To be clear, the media did not portray the 2011 election results to be an affront to democracy.
In the ensuing years, however, PM Harper's manner of governing was so described, not much by mainstream media but by a growing chorus of critics who were alarmed, for well-founded reasons, by the extent to which Harper closed the door to even consultation with the members of his own caucus, let alone members of the opposition parties, and even to major stakeholders. Almost all legislation, for example, including hugely important bills like Bill C-23 (dramatically revising the law governing Canadian elections), Bill C-24 (citizenship), and Bill C-51 (adding profound powers of surveillance with minimal oversight), was drafted behind closed doors, largely in secret, by a small inner circle of individuals close to Harper, and then rammed through the legislative process with minimal study or debate. Even Harper's own caucus was kept in the dark until the legislation was tabled. Even stakeholders in the government, let alone those outside government, were minimally consulted.
Anyone who spent much time watching Question Period over the last four years could easily see for herself the extent to which Harper refused to so much as even engage in the democratic process, refusing to answer even straight-forward questions of fact, key questions of importance on key issues facing the country.
In addition Harper implemented all sorts of other undemocratic policies, ranging from silencing government researchers to all but defunding the Information Commissioners office while at the same time stonewalling or outright denying scores and scores of legitimate information requests. Under his government scientists faced discipline for merely writing and performing folk songs unrelated to their employment.
We saw the impact on citizenship: under his government important Operational Bulletins governing procedure were excluded from the public view, ATI requests about basic bureaucratic practices were increasingly and drastically subject to redaction, and major changes to policy and practice were drafted in secret in the PMO and then dumped on CIC in a way that almost brought the processing of citizenship applications to a grinding halt (the 2012 implementation of OB 407, much of which is still concealed from public view; note that internal CIC memos obtained through the ATI process reveal the extent to which this was imposed from the top down with virtually no serious input from those who actually did the work in CIC, an obvious recipe for disaster, and it was, indeed, a disaster, and tens of thousands of qualified applicants are still mired in egregiously unfair delays still, years later).
In contrast, many previous majority governments in Canada were similarly elected by around 40% of the popular vote and they worked with opposition parties to govern Canada on behalf of all Canadians. (The media pundits estimate that 38.5% of the popular vote is the practical threshold for establishing a majority government.)
Justin Trudeau has promised to listen to each and every member of Parliament with respect, all 338 members, because even if they are a member outside the Liberal Party, they were nonetheless elected to represent the Canadians in their riding. And their opinion matters. Their opinion should be respected and considered.
The difference is huge. Whether Trudeau can keep this promise, or to what extent he can actually follow through with it, remains to be seen. A big clue will emerge in how Trudeau conducts himself during Question Period after Parliament is back in session.
While perhaps largely symbolic, Trudeau's appearance in the Press Galley this week, willing to openly address questions from reporters, illustrates oceanic differences in the approach to governing. I adamantly hope he keeps it up, difficult though it is sure to be.
;D 