Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff pondered recently how the prime minister “just can’t help himself” from using expensive and damaging short-term partisan trickery in his quest to cling to power. We have seen Stephen Harper do it before when, against the advice of all economists, he twice lowered the GST rate to buy the votes of the masses. He depleted the federal treasury in a futile attempt to secure a majority and, having failed at that, appears to be ready once again to be ready to bribe voters with their own money. Damn the consequences. Notwithstanding all the budget leaks of the past two weeks, In a few hours, more of his devious tricks will be revealed.. Assuredly, it’s going to be a bad budget, likely including more unwise tax cuts.
The question Liberals and Ignatieff have to decide is how much bad is acceptable, balanced against the need for urgent action to respond to the current recession. Canada is in a tough period and some sort of economic stimulus absolutely is necessary. Government also has a responsibility to ensure those most vulnerable are shielded from the worst of the recession. But since any help that the government can provide will have to be funded with borrowed money, money that will have to paid-back in the future, new spending also must be an investment in the future of Canada and Canadians. If this doesn’t describe the Conservative government’s budget plan, the plan deserves to be rejected by Parliament just as Canadians have twice rejected this prime minister’s quest for unfettered control of the nation’s institutions.
Michael Ignatieff’s pledge to evaluate the budget carefully before deciding whether or not to give his support is appropriate. We already know the government is going to run-up a huge deficit to fund job-creating/sustaining projects. We don’t know what, if anything, is planned to cushion lower-income Canadians and the already or soon-to-be unemployed. We don’t know how much money the government is willing to put into propping-up old industries compared to investing in new industries and jobs for the future. We do know, that having cut taxes inappropriately especially the GST cut, the treasury is empty and the government will be borrowing to cover its current as well as all new expenses.
All of this might be tolerable if the government can show Canadians that its deficit will be short-lived and that paying-down the national debt will resume in reasonable course. But rumours persist that this bribe-them-with-their-own-money prime minister is planning more and permanent tax reductions that will make it impossible for the government to dig itself out of deficit, even after the economy recovers. Having adopted George W Bush’s cut-taxes and spend approach to government, Harper seems determined to ruin Canada, just as his mentor did the USA.
On one level, Jack Layton has it right; this government cannot be trusted and deserves to be defeated at the earliest opportunity. If it could be assured that an alternate government would be given a chance following any rejection of the budget, then the opposition surely should dispatch this budget, and this government, as quickly as possible. But there is no such certainty and the country does not want and cannot afford another election within 4 months of the previous one. It’s not just the direct costs of an election; it’s the cost of delay in implementing measures to respond dire economic circumstances.
Canadians do not want an election and would punish anyone who caused one at this time. Who they would punish however, remains in doubt; the Conservatives for a bad budget and asking the Governor General for an election, or the Liberals for refusing to compromise on principle and bringing an un-wanted election. To reject the budget and defeat the government would be a huge gamble, unless Canadians’ immediate reaction to it is so negative that any other decision is beyond consideration. What’s not beyond possibility that Harper will strategise his own defeat in an effort to have another election before Michael Ignatieff is better known to Canadians, before the Liberal Party has fixed its fund-raising machine and before the scheduled May policy and leadership convention garners public interest, awareness and support for Liberal policies.
In determining how to respond to the budget, there is an opportunity for Michael Ignatieff to show himself as a different kind of politician, from Layton or Harper; one who puts the good of the country ahead of partisan interests. If this delays the inevitability of Harper’s ultimate defeat - which I believe will happen in 2009 whether or not this budget passes - so be it. All signs, including the PM’s body-language as he sat through yesterday Throne Speech, indicate Harper’s tenure is nearing its end. Ottawa pundits are picking-up signals that Conservatives are scouting out potential candidates and supporters for a leader to replace Harper. Ignatieff and Liberals are bound to get a boost from media coverage of the upcoming convention. And a few more months of recession will re-enforce in voters’ minds that Conservative-times are hard-times; that this government does not have the aptitude for managing the economy effectively and does not have the inclination to serve the common public good.
2009, I believe, will be a good year for Michael Ignatieff and Liberals. Whether the government is defeated, Thursday, on the budget vote, or a few months from now, Steven Harper’s inability to help himself will be rewarded justly. He had defined his own character and has been found wanting.
