COIC
I’ve met a lot of people over the years that have declared that they are religious but do not believe in organized religion. Sometimes, I feel the same way about politics. I believe in solid fiscal policy, on being socially progressive, on doing what’s best for Canada; But organized politics is sometimes the problem.
At the same time, I also think that there are advantages to organized parties that need to be acknowledged. Resources are far more numerous, and you have an audience of like-minded individuals to debate with. The whole idea of a caucus, and by extension the party as a whole, is to argue an idea before it even goes to the House. If you can believe that a party could truly achieve that, then you can probably understand the idea of toeing party line. I mean, your party decides its position, with your say, as well as the say of other MPs, or even members. And then you present that to the House with solidarity. That’s the idea, although unfortunately it often fails in practice.
I recently learned of an organization called the Coalition of Independent Candidates, who aim to get independents elected into the House. I like the idea of an organization promoting some of the advantages that independents can bring to the table, but, it also has the ability of, within itself, becoming party-like in its quest to get only the people it endorses elected.
Not all independents will be COIC candidates, however all COIC candidates will be independent.
-COIC Press Release, August 29, 2007
That said, I wrote an email to the COIC, partially to get a better idea of their mandate, but also to understand if they were more anti-party or more pro-independent.
A pro-independent organization that aims to inform, in my opinion, is a grand idea. An anti-corruption view is also good, trying to bring transparency and accountability to the system, through the election of independents. However, the idea of promoting select independents for the sake of them being independent can also be a disestablishmentarian (ok. I just had the need to use this word) view that ignores some of the implicit benefits of a party system, especially when considering the sheer geography of a country like Canada. I wanted to know which of these view(s) the COIC held…
Below I offer you their response. You can judge for yourself.
Dear Kirk
Thank you so much for writing. We are very encouraged by the response to COIC. Just to be clear COIC is not a party, but rather a concept. The Charter is for the public to understand a candidates commitment, ethics and understanding of the employment they seek. We feel strongly that Canadians are ready for real representatives who desire to keep their word and are free to do so.We do not have supplemental information, other than what is on the website. There are new articles and concepts being posted everyday, so please check the site regularly. If you agree with the Charter and want your constituents to know you agree with those basic principles than we would present you as a member through the website. We do not design platforms, or tell candidates what their stand is, other than the basic Charter.
We are exploring the avenue of becoming a third party for financing purposes. Ultimately I think having all MP’s independent of any and all influence would be in the best interest of Canadians, however I don’t expect it to happen overnight. Party endorsed candidates who express independent thinking, are only free to speak, if their party allows it; so they are not truly free. It is a bit like an illusion of freedom, without the reality of it. I have just recently penned an article regarding this issue, which will be on the website shortly. The question is why do we need a middle man? Are MP’s not capable of speaking on their own, are they not competent? Are they just a spokesperson for the party, rather than the people’s representative? Those are important questions Canadians must begin to explore.
I am impressed with Bill Casey’s stand and his efforts on behalf of independents. It doesn’t really make sense for Canadians to fund the party machine, we are paying our MP’s a salary, perks etc, as well as a party to be their front; why?
…
Again I appreciate your taking the time to write, and look forward to your ideas.
2 Responses to “COIC”
I have given the COIC a copy of my ‘Independent Fundraising’ points (albeit a more refined version). Whether or not I agree with all principles of the organization, they provide a much larger vehicle to carry the ideas forward. I want to continue within the spirit of cooperation with this group, regardless of whether I decide to be endorsed by them or not.
Well, at the very least, at least they are open about the “lack of freedom” reality that the freedom is supposed to counteract. In any case, it also seems that they are working on this. And new is always good because it changes things up, which means more diversity at the table. Whether it shapes up to be just like any other party remains to be seen… so my jury is still out on that one.
Leave a Reply