|
May 12, 2011
Canadians flocked to Montreal in 1995 to save Canada from the separation of
Quebec. Quebecers flocked to the polls in 2011 to save Canada from the
separation of its senses.
The referendum of 1995 was a cliff-hanger; the vote could have gone either way.
In a plea for federal unity, 100,000 non-Quebecers flocked to Montreal just days
before the vote. Canadians held their collective breaths as Quebecers narrowly
elected to stay within the country.
The federal election of 2011 saw Quebecers look beyond their boarders to a
national party. It was a remarkable leap of faith, not only in favour of Jack
Layton and the NDP but for the progressive values that most Canadian voters
want. Quebecers would not be sidetracked. It didn't matter where the NDP
candidates came from, whether they had ever set foot in the riding, knocked on
their doors, or even spoke French.
As in the 1995 referendum of, the establishment is crying foul. Back then,
separatists claimed that the Canadian invaders broke election laws by making
unauthorized contributions to the campaign. Now Canada's corporate media are
deriding the youthful contingent of Quebec's new MPs. Political pundits have to
get over it. The NDP is a new force.
Jack Layton plans to change the way opposition works. The NDP leader wants to
use persuasion. "I've always favoured proposition over opposition, but we will
oppose the government when it's off track." In other words; agreement when
warranted, suggestion when improvements can be made, and opposition when the
government loses its way.
Let's see how "proposition over opposition" might work. The National Post has
come up with its top-ten list called "truly conservative priorities."
The top priority for the Conservative government is to balance the books ahead
of schedule. That's a goal worth working for. Proposition: reduce debt by
ensuring that everyone pays their fair share of taxes. The rich currently pay
taxes at a slightly lower rate than the poor according to a study from the
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. As a percentage of their income, the
rich and poor both pay about 30 per cent on taxes. The middle class pay six per
cent higher than both groups. All Canadians need to pull together to reduce debt
according to their ability to pay.
|
The National Post wants to see income-splitting implemented. Progressive
Canadians agree and would like to see that principle taken one step further.
Income-splitting is a fair system of taxation because it treats both
income-earners as equals in families, lowering overall taxes and increasing
spending power. Another way of putting more money into the hands of
middle-class families is to decrease day-care costs. Quebec has the best
day-care system in Canada: a benefit they would like to share with all
Canadians. Savings are realized by a public day-care system the same way
that public schools work. Everyone pays regardless of whether they have
children and the result is that all society benefits.
Next on the list is a "better balance between punishment and the protection
of society. Certain provisions, such as those prohibiting contact with
visitors, for example, serve no discernable purpose and come across as
merely mean-spirited; they should be scrapped." Bravo to that and also to
the Post's proposal to decriminalize marijuana.
However, the above issues highlight one a major problem facing the
Conservatives. More conservative voices mean more mind-sets. Some favour
punishment over rehabilitation; they would like to throw more in jail. Some
see wealth in the hands of the rich as a virtue but money in the hands of
the poor at a vice. Some conservative types see marijuana as the gateway to
hell. Many of Harper's conservatives are from the evangelical right-wing.
Much has been made about integrating the NDP's new members from Quebec but
not much about the problems that the Conservatives face in integrating new
urban conservatives into what has been a rural, parochial party.
Some of the items on the Post's list are poorly thought out. They want to
suspend Canada's Health Act and introduce new health delivery models,
including private insurance and hospitals. To offer both ideas in the same
breath creates a false dichotomy. The Health Act doesn't prevent private
clinics or insurance and the Post is being disingenuous to suggest such. The
guiding principle of the Health Act is that of a single payer; it doesn't
preclude innovation.
David Charbonneau is the owner of Trio Technical.
He can be reached at
dcharbonneau13@shaw.ca
|
