It seems to be a problem that the Canadian Conservative
Party of Canada (CPC) does not live up to their own ideology. In this essay I want to go through their
party platform and beliefs of the CPC and see how and what they have been doing
since they took office in 2006, to see how their actions compare to the words
and rhetoric.
According to Wikipedia, it is very difficult to nail down the
beliefs the CPC holds. For starters,
they want to more closely match US foreign policy - sort of - except we know
when the US intervened in Syria and Libya, Canada allied with the Americans
only as cheerleaders - didn't actually do much of anything. They foster strong ties to China and are
aggressively pursuing trade agreements with Europe and other countries around
the world. Although the actual benefits
of these trade agreements and why they benefit Canada are not talked about
specifically, we are told repeatedly that it is good for Canada's economy and
we will benefit more as a result in some
way.
The Conservatives also mention in their platform that they are
in favour of abolishing the Senate, but in actuality they advised to appoint
Michael Fortier to the Senate in 2006, and filled all 18 seats that were vacant
in 2008. Every Canadian with a
television, radio or internet connection knows how that is working out for them
at the moment. Still in the midst of the
Senate Scandal, they are refusing to call an inquiry, declining options to have
people connected to the scandal testify, and generally trying to act like it is
all going to go away on its own, when their own rise to power happened as a
result of the Liberal Sponsorship Scandal in the early 2000's. That idea of
SCANDAL, how to deal with one and how to avoid one, should have been the first
lesson they had learned before taking power, yes? Nigel Wright, one of the 4 people whom the
conservatives condemned as the ONLY people involved in the scandal, even he has
not testified . In fact, I could not
come up with much of anything he has said or done since writing the $90,000
cheque of his own money. Apparently he
is a shrewd, intelligent, rich guy who actually recruited Steve Harper when the
current party was being formed. Harper
conversely promoted Nigel to the party Chief of Staff after winning party
leadership. This guy is not an idiot,
and he is very well connected by his past to the current Prime Minister. The fact that he is not saying anything
speaks volumes to me: this guy wants to avoid the limelight at all costs, so he
can do whatever it is he does innocuously in the background. It is very difficult to pin his activities
down, but he doesn't seem to concerned about having his name dragged through
the mud in this case. Obviously there is
still quite a bit going on, and he seems very capable of avoiding any sort of
news reports.
Next I want to mention one huge campaign promise the CPC had
was at the time of the Sponsorship scandal and wanted to implement measures to
hold government to account, including the parliamentary budget office. Instead of the PBO being an aggressive
watchdog, nipping at the heels of government and keeping things in line it
seems like some sort of sad pathetic inbred toothless cur, with a failing liver
and weak ankles and probably also crossed eyes.
Another big campaign promise conservatives like to toot
their little tug boats about is lower taxes.
As it turns out, the government decided to tax income trusts in fall of
2006, effectively breaking one of their election promises. The government did lower taxes federally, but
announced that the growth of future health and social transfers to the
provinces are tied to economic growth.
This forces the provinces to raise their own taxes via methods such as
the HST, and doesn't really solve any of the problems associated with lowering
taxes.
Conservatives like to use the phrase stewards of the economy
- this branding seems pretty effective because anybody I talk to who admits to
voting conservative seems to think that they are fiscally confident and wise
managers of wealth. They also think that
any other political party will destroy Canada's economy, but there is no actual
basis to think that way. I can say that Auditor
General Michael Ferguson was unable to find 3.1 billion dollars in
antiterrorism spending between 2001 and 2009.
THEY LOST 3.1 BILLION DOLLARS. The conservatives can also take full
ownership of the fact that they misrepresented the costs of the f-35 jets,
which as it turns out would end up costing $25 billion plus maintenance.
On another topic conservatives can be heard bleating about
is making a smaller government - Since in power Harper has actually increased the size of cabinet to 39
ministers. Combine that will
expansions of the senate, the addition of the PBO, and the bloating of the
deficit by funding government stimulus, the government has only gotten larger
during their period in office.
I cannot argue the Conservatives have perused related to
their platform is the promotion of traditional religious and cultural values
. Harper has firmly taken the
"progressive" out of conservative, by making a huge stink about the
royal wedding, queen's jubilee, re-re-naming the Royal Canadian Air Force and
Navy...because we want to go back to remind ourselves we are a British colony? Exporting our resources on behalf of a
country whose only gifts to the world are banks, stock exchanges and
pharmaceuticals. Canada is now choosing
to define itself by the past in a way that is probably not at all flattering to
First Nations, some of whom are getting a flashback of colonial times in the
process of protesting shale gas exploration on the East Coast. By and large many Canadians seem to be enjoying this retro-ification
of Canada's culture, possibly because it is the only few things that really are
associated with Canada. They certainly
can't tout environmentalism or peacemaker stereotypes that previously defined
Canada (although I'm not sure exactly when this was - maybe in the 70's and
early 80's?). It would be interesting to
talk to young Canadians to see how they define themselves within the context of
their country's culture, because that is a mighty big black box to me.
