It's odd but the conservative press has recently been much harder on the federal government than, say, the Toronto Star.
Perhaps that's because they see that the dream of a conservative Conservative Party is failing.
And in fact, the voice for responsible (conservative) Federal finances is the Liberal Party. I say this not just because I am a Liberal but mainly because I am afraid of long term deficits -- a tax system structured to be in a deficit because it cannot pay off, in good times, what it borrowed in bad times. The Conservatives have succumbed to the lure of voodoo economics.
But leave aside the economy, what has the Conservative Party achieved with regard to the social conservative agenda? Gay marriage? Abortion? Tough on crime? Bringing religion back into the public square? Well what have they done? (ok, they raised the age of consent from 14 to 16; that will keep the barbarians on the other side of the Alps).
Truth is, at best there have been trifles achieved on the social conservative agenda; foreign policy seems to be the strongest conservative success but even this is weak. The (modest) support of George Bush's war on terror looks to have failed (welcome home Omar Khadr). And Middle East policy is virtually the same in the Conservative and Liberal platforms.
And so we are left with a party that has not fulfilled a social conservative agenda and which is spending money with more abandon than the Reform Party said PET ever did.
No wonder the conservative press is unimpressed.
I'll finish with a quotation from a piece in tomorrow's Post:
"In the life of every ministry, there comes a moment when convictions have been worn down by the constant pressures of power, leaving the government on all sides of every issue, standing for everything and nothing. Stephen Harper's government may well have reached that point with this budget."
http://www.nationalpost.com/m/blog.html?e=fullcomment/archive/2009/01/26/blogpost5.aspx
James Morton
6 comments:
Morton, you are sickenly right. The Conservative Party has betrayed its trust. I don't care about the economy much. Martin seemed pretty good there. But Canada's abortion laws make me weep. And Harper won't even agree to a law to make murdering a pregnant woman a specially bad crime. Look, with a guy like Ignateiff you know what you get. He's a heathen but he doesn't pretend to be a Christian. Harper pretends and then betrays. It's very sad. JJ
"And in fact, the voice for responsible (conservative) Federal finances is the Liberal Party."
James, I hope what you say above is true. I am very concerned that even the Liberal Party has fallen victim to the knee jerk reaction to spend spend spend after over a decade of responsible economics. Each time McCallum says stimulus I cringe. We can't afford to spend ourselves to the wall a la Trudeau and Mulroney.
Anon... One only needs to look at the past Liberal record to see how fiscally responsible we've been. As far as spending goes, there are a couple of dominant options in times like these:
1) The conservative route of spending via massive tax cuts (remember, this is still "spending" money the government does not even have) - which usually sees the money wash into a "savings" vacuum (everyone puts the savings away, and doesn't spend)
2) The progressive route of spending in key areas to stimulate the economy: Tax breaks targeted at specific businesses which will create jobs (in specific industries - tied to specific projects); infrastructure projects (while these are expensive, they employ thousands of out of work Canadians - who then spend back into the economy - which helps businesses and communities recover. Infrastructure also provides the means to build on tomorrow's economy - which we'll need in 2-5 year's time when the next boom cycle begins); education and retraining programs (helps many find work, creates jobs in the education field, and creates a bright, intelligent work-force which attracts foreign investment).
The end result is a broader tax base created from a liberal/moderate/progressive platform, paying down a debt, rather than limited taxpayers being strapped with a giant debt - as in the conservative plan.
The choice would seem to fall with the Liberal Party - which has the experts who pulled us out of our last round of massive Conservative deficits. The choice is clearly between a nation being able to handle it's debt, and a system where we also create debt but force it on a shrinking tax base.
I would rather have a much larger tax base, which allows me the flexibility to cut taxes, if and when needed - in specific areas. Tax cuts to the middle class may create votes now, but as one of those middle class, I know darned well that if we don't take care of the jobless and businesses in trouble, the size of our "class" will shrink too. In that case, tax cuts will do me no good at all.
I don't think the Reform Party and the Alliance are too happy with Harper,as he is going against his principles,
blaming him for Red Tory financing. They say they are going to stop all donations to the Conservative Party
This is new news?
I said this on day one. These are not tories, they are a collection of fundamentalist zealots. Fate and the nonchalance of Canadians allowed brigands to 'steal' a party name; instant credibility. Without that name they'd still be pounding pulpits in hinterland Canada.
There aren't more than 5 people with any kind of useful qualification amongst them and that group would not include Harper.
Perhaps there is finally a growing understanding in Canada of how deep incompetence flows within and around Harper's party.
Conservatives are consistent in at least one thing - economic mismanagement.
By responding to the recession with tax cuts, they are simply hurting government's ability to respond, while effectively removing money from circulation (since people will save the tax cuts, not spend them).
Moreover, these are 'permanent' tax cuts, despite the promise that they would not create a structural deficit, which means they have even more significant spending cuts planned for the future.
Essentially, this will march us down the route that led to the crisis in the first place, an over-reliance on the private sector to act in the best interests of society.
Post a Comment