Friday, November 28, 2008

CANADA'S CONSERVATIVES OFFER A BIZARRE ECONOMIC STATEMENT

POSTED RESPONSE TO A COLUMN IN THE TORONTO GLOBE AND MAIL

And so the Tory minority should be in jeopardy.

What a bizarre document the Conservatives have presented us.

I would have no objection to the government playing things cautiously with regard to major-industry stimulation policies, taking only sensible steps until the developing picture is a little clearer.

After all, a new government is being born in the United States, and it is not clear what steps will be taken towards an industry like automobiles.

But without major programs being started yet, one did reasonably expect certain steps to have been taken. Some extension of EI benefits would be one. So is a substantially better treatment of retirees with their drawdown of savings from government-created instruments. And so would genuine government restraint, such as a reducing a bloated cabinet, placing hard-nosed limits on expenses, and perhaps even reducing ministers’ salaries.

But here we have no such measures.

And, just as important, we have no consultation with opposition parties before presenting this document. None.

It’s the clearest indicator that Harper intends to rule exactly the way he has the last two and a half years, and that is simply not acceptable.

This document plays politics under the guise of economic restraint, and it is not just any politics, it is American-style Right Wing politics.

What benefit worth measuring can possibly come from ending support for political parties? Moreover, does anyone in his or her right mind think American-style private money controlling politics is good?

What benefit worth measuring can come from suspending the right to strike?

Is the suspension of that right even legal? It seems to me to invite a court challenge. This isn’t bringing people together, it’s the opposite.

What meaningful benefit can come from the changes concerning women and equity?

This document provides the clearest evidence of Harper’s continued ideologue approach to government. He seems to have learned nothing, only posing in his general statements and photo-ops as a man who has learned something.