I promise you, I’m not taking this as a victory lap because, to be certain, Canada loses in this scenario. But as I said in the title of my Western Standard article published last month, “Yes, expect more floor-crossing — no, it’s not okay.”Well, here it is, and it’s not okay.MP Matt Jeneroux crossed the floor on February 18, a double whammy in Parliament. Not only does he bring the federal Liberals one seat closer to a majority, but, more importantly, he nullifies the majority of votes from the constituents of Edmonton Riverbend. It’s an incredibly clumsy and selfish move, at a time when national unity is hanging in the balance. A time when just a single political scandal could conceivably precipitate the end of Canada as we know it. The thirty pieces of silver Jeneroux received are today called “special advisor on economic and security partnerships.”Following this betrayal, the voices for Alberta independence will rise in unison, calling for more support. Who can blame them? Floor-crossing is a dirty pool, the cheapest of tactics, subverting democracy with backroom deals. It’s deciding the future by the will of the few instead of by the votes of the electorate. As I argued in my last article, I don’t believe it was democratic when Harper allowed it. I don’t believe it’s democratic today.But it’s perfectly normal, if you ask the Canadian Press who, if you’ll remember, Pierre Poilievre called, “a tax-funded mouthpiece to the PMO.” In response to Jeneroux’s skulduggery, the Canadian Press blithely state that, “more than 300 MPs have crossed the floor in Parliament since Confederation.” That was the title of their article, published at CTV, the Toronto Star, and even my hometown’s Sudbury.com. Do they care about the unity of the country at all? The entire Alberta independence movement rests on a disillusionment with that Confederation from the word “go.” .Read the room.Within two hours of posting that off-putting title, CTV News changed the headline. It’s entirely fair to ask: Is this attempt to attain a majority by hook or by crook really going to unify our country? Might it further pull Canada apart?It certainly doesn’t support the argument that Canada is a democracy. It can’t possibly reassure Albertans on the fence that Canada is worth sticking around for, can it?These three floor-crossings in four months fit, rather, into Chrystia Freeland’s cryptic 2023 question: “Does capitalist democracy still work?” Freeland’s implication, of course, is that capitalist democracy doesn’t work, begging the question of what exactly it can be replaced with.Well, what are the Liberals replacing democracy with?Technocracy is one possibility, driving Canada toward results-based governance by experts, ostensibly because we’re in a crisis. Technocracy is governance that actively overrides the democratic process in the name of “getting things done” efficiently. It removes bureaucrats and replaces them with technocrats (experts) or even technology (such as AI).Some conservative voters are happy about this approach, because it cuts the bloat in the federal public service, but (if it hasn’t already) just wait until AI-driven replacements come for your sector. Such technology-driven measures help further income inequality and concomitantly destroy humanity, while expanding the new class of uber-rich multi-billionaires. Better hope they’re benevolent multi-billionaires. .Is technocracy going to be effective in Canada? Carney’s technocratic regime seems thus far comprised of Carney alone: needless jet-setting, intermittent posturing, and long-winded speeches on saving the world. Carney is so busy creating the narrative of a “rupture” that he’s failed to do anything tangible to resolve what he identifies as the biggest source of that rupture — US protectionism. He’s failed to bring Canada down from the precipice of a recession, despite being a central banker who sold himself on the basis that, “if it’s not a crisis, you wouldn’t be seeing me. I’m most useful in a crisis. I’m not that good in peacetime.”Maybe, Mr. Carney, you’re not good for Canada at any time.There’s a growing argument behind this conjecture: if Carney continues preening for the cameras about so-called ‘unity,’ such as he did after he returned from Davos, then he’d better act like someone aiming for unity. There is a very big disparity between what Carney says and what he does, and he’s hoping Canadians won’t pay attention.Poaching an MP from within the heart of a province ostensibly experiencing the birth pains of nationhood might induce such a birth. What are the technocrats — the experts that know everything — thinking on this one? This is, politically speaking, amateurish. It’s outright hypocrisy. It could cost Canada its unity.
