Federal Greenhouse: Let’s Make Good Use of Hot Air

For the past few weeks, I’ve been trying to take a little break from being angry at Canadian politicians for being uninspiring to the citizenry at best and downright insulting to us at worst. This doesn’t mean I haven’t been stewing in my juices the whole time. It’s been hard to ignore the signs that a blog post on the subject was looming.

First, I read this. “This” refers to an article on the CBC website, outlining plans to build a $42 million dollar glass dome as a temporary home for the House of Commons while it undergoes much needed repairs. Huh.

Then, I read THIS. “THIS” refers to an excellent special feature in the February 28, 2011 issue of Maclean’s by Aaron Wherry. The article details Wherry’s visit to the House of Commons on February 3 to see, well, what was going on in Parliament. Not much. There are 305 Members of Parliament (including the Speaker). On February 3 at 1:05 p.m.,  only 19 MPs were present for debate in the House. At 2:30 p.m., during question period (when the photographers and video cameras are usually present), the numbers swelled to 231 MPs present. By 6:45 p.m., as the House finished opposition questions, only 5 of 305 MPs remained. Huh.

It’s kind of funny, isn’t it? Some people slave away at their jobs for years to scrape together enough income to support their families and maybe, SOMEDAY, upgrade to an office with a window, and we’re going to build a fantastical glass dome for a bunch of people who can’t be bothered to show up and do the thing taxpayers pay them to do? Huh.

And then I read, in a variety of places, that there’s going to be another Federal election. In fact, I just heard my first attack ad on the radio today. (Thank you, Conservative Party of Canada! I was not aware Ignatieff was only in it for himself but you sure taught me a thing or two!). So not only will I get to pay for a bunch of no-shows to hang out in a glass palace (when they can be bothered to be there), but now I get to listen to personal attacks and false promises for the next month and a half? Huh.

It was all getting a bit much and I was thinking about going to bed for a few months until the attack ads were over and the “Will they? Won’t they?” coalition questions had disappeared.

But then, I had a better idea.

Glass-domed Parliament + No-show MPs + Federal election (i.e. a chance to get rid of everybody in one fell swoop) = FEDERAL GREENHOUSE.

What I am proposing, ladies and gentlemen, is that come election time we bid adieu to the MPs who have failed to change our country for the better and replace them with hothouse vegetables, which would be grown in the House of Commons and donated to needy families. As soon as that glass dome gets built the House would be the perfect environment for an indoor garden.

Harper: "Deceit. Abuse. Contempt." Starchy.

Just think of it: the seats belonging to the Liberal Party of Canada would be replaced with rows of juicy red tomatoes. The NDP, carrots (’cause they’re orange, do you see where I’m going with this?). The Bloc, some kind of legume (just to keep things en français), and the Conservatives? Well, I couldn’t think of any blue vegetable so I settled on potatoes. Sometimes, Stephen Harper looks a bit like a potato. Come to think of it, so does Jason Kenney. AND John Baird. Potatoes it is.

Should the Green Party ever win any seats, those will be planted with zucchini. (Because let’s face it, as much as we all enjoy zucchini from time to time, if we don’t have it, it doesn’t really seem to make a difference, does it?)

Ignatieff: "He didn't come back for you." But he sure is delicious.

I believe a Federal Greenhouse is a much more cost-effective way to run a Parliament than paying salaries to 305 eating, breathing, expense-claim-submitting human beings. It would also serve to restore some civility to question period. I highly doubt that any back benching legumes will be on their smartphones instead of paying attention to the issues being discussed. And if a potato managed to make personal attacks in QP aimed at a tomato or carrot across the floor, I’d actually be impressed instead of disgusted. Sure, big issues like health care and the Canada Pension Plan and Canada’s role in overseas conflicts probably wouldn’t be dealt with very effectively by a room full of vegetables, but I would like to posit that they aren’t really being dealt with very effectively now by a room that’s only occasionally full of MPs. At least the vegetables would go to hungry families. And giving nutritious food to children is something I’m sure all Canadians of any party stripe can get behind.

