The Future of Democracy Part I: Archaic Democracy.

Yesterday morning, I clicked on a link on Facebook to this article. It's a joke article, and a really funny one, poking fun at the way religion can stick it's nose into policy based on science, but the other way around is just not done, at least in the UK. As with all good jokes, it works well because it contains more than a grain of truth.

Lords Spiritual

The thing about this article that stuck with me after the laughing had died down was that it included a wikipedia link to the Lords Spiritual. I must admit, that as much as I am against the House of Lords in principal, it is not something I have researched much, not know much about, so when I read that 26 of it's sitting and voting members are made up of Bishops of the Anglican Church, to say I was gobsmacked is an understatement. I find this fact abhorrent, and counter to all modern democratic principles, even more so that the existence of the House of Lords to begin with.

Okay, so they are only 3.3% of the voting members of the House, (there are a further 5 former Lords Spiritual, who still sit in the House, due to life peerages so really it's 3.9%) but that is not the point . These are men (Women can be anglican bishops, but since the first one was only ordained last month, none of those sitting are female) have not been elected by the public (as all Peers), they have a very definite bias towards religion, thereby denying the division between church and state that I believe should be the cornerstone of all progresive societies. Furthermore, they are all Anglican. For historical reasons, and reasons of established religion, only English Bishops can sit. There is no representation from Scotland (Scottish Bishops were excluded from the Scottish parliament in 1638), Wales (the Church of Wales split in 1920, and the Welsh Bishops lost their seats) or Ireland (dissestablished in 1871). Not to mention people of other faiths within England and the rest of the UK. Only 19.9% of the population of the UK consider themselves members of the Church of England. This is not what we could call an equal representation of constituent states, is it? Don't get me wrong, I don't think the answer would be to install Bishops, or Bishops equivalents from the other member countries of the UK, but to dissestablish the Anglican Bishops sitting now.

The coalition Government slated reform to reduce this number, but these reforms have been dropped, due to lack of Tory support for the bill. Quelle surprise!

Canada

Yes, the House of Lords is an aberration, and one that seems particular to the UK, but a lot of the faults it has are mirrored in the Canadian Senate, another unelected body of power, granted with different selection criterea, but un democratic all the same. Especially since the numbers of Senators per Province are grossly out of date. The second issue, for both upper houses, is that they perpetuate the two party system. This is less so the case in the UK, which has Lords from many (but not all) parties, but even there, there is an inbuilt bias towards the two party system that cannot be easily eradicated. In Canada, it is much worse, with only two of the countries parties having seats (No NDP, Bloc or Green Senators). Last year, all Liberal Senators were removed from the Liberal Party, making them nominal Independant mambers, but the reality is, it seems more a PR stunt than actually making the senators functionally independant.

Reform

Democratic reform, is not a luxury, it is a neccesity. These Houses of sober reflection are undemocratic, and extremely out of date. It is also debateable if they actually do work as brakes on the Houses of Commons, since they can be filled by the Government of the day with their own people, thereby allowing laws to be passed anyway. These systems are centuries out of date, and don't fulfil the role intended of them, and in fact hinder modern democratic processes and full representation of the citizens of these countries. Is it no wonder then, that people are disengaging from politics under these systems, and are actively searching for alternatives?

I had intended to go on to look at some exciting developments and alternative democratic procedures, but I have ranted on for far too long, so that must now become a second post.

Edit:
Seems, the number of members is going up, at an astounding rate!

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf

I am Part Timelord

I always knew this to be kinda true, you know, despite the evidence to the contrary, lack of time-machine, only one heart, that kind of thing, but I read it in Doctor Who Magazine Issue 480, whilst waiting for the train this morning, I am related to the latest incarnation of the Rani (by blood, if a little diluted, she's my Mum's cousin).

I met with her at a recent family gathering, where she mentioned recording with Big Finish Audio, but I didn't really think about it, and didn't ask for more info, and the conversation moved on, but after having seen her face in the mag, I wish I had pushed for more info, although reading about it, that may have been for a previous production she did with them. Also, this was announced back in June of this year, so I am ever so slightly behind the times. Still, I'll go and buy these episodes now for sure.

So, it seems that Timelords have a large amount of Scottish blood in them (3 Doctors, 1 Master and 1 Rani), maybe that's why they make such good explorers and travel so well, after all, if Scots are known for one thing, it's leaving Scotland!

Halloween 2014

This year's pumpkins were a little more taxing than previous years for some reason. Maybe I was just getting over confident after the successes of previous years.. Next year, remind me, if one of them asks for Hello Kitty again, just to say yes!

LP wanted Toothless, the dragon from how to train your dragon, but she wanted the whole dragon, like this one we found online, but I couldn't find a template for it, and although I could maybe freehand a dragon, there was no guarantee it would look like Toothless. In the end I managed to convince her to go with the one pictured here, and she likes it too.

Abi wanted an owl, much easier to find, however, I made a bit of a mess of it, and I left too few points of contact with the owl and the rest of the pumpkin, so it broke off at the legs, and needed cocktail stick surgery to keep it in place. It should last to Halloween, but not likely much longer.

As to the costumes, this year they are a cowgirl, and a baby cow (as Abi insists on calling the costume, even though her sister corrects her to calf every time she says it).

 

 Happy Halloween!

Halloween Masks

K and I do love Halloween, though we don't always have an excuse to dress up,. This year, we are heading out for a Halloween supper with the kids and a local kid-friendly cafe. Well, it's more than kid friendly, it's designed to be a place where the kids can run about and play while the parents have a seat and a coffee.

