Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Another Letter to the Governer General

To: Her Excellency
the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, C.C., C.M.M., C.O.M., C.D.
Governor General of Canada

Politicians need a swift and strong reminder: they represent the electorate and serve at our pleasure.

What have these people achieved who are bestowed with such a prestigious role and title of "Honourable" Member, when they cannot proclaim the basic behaviour and belief of "Peace, Order, Good Governance"? Besides personal glory and gluttony?

It is long past time that a thorough, transparent accounting occur with Government - who spend - unfettered OUR tax dollars.

Economic and world conditions are precarious and most turbulent - it is clear thoughtful, prudent and extra-ordinary measures must be executed to safeguard our Country. I trust an economist to possess a better comprehension of the complexities and interdependence of such matters domestically and their external global relationship. It would be irresponsible to support a flailing, do anything especially wild spending that are only band-aids on a slashed jugular - it is short term and short sighted.

Government MUST cut costs in all areas of each department and programme - just like every taxpayer has to do - like it or not.

The immediate cessation of Taxpayers Subsidizing Political Parties, $30 Million per annum is a start.

Politicians crafted tax legislation to generously reward and entice political donations with a whopping 75% tax credit!!

While "everyone" gives lip service to helping others - the Red Cross or Salvation Army certainly don't receive such tax incentives.

I thank you in advance for your time to read my email, it is far longer than I intended and there is far more to express, which will be in short order, just not at this time. However, I shall sign off with this:

Should it be decided that our newly elected Parliament - cannot proceed nor succeed - as a Canadian citizen, legally entitled to vote, it is this Taxpayer's Demand that an immediate election is called - so that we the people who pay for all of this, vote to unequivocally determine who governs Canada during this time of uncertainty and market crisis.

On June 6th, 2001 Prime Minister Chretien directed the Members of Parliament to approve a 42% and 20% pay increase, including a few perks for the Senators to ensure swift passage in both the House of Commons and the Upper Chamber. Not only was the Bill passed in a record three days but, it was also retro-active six months, which brings us to barely a month after Federal Election. This major legislation was, considered irrelevant to Taxpayers, as it wasn’t even hinted at prior to the Election.

Your role - unless you defer to the Queen of England, must ensure our democratic rights are not usurped again.


Sandra Miller


Anonymous said...

Elizabeth is the Queen of Canada, not just of the United Kingdom.
Canada is a monarchy, we are not citizens we are subjects, citizens live in a republic.
Your "democratic rights" are not being usurped by an action (a coalition) that is perfectly constitutional.

Pelalusa said...

Dear Anonymous,

I'll let Sandra address your first few points. As for your last one, you couldn't be more wrong.

As I've already written earlier, Le Coalition does have Constitutional Legitimacy but in no way, shape or form do they have Democratic Legitimacy. You can lie to yourself that they do but they simply don't.

There is ZERO precedent for this ever happening under remotely similar circumstances before and there's a good reason it hasn't.

David in North Burnaby BC said...

Mrs Windsor is indeed queen of canerduh as well as the UK, etc all separately, she wears a number of crowns at the same time.
"The Royal Style and Titles Act, was approved by the Canadian Parliament and was established by Royal Proclamation on May 29, 1953. The Act conferred legally and publicly, on the eve of the Queen’s Coronation, the principle of a distinct constitutional monarchy for Canada. Elizabeth II was equally Queen of Canada and the United Kingdom. The monarch remained shared, but the institution of monarchy had now evolved into independent constitutional entities. "

Canadian Parliamentary Review

As for the second point, I would assume that the anon poster is, like myself, much influenced by contract theorists like Locke and Rousseau, who hold that a true citizen is both subject and sovereign, and as in a monarchy the sovereign is sovereign (its right there in the job title) the subjects of a sovereign are not citizens of the state.
In this view (which I find persuasive myself, while I do it an injustice by thumbnailing here) only in a Res Publica, a republic, ruled by the people, can one truly be a citizen.

Pelalusa said...

Hi David,

It's been a long day and I must confess that much of what you're saying isn't registering with me.

Anyhow, thank you for commenting again.

Perhaps in the end we'll have to agree to disagree about Democratic Legitimacy. I could cite examples from Germany in the 1930's and from Africa in recent decades, though with no intention to draw a direct comparison.

I just happen to believe that there's a moral code that weighs far more importantly than any written laws. One good example I read today was: Just because it's not illegal to cheat on your spouse doesn't make it morally okay.

Good night.

David in North Burnaby BC said...

"Just because it's not illegal to cheat on your spouse doesn't make it morally okay."

Where the two situations do not correspond is in the fact that there is no penalty in law for adultery; in the current case in question, there would be a legal ramification in that Stephi Dionne, Lefty and Gills would be denied their constitutionally sanctioned coalition government.
As for whether I find all this to my liking, allow me to remind one and all I find very little about canerduh and its system of governance to my tastes and make no bones about it.
For example:

I hope you slept well, Robert.