(For all you pedants out there, yes, I am aware that tomatoes aren’t actually vegetables. But they’re very good for you.)

Still not convinced this is a fantastic idea that should be implemented as soon as humanly possible? Fine. I have another solution for you. An election is coming. Go get informed. Find out who the candidates in your riding are. Ask them questions about the issues that matter to you most. Ask your MPs what they are doing for your constituency, both within and outside of the House of Commons. On election day, go vote.

The Elections Canada website provides a very helpful webpage where you can search for your Federal riding by entering your postal code. Once your riding comes up, the page shows you when the next Federal election takes place (May 2, 2011) and also has lists of helpful links along the side, answering FAQ’s such as “Where do I vote?” and “Who are the candidates in my electoral district?”. I just gave you the link to the aforementioned helpful website so you’ve really got no excuse not to check it out.

Young voters, I’ve already berated you in an earlier blog post. Now’s your time to shine. Get out there and give your MPs a kick in the ass. Or, if you dig greenhouses, find your gardening gloves. One way or another, it’s time to get your hands dirty for your country.

Conservatives & Liberals: Just stop it, both of you.

Like kittens? You'll love Harper's politics.

Today’s rant about being sick and tired of hearing about Canadian politics may come as a surprise to people who read my December 2 post, berating my generation for their lack of political participation and poor voter turn-out. I do still sincerely believe that citizens my age have a duty to be informed and involved. But democracy is a two-way street. Politicians who want our support need to give us something to vote for. Stephen Harper, the leader of the Canadian government, and Michael Ignatieff, the leader of the official opposition, are just not doing it for me right now.

I am tired of reading about whether or not Canadians will be subjected to a federal election this year (wasn’t that the question last year, and the year before that, and the year before that?). I am tired of the government being so arrogant (or perhaps so hopeful) as to make the claim, as they often seem to do, that “Canadians don’t want an election.”  I am tired of the opposition being so unimaginative and so impotent that the only weapon they seem to want to deploy is the threat of an election, only to withdraw that threat as soon as anyone starts to think they might really be serious.

I am tired of Stephen Harper’s sweaters and musical stylings. I am tired of Michael Ignatieff’s plaid shirts and cross-country burger flipping. Why are they doing this? Why aren’t they running the country? What the heck is going on?

That's actually pretty good. Quebec City, July 2010 Photo: Jacques Boissinot/Canadian Press

My January 17, 2011 Maclean’s came today, and with it a tidy little opinion piece by columnist Paul Wells entitled “How Stephen Harper Will Survive 2011.” Even before I read the article there was little doubt in my mind that Stephen Harper will survive 2011 just fine, though whether he’ll do anything with the power he’s still managing to cling to, anything that serves Canada more than it serves his party, is another matter. According to Wells, Harper is in a position of “relative strength” and “has a good shot at avoiding an election and, if he cannot avoid it, a good shot at winning it.” Let’s get this straight: Harper doesn’t want to win an election, he wants to avoid one, but if avoiding doesn’t work, it’s okay, he’ll win it. Harper also seems to be a fan of saying that the opposition is a fan of an election. Which seems silly, because if there was an election, Harper would win it, right?

I’m confused.

Speaking of confusion, I am not exactly receiving a boat-load of clarity from the opposition either. Iggy’s bus tour and the fact that he’s a really smart guy (albeit a bit of a cold fish in front of the camera) notwithstanding, I don’t know much about what Michael Ignatieff wants to do for my country. He likes to complain about the Conservatives, that’s for sure, but any bozo can complain. I’m complaining right now. Ignatieff’s job is to be more effective than that, and the Liberals’ only claim to fame at the moment is that they do not agree with the government. Except when they do, of course.