One 'victory' conservatives like to talk about is their
fulfilment to reduce gun controls and scrap the long gun registry. This one will not be put to rest easily, in
part because Quebec and the CPC don't quite get along, but also within the
historical context of the Polytechnique shooting in December 1989. That province is still fighting the gun
registry abolishment in court, and trying to hang on to the records that they
have already collected. While the issue
seems to have passed in the rest of Canada, Quebec seems willing to fight tooth
and nail to hang on to these records in any way or court possible, and if they
can establish even a small foothold in keeping those records the Conservatives
will find it very hard to shake it by 2015.
Another campaign promise Harper has done with his whole
heart is in the promotion of the energy and gas sectors. When I found out the Canadian government was spying on Brazil and reporting the
information to oil companies, it became very evident to me who Stephen Harper's
bosses are. Wouldn't a genuine
conservative want to "conserve" their environmental resources and
protect it from outside influence, rather than selling them off and destroying
our other resources in the process?
On the promise of enhancing crime and law enforcement, the senate scandal has made one thing clear:
the CPC are doing everything in their power to hinder justice and obscure the
truth - criminals in this case are given a blind eye, and they don't see
anything wrong with that, no need to call an inquiry, no need for people
involved to testify and find out what is actually going on. Of course conservatives will push for higher
sentences for blue collar crimes such as drug possession, shoplifting and
vandalism, while the less visible but much more costly white collar crimes such
as industrial espionage, environmental regulations, manipulations of the stock
market, property and construction, tax evasion, and crimes by politicians have
got no such attention, no new bills passed, no tightening of loopholes to bring
the rich and powerful to the conservative party perception of justice. Those super-prisons they were bragging about
starting in 2009 will not be housing Rob Ford or other powerful individuals or
corporate decision makers who profited in the 2008 market collapse and job
destruction. Instead they will hold
petty thieves, small time drug dealers and the mentally ill while the owners of
the prisons profit from the influx of criminality.
Internet surveillance is finally becoming a reality as the
release of documents by Snowden revealed the extent of collection and analysis
of users' internet usage both in the United States and Canada (and presumably
most or all other countries with internet access). For a long time surveillance of all kinds has
been getting a hard push, under the pretence of terrorism. Whether or not the loss of all privacy is
"worth it" in the long run is an issue that will only grow as the
surveillance becomes more elaborate and more intensive. I'm sure all sorts of dirt will be found on
who is sleeping with who, who is using which drugs, and other (mostly)
victimless crimes are brought to light and a perverse sense of justice, as the
number of criminals increase and another excuse given to fill up super-prisons,
I'm not sure what point has to be reached before a serious debate begins on if
this is the direction people generally want to be headed in.
As I've already mentioned, there is still a stalwart base
that will vote conservative regardless of the obvious criminal activity and
lack of transparency on the part of the CPC in their time running the Canadian
government. The few conservatives I have
spoken with and comments I have read express that they feel the CPC is their
only choice in Canada's electoral system, that other parties will "ruin
Canada worse" or squander Canada's resources more so than what is already
happening now. I can't say with any
certainty that the Liberals or the NDP would manage spending and the economy
any better than the Conservatives have, but nobody with any fairness can say
they will manage things any worse, either, since they actually haven't been
given an opportunity to. Overall the
Liberals had a VERY good spending record during their long period running the
country, and the NDP have yet to have been given a chance FEDERALLY. Being as scrutinized as they would be, it
seems to me like an NDP minority would ensure a very responsible spending
policy, since it is such a contentious issue constantly being parroted by the
conservatives as the holy grail of government responsibilities. I would argue that until they have been given
a chance, you can't know with any certainty how good or badly they would
perform the task. And given that the CPC
has squandered every opportunity to create a transparent, responsible,
accountable government, we can't collectively sit on our hands and say
"well we can't hope for anything better", because we CAN do something
better: what needs to happen is that our very fundamental system of government
is the problem, and by changing the way the government works in a more broad
sense external of which political party is in office, we are capable of
bringing a new concept of government in to the world, a system where people can
make their voice heard and actually bring back democratic values to a system
that is obsolete, broken, and thoroughly corrupt. In future posts I hope to discuss ideas for
Canada's political future in more depth.
