If we want to take our country back we need to look to our history.
Voters in BC told their political masters where to stuff their HST voting out the tax in a referendum. In essence they were acting on the ancient practice of no taxation without representation, a Canadian ideal.
Despite the decades worth of rubbish you have been told about Canada`s history, our country is not traditionally one given to big government or huge spending. Government social programs did not create Canada nor do they define the nation now. That is what some would want you to believe but it is simply not true.
On Byline tonight I spoke with John Robson about this and we once again discussed the concept that taxation requires the consent of the governed.
People that want big government and high taxation will claim you are American if you believe in these sorts of ideas. Don`t let them bamboozle you, history is on your side. Here are the quotes to prove it.
St. Laurent believed in small government, Laurier believed in liberty. Both were Liberal leaders.
Look at the quote from Nova Scotia`s Isaac LeVesconte who was in the middle of debating confederation. He clearly saw that taxation required the consent of the governed.
‘Any ideas of non-essential interference by the Government is repugnant to the Liberal Party.“
Louis St. Laurent, 1957 election campaign, Fearful Symmetry p. 50.
“The good Saxon word, freedom; freedom in every sense of the term, freedom of speech, freedom of action, freedom in religious life and civil life and last but not least, freedom in commercial life.”
Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1894 (in a speech in Winnipeg)
“Their [the American] institutions have the same features as our own. There are some points of variance, but the same great principle is the basis of both – that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the unalienable rights of man, and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. This is the secret of the strength of the British constitution, and without a free and full recognition of it no government can be strong or permanent.”
David Christie in the Legislative Council of Canada 15/2/65, in Ajzenstat et al., eds., Canada’s Founding Debates p. 191.
“Will you permit the sacred fire of liberty, brought by your fathers from the venerable temples of Britain, to be quenched and trodden out on the simple altars they [your ancestors] have raised?”
Joseph Howe, in Halifax in 1835, appealing to a jury to acquit him on libel charges because what he’d published was true, in Gruending, ed., Great Canadian Speeches p. 7 [he was acquitted].
“Every person who had conversed with the most intelligent American statesmen and writers must have learned that they all admitted that the governmental powers had become too extended, owning to the introduction of universal suffrage, and mob rule had consequently supplanted legitimate authority; and we now saw the sad spectacle of a country torn by civil war, and brethren fighting against brethren.”
George-Etienne Cartier in the Legislative Assembly of Canada 7/2/65, in Ajzenstat et al., eds., Canada’s Founding Debates p. 185.
“The right of being taxed only through the action of their representatives, has always been considered one of the dearest privileges a free people can possess, and it is one that comes home to every man’s mind. At present not a single penny of taxes can be imposed upon the country except with the consent of its people. But what will be the result after we are annexed to Canada? What chance would 300,000 people have against three millions…?”
Isaac LeVesconte in the Nova Scotia House of Assembly 17/4/65, quoted in Ajzenstat et al., eds., Canada’s Founding Debates p. 237.
“He was glad to hear the honourable and learned member for Charlottetown (Mr. Brecken) allude to the right claimed by John Bull to grumble and to be stubborn when called upon to resign anything he believed himself entitled to hold; and to hear the honourable member then base thereon an argument for the people of this island being, like John Bull, stubborn in the retention of their free constitution. Such stubbornness was certainly becoming in a free people; but although he would not deny that the sons of John Bull had an hereditary right to assert that privilege, yet he would say it became them not (the descendants of the men who were conquered by the Normans and lost their liberty at the battle of Hastings) as well as it did the descendants of those men whose ancestors (the Caledonians of old) beat back from their mountain fastnesses of liberty the conquering eagles of imperial Rome. He was a descendant of those unconquered heroes of the north, and he would never consent that, in asserting our right to preserve our free constitution, we should adopt the cowardly, cringing tone in which it suited venality and corruption to plead for the attainment of the objects of their selfish designs.”
John McEachen in the PEI House of Assembly 7/5/66 quoted in Ajzenstat et al., eds., Canada’s Founding Debates pp. 225-26.