Just for fun, here’s a little snippet of Twitter conversation I caught on January 7, 2011 between Paul Wells and Andrew Coyne (also of Maclean’s Magazine):

InklessPW Paul Wells

“Planes and prisons” vs “families” and other good stuff: the Liberal ballot question as framed by Brison today and Goodale 2 weeks ago

acoyne acoyne

Interesting, since Libs also for planes & prisons RT @InklessPW “Planes & prisons” vs “families” & other good stuff: Liberal ballot question

acoyne acoyne
ie They’re still going to buy the planes, and they voted for the crime bills that necessitate more prisons RT @InklessPW

.

Again I’m confused. Both parties want some new planes? Both parties are on board with laws that would necessitate more prisons?  I’ll take Coyne’s word on this one, even if it is just a Twitter conversation, even if Twitter isn’t always a good “source”, since he’s a much more knowledgeable person than I.  I know 140-character limits tend to over-simplify issues a bit but it’s the very idea that bothers me. Planes and prisons for both Conservatives and Liberals? Talk about arriving at the party in the same dress and now having to figure out who “wears it better.”

This one's for my scrapbook.

If both the government and its closest rival agree on planes and prisons, and stimulus spending, and all the other big and small issues that the two parties have made gutless compromises on since 2008 (some necessary, some not), all that’s left for each side to do is accessorize that same old dress and try to convince us that the other gal looks trashy.

Which means that instead of being asked to consider which party better represents my values and beliefs regarding war, justice, education, and the economy (not to mention health care and the environment), I am being asked, by BOTH sides, to care about who is more cuddly, who likes “ordinary Canadians” more and terrorists less. To care about whether Iggy is “just visiting” or whether he’s here to stay, to care about whether Harper has something sinister up his sleeve or whether he’s doing what he truly believes is best for Canada. In short, I’m being asked to care about “politics”.

I don’t mean, “caring about politics” in terms of being informed, and of voting for the MP you think will best address your concerns. The “politics” I’m being asked to care about is mostly spin, hype, polls (whose conclusions my beliefs are never on the winning side of), a coalition of “Socialists” and “Separatists” that never really happened (and likely never will), and an election that isn’t happening yet, but that we don’t know for sure isn’t going to happen. This is the kind of crap that always seems to float to the top of the murky federal politics pool. I suppose I could stick my head in there and try to see if I can find any useful information but it’s not an appealing prospect.

Clap if you believe he can win an election. Photo: Sean Kilpatrick/ Canadian Press

This constant stream of exaggeration, hyperbole, and trivial detail seems to come from both sides. And it belittles me as a citizen. It makes me feel as though my part of the political process is about being led to the ballot box by half-truths and handshakes. It makes me feel as though nobody in Parliament thinks we’re smart enough to think about the actual issues that affect our lives and to vote that way. The fact that I haven’t seen either side touch health care with a ten-foot pole recently even though, at some point, we’re really going to have to, is not inspiring. It seems that while both sides certainly believe they have the right to govern, they don’t really have the guts to, and, to add insult to injury, they don’t think we’ll notice.

For goodness sakes, enough already. Conservatives, Liberals, just stop it. That new, nasty, media-sexy, but actually totally irrelevant barb you’re ready to let fly at the other party? That photo of you cuddling a cute kitten/baby/constituent you’re waiting to release? Just don’t. I don’t care. Go to your rooms. Think about what you’ve done. Think about what you’re going to do. I don’t want to hear a single word from either of you until you have something constructive to say.

Dear Rick Mercer: Please make me your sidekick

 

Saskatchewan (usually BC), Canada

ATTN: Rick Mercer, The Rick Mercer Report

CC: CBC Television

Watch the Rick Mercer Report on CBC Television

Dear Mr. Mercer,

I am writing to you today to humbly request that you consider making me your sidekick on the Rick Mercer Report. I know what you are thinking. You are thinking, “The RMR is an excellent show just as it is, without a sidekick.” And it is. It certainly is. But my dream job is to be your sidekick on the Rick Mercer Report, and I’m pretty sure my effect on the RMR will be harmless at worst, and at best, I might improve ratings in the “enjoys watching well-mannered young Canadians on TV” demographic. (And who doesn’t like well-mannered young Canadians? It’s what we DO.)

