stand up for his own ideology on this matter, despite the fact that it was not, in any way, a platform issue during the election.
So, this all begs a very simple question... Stephen, who do you represent?