|
Canadian Election
Parties far closer than they admit
Sep 09, 2008 04:30 AM
Thomas Walkom Column in the Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/495706
Both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader
Stéphane Dion paint their rivalry in near-apocalyptic
terms.
Dion insists that Harper is defined by a
"narrow-minded right-wing agenda...
"There has never been a federal election that has more
clearly provided Canadians with such a stark choice,"
he said on Sunday.
Harper says the choice is equally stark – between what
he calls his solid, middle-of-the-road government and
the wild-eyed notions of a radical academic.
"Canadians want prudence, not risk," he said this
week. "They want practical actions for the many, not
theoretical ideas for the very few."
All of this is vibrant rhetoric.
But in terms of deeds, the Conservatives and Liberals
are far closer than their partisans admit.
Harper, in particular, has been careful not to stray
too far from the centre-right orthodoxy of previous
Liberal regimes. His critics insist that this is a
ruse, that he has a hidden agenda ready to unleash if
he wins a majority of Commons seats.
Yet there is little evidence of such an agenda.
As prime minister, Harper has deftly avoided most of
the so-called culture war issues, from abortion to gay
marriage.
Instead, he has taken aim at relatively low-budget
federal schemes unpopular with his base – from a
program that allowed disadvantaged groups to take on
the government in court, to cultural grants that
benefit those with whom the Conservatives disagree.
He has not dismantled what's left of the welfare
state, such as employment insurance. He hasn't had to.
Jean Chrétien's previous Liberal government did it for
him.
Like the Liberals, Harper has been happy to fund
medicare.
But – again like the Liberals – he has ignored its
creeping privatization, refusing to enforce the Canada
Health Act.
Dion accuses Harper of squandering the $12 billion
budgetary surplus he inherited.
If so, Harper has simply followed the Liberal lead,
using this surplus to pay down debt, reduce taxes and
boost federal spending.
In fact, most of Harper's tax cuts (with the important
exception of his decision to slash the GST) were
supported by the Liberals.
Conversely, the Harper Conservatives have not been
exactly parsimonious. During their two full years in
government, federal spending on programs rose by about
$20 billon.
During the last two full years of the previous Liberal
government, program spending also rose by $20 billion.
True, the Conservatives favour military spending. But
the Liberals are hardly peaceniks. They support
Harper's decision to keep Canadian combat troops in
Afghanistan until at least 2011.
Even the parties' scandals are eerily similar.
Four years ago, the RCMP was brought in to sort out
the fabled Liberal sponsorship program.
This year, the RCMP was brought in to sort out a
Conservative financing scheme that Elections Canada
says is illegal.
This is not to say the two parties are identical. Dion
says he would cut income taxes and impose new levies
on commodities whose production involves carbon
emissions. Harper says he wouldn't.
But even this distinction is more complex than it
seems. Dion's scheme may help the environment. But by
replacing progressive income taxes with a regressive
consumption tax, he could help the rich at the expense
of the middling classes. Conversely, Harper – in tax
terms at least – could emerge here as the more leftish
of the two. Which isn't quite how he's usually seen. |
