Politik
The Liberals have begun to sound like a pack of dying animals. Harper's Conservatives are now 10 points ahead in the polls and Martin's frantic attempts to dichotomize value differences between himself and Harper appears to be falling on deaf ears. The past week has seen numerous "liberal" or left-centre policy announcements as the Liberals attempt to further widen the value gap between themselves and Harper's Conservatives.
As appealing as these policies may sound to a left-leaning Canadian citizen such as myself, I see them as nothing more than classic Liberal doublespeak. Despite Martin's best wishes, we have two tools at our disposal to angrily reject the "value difference" that Martin is now passionately speaking about: The Internet, and our memory. Using these tools, let's examine these new Liberal policies (read: election promises) in more detail (below the LJ cut).
Promise #1. The Liberals will petition the international community to fully ban weapons in space, directly blocking the United States' proposed missile-defense shield. Previously, the Liberal's refused to provide Bush with Canada's political support for missile defence, so at first glance, this seems to be a logical policy extension. Recall however that the Liberal’s were on the brink of supporting missile-defence, but backed off only because of a massive public outcry against it. Despite this policy promise, both current Liberal MPs, and Liberal candidates running in this election still are in favour of missile-defence.
Promise #2. A Liberal government will increase access to post secondary education through a new 50/50 Plan under which the government will pay for half of a student’s first year tuition, and half of a student’s graduating year tuition - up to a maximum of $3,000. While this sounds like a reasonable commitment to post-secondary funding when taken at face value, further analysis suggests otherwise. Nowhere in this policy does Martin commit to increasing funding to provinces for actual post-secondary relief.
Promise #3. Increased federal support for low and middle income families in the form of tax cuts. Over the next four years, the Liberals promise to increase personal tax exemptions from $8,000 to $10,000, representing the removal of another 860,000 low- and middle-income individuals and families from the tax roll. Again, Martin’s history as Finance Minister seems to contradict the claim that he has any interest in the social and financial wellbeing of poor and working class Canadians.
Analysis: Promise #1. John Ibbitson: Do you believe that Canada should join national missile defence? Paul Martin: I think that we are essentially responsible for security in North America continent and we do not want to be in a position where the United States feel that they have to come up here if they are going to protect their northern border... I think that we want to be at the table. Ibbitson: So that's a yes, we should join. Martin: Well I don't see why we would walk away from the opportunity to protect the northern half and to have a say over what happens in our airspace." (Question Period [CTV], April 27, 2003)
"This is not Iraq, this is not an engagement somewhere else. This is about North America. I think it's very important for us to be associated in any program that deals with the defence of North America," Defence Minister Bill Graham told CanWest News in an exclusive interview at his Toronto constituency office. "I think Canada will regret it if we don't participate." (CanWest News, September 23, 2004)
“Canada's decision not to participate in the ballistic missile defence program is not, and should not be interpreted as, a sign that we are not committed to doing our part in the defence of North America … one of our key priorities will be to develop a new, more sophisticated approach to our relationship with the United States. This includes strengthening our capacity to defend our shared continent.” (Speaking Notes for The Honourable Bill Graham)
"We do not want our decisions to fragment the command system of North American defence, and we do not want a principled decision to result in us having less control over our national sovereignty. We must not walk away from the table. We must be there, at the table, defending what only we can defend." Michael Ignatieff on the ballistic missile defence, Liberal Party convention (Toronto Star, March 4, 2005).
Analysis: Promise #2. As finance minister in the Chrétien government, Martin’s drastic cuts to post-secondary funding resulted in Canadian tuition rates doubling between 1993 and 2003. Prior to these cuts, tuition fees made up 17% of universities operating budgets; now they make up 28% (Canadian Federation of Students, 2005 ). This demonstrates that Martin’s policy has been to shift the cost of education from the government to students. In 10 years time when tuition fees have doubled again, $3,000 of government support over a 4 year period will be meaningless.
Analysis: Promise #3. Martin’s 'concern' for the welfare of low-income earners and the unemployed was shown when in 1995, he cut $25 billion in social spending, eliminated the Canada Assistance Plan, and cut funding for housing by 80%. These cuts brought per capita social spending in Canada to the lowest levels since the 1950’s. As a result, Canada has fallen on the UN Human DevelopmentIndex from 1st place in 1993 to 5th place in 2005.