I will now outline the reasons why I would make an excellent sidekick for you on the Rick Mercer Report:

1. FANDOM. I think anyone who is going to be your sidekick should be a fan. I am a fan. Of you Mr. Mercer, of the Rick Mercer Report, and of the CBC. Being from rural Saskatchewan, I was raised on CBC TV (one of two channels we received) and CBC Radio. I grew up watching This Hour Has 22 Minutes. Sure, once I moved out to the West Coast and mysteriously got free cable for a while I left my CBC roots. But after the Rick Mercer Report visited Simon Fraser University (my alma mater) for the Spread the Net Student Challenge I started watching the RMR. A wave of nostalgia washed over me and my highest show-biz ambition is now to be a CBC media personality.

2. TRAVELLING CANADA. A lot of what you do on the Rick Mercer Report involves travelling across Canada. As my only dependents in Vancouver at the moment are fairly hardy houseplants I am up for Canadian adventures whenever you and the CBC say the word. (I graduated with a BFA, so you know I have free time.) One of the reasons the RMR works is that you have a genuine interest in and love for Canada. So do I. I’ve lived in other countries and I relished the experience but I’ve got a pretty strong bias for Canada. Big places, small places, north, south, east, west, Canada’s my home and I’d love to show it off. I also feel that between the two of us (you growing up in the Maritimes and working in Toronto, me growing up in Saskatchewan and working in Vancouver) we’ll have Canada pretty much covered east to west. (As a matter of fact, let’s add “Western Canadians” to the demographic I can try to help reach. Cha-ching.)

“Hold the phone,” you might say, “there’s a lot more to the RMR than just travelling around Canada.” I know this, and I am ready. Heli-logging? Love to try it. Bungee jumping with Rick Hansen? Zip lining? Sign me up. Harvesting potatoes? I’ve been picking potatoes since I was a young fry. I am ready for you, Canada. I will taste your jams and dance your jigs and fire your cannons and ride in and/or drive vehicles I most certainly do not have the certification to operate. I will wear a camera on my head as I plunge off some Canadian summit, kept safe by only a harness and my will to not die on Canadian television. So Canada’s a big wild country? Bring it.

3. MY TV-FRIENDLY ATTRIBUTES. I understand that good RMR sidekick material would also have to be good TV material. I’m outgoing and love talking to people. I’m cheerful and silly, smart and grounded. I keep abreast of Canadian politics with my Maclean’s subscription (all the better to quip about politicians with), my more-clever-than-me friends, and my new Twitter addiction. I have a clear and pleasant speaking voice (like an elementary school secretary), I’m very polite, and I’m reasonably easy on the eyes too:

 

Nothing that a CBC make-up artist can't spruce up.

I realize that the RMR and CBC TV likely do not have the budget to hire a whole other (more or less unnecessary) person to be your sidekick. I would like to point out that in addition to the attributes listed above, I’m relatively small, don’t eat much, and require fairly little upkeep. I am happy to curl up each night in a bedroom set left over from “Wind At My Back” or any other remnant of CBC Canadiana not currently being used. A nice four-poster from “Road to Avonlea” would do just fine.

As a spunky Canadian and fan of your show, Mr. Mercer, I believe I really ought to be considered as a possible sidekick for you on the Rick Mercer Report. I would do an outstanding job mostly because I would be so jazzed to be there. Also, my parents would think it was really cool.

I am able to drop everything and be an awesome sidekick at your earliest convenience. References are available upon request. I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Best of luck in your 2011 season.

Sincerely,

Lauren Kresowaty

(twitter.com/niftynotcool)

P.S. For all of you reading who are NOT Rick Mercer or a representative of CBC Television, remember to watch the Rick Mercer Report on CBC when it returns in the New Year and to have a wonderful Christmas.

Are you going to watch the Rick Mercer Report? I know I am!