We didn't want to go the whole hog for a costume, but we did need to do something. Luckily, this site came across my Facebook feed last week, and I figured it gave the perfect answer. Cheap, but looks good.

We chose the bird mask, and then set to using the pdf Template required to make the masks out of old cereal packets.

I think they work rather well, especially after the coat of silver paint.

Ok, no, after this, I'll be done

One last post on the subject, then I promise it'll be back to pictures of the kids and other holiday snaps. Promise. I just need a good rant to clear my system.

I couldn't vote in the referendum. I'm good with that, it was part of what I loved about the campaign to build a better Scotland, not an ethnically pure Scotland. All good.

However, just because I moved to Canada, don't tell me shut up about it. Either because I say before hand what I would like to happen, or because I complain about the result because I don't like it. I care what happens there. I am invested in the outcome, and I can be disappointed if it doesn't turn out the way I had hoped. The process involved me, and motivated me, as it did many others in a way that other political processes have not, even without the additional factor of journalists asking what I thought. I don't deny I enjoyed that aspect, and it was an excellent experience for me, it did further sharpen my thoughts on the matter, and made me educate myself on what my opinion really was.

Do not belittle outsiders points of view. Sometimes you have to step away to get another perspective, or as the Bard put it:

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us, To see oursels as ithers see us

Every family in Scotland, for every generation, going back about, oh, I don't know, 300 years or so, has had someone, or even multiple family members that have left, to find a better life. Be that to North America, Australasia, or even if it's just down to England. Why did they leave again? To find a better life. My own father said to me, when I first told him of plans to come to Canada, that "there's nothing for you here". He himself had contemplated emigration to Australia when a young man. It's such a recurring trend, we have a whole genre of songs based upon it. Right now, there are over 1 million Scots, who were born in Scotland, that live elsewhere. 20% of the population has left. And that doesn't even cover those with Scottish parents, or ancestry. That is a larger percentage of the population than even New Zealand (14%), who are famous for leaving their islands.

Historically, these Scots emigrants went on to build things. Within the British Empire, yes I get that, but under that construct those that left flourished, an those that stayed, well, they just kept leaving. The emigrant Scots helped to build places like Canada, and New Zealand and the USA. Scottish thinkers, Scottish workers and Scottish philosophy perfused these places to make them what they are today. Of course, they did not do this alone, no man is an island, and no culture remains uninfluenced by those that surround it, but the roots are there.

So, all these Scots had to leave, to find something better, then when they got there, they built something better for themselves. My question is, why did they have to leave at all? If they had the will and the know how to make things the way they wanted, why did they have to leave to do it?

Yesterday, Scotland had a chance to change this trend. To put a cap on those that had to leave to find better, by building that better place underneath them, instead of having to run away to foreign climes to be able to do things their way. Not only to put a cap on emigration, but to maybe even reverse the trend. To have those Scots who left to come back, and of course, to welcome those from other countries who liked what they saw and want to stay. They had a chance to take control of their own destiny, and build a better Scotland based on social justice, and representative democracy. That didn't happen. Scots are just going to keep on leaving, and before you ask them to come back, ask the question, is there anything there for them?

Scotland bottles it. Shocker.

The title of this post is  a post I made on facebook last night, after coming home from the pub. I may have put a few hackles up with what is possibly an inflamatory and condescending comment, especially since I have chosen not to live in that country. I stand by my statement.

I have tried to put the sentiment into clearer, more verbose English, and even tried to translate it into French, so I can convey that sentiment to those here in Quebec who ask how I feel this morning, but I just can't. There is a subtlety and depth the the phrase "bottling it" that is beyond my skills to translate. It is a uniquely Scottish phrase, for what is an apparently in-built and unavoidable part of the Scottish psyche.

Anyway, enough wallowing. The people of Scotland have decided, by a whopping 10% margin. Onwards.

Last night, a few of the members of our meetup group, and other Scots got together in a local bar, and were joined by journalists from the Gazette, le Devoir and CBC. And with that, the spotlight leaves Scotland to muddle through as best it can, and the Scots in Montreal fade back into the background.

CBC Montreal News

So, yeah, turns out the TV did want to talk to me. I got a call this morning from nice chap at CBC Montreal asking if I would like to do a spot for the evening news. Once I realised I didn't have to go into the studio, and that he would come to me, I said yes.

Of course, I wasn't dressed for TV, just in scrappy jeans and a T-shirt, but when I phoned K to tell her I had been asked, she ever so kindly offered to drop off a shirt and jacket at work for me!
The interview was conducted just outside Ste Justine, and was about 5-10 minutes in length, which is becoming quite easy for me to do on this subject, after the latest practice. Of course they only used 2 sound bites from those 5 minutes, but at least I wasn't quoted out of context. It would be nice to get my hands on the full interview, but I doubt that'll happen.


Here's the link. I'm between 5.00 and 5.24 minutes into the clip.

CBC Web Player here.

So, it turns out all I had to do to get on TV was write a request in my blog! Who knew? So, anyone out there want to give me a million bucks? Anyone?

Of course, nothing I say here will have an effect on the result, but I do feel engaged in the debate, if even in a small way, and to me, that is one of the greatest things about this debate, that it has engaged the population, of Scotland, and elsewhere, in a way that politics does not normally do. If even a fraction of the energy and interest that has been generated in this campaign continues to be put to use, then no matter the outcome, Scotland will win.

Is that the end of it? Not at all.  There's talk of cameras crashing our Scottish event tomorrow evening, and there's another CBC radio show that wants me for a debrief on Friday, but I doubt I can go due to the time of recording. I already had to turn them down today, but they did talk to me, and I get a mention in this segment they did with my friend Angus Bell.