/end
As appealing as these policies may sound to a left-leaning Canadian citizen such as myself, I see them as nothing more than classic Liberal doublespeak. Despite Martin's best wishes, we have two tools at our disposal to angrily reject the "value difference" that Martin is now passionately speaking about: The Internet, and our memory. Using these tools, let's examine these new Liberal policies (read: election promises) in more detail (below the LJ cut).
Promise #1. The Liberals will petition the international community to fully ban weapons in space, directly blocking the United States' proposed missile-defense shield. Previously, the Liberal's refused to provide Bush with Canada's political support for missile defence, so at first glance, this seems to be a logical policy extension. Recall however that the Liberal’s were on the brink of supporting missile-defence, but backed off only because of a massive public outcry against it. Despite this policy promise, both current Liberal MPs, and Liberal candidates running in this election still are in favour of missile-defence.
Promise #2. A Liberal government will increase access to post secondary education through a new 50/50 Plan under which the government will pay for half of a student’s first year tuition, and half of a student’s graduating year tuition - up to a maximum of $3,000. While this sounds like a reasonable commitment to post-secondary funding when taken at face value, further analysis suggests otherwise. Nowhere in this policy does Martin commit to increasing funding to provinces for actual post-secondary relief.
Promise #3. Increased federal support for low and middle income families in the form of tax cuts. Over the next four years, the Liberals promise to increase personal tax exemptions from $8,000 to $10,000, representing the removal of another 860,000 low- and middle-income individuals and families from the tax roll. Again, Martin’s history as Finance Minister seems to contradict the claim that he has any interest in the social and financial wellbeing of poor and working class Canadians.
Analysis: Promise #1. John Ibbitson: Do you believe that Canada should join national missile defence? Paul Martin: I think that we are essentially responsible for security in North America continent and we do not want to be in a position where the United States feel that they have to come up here if they are going to protect their northern border... I think that we want to be at the table. Ibbitson: So that's a yes, we should join. Martin: Well I don't see why we would walk away from the opportunity to protect the northern half and to have a say over what happens in our airspace." (Question Period [CTV], April 27, 2003)
"This is not Iraq, this is not an engagement somewhere else. This is about North America. I think it's very important for us to be associated in any program that deals with the defence of North America," Defence Minister Bill Graham told CanWest News in an exclusive interview at his Toronto constituency office. "I think Canada will regret it if we don't participate." (CanWest News, September 23, 2004)
“Canada's decision not to participate in the ballistic missile defence program is not, and should not be interpreted as, a sign that we are not committed to doing our part in the defence of North America … one of our key priorities will be to develop a new, more sophisticated approach to our relationship with the United States. This includes strengthening our capacity to defend our shared continent.” (Speaking Notes for The Honourable Bill Graham)
"We do not want our decisions to fragment the command system of North American defence, and we do not want a principled decision to result in us having less control over our national sovereignty. We must not walk away from the table. We must be there, at the table, defending what only we can defend." Michael Ignatieff on the ballistic missile defence, Liberal Party convention (Toronto Star, March 4, 2005).
Analysis: Promise #2. As finance minister in the Chrétien government, Martin’s drastic cuts to post-secondary funding resulted in Canadian tuition rates doubling between 1993 and 2003. Prior to these cuts, tuition fees made up 17% of universities operating budgets; now they make up 28% (Canadian Federation of Students, 2005 ). This demonstrates that Martin’s policy has been to shift the cost of education from the government to students. In 10 years time when tuition fees have doubled again, $3,000 of government support over a 4 year period will be meaningless.
Analysis: Promise #3. Martin’s 'concern' for the welfare of low-income earners and the unemployed was shown when in 1995, he cut $25 billion in social spending, eliminated the Canada Assistance Plan, and cut funding for housing by 80%. These cuts brought per capita social spending in Canada to the lowest levels since the 1950’s. As a result, Canada has fallen on the UN Human DevelopmentIndex from 1st place in 1993 to 5th place in 2005.
/end