Do we need a Federal Election soon?

[August1991]

A constant refrain fo Liberals is that Canadians don't want an election. Three elections in three and half years is too many.

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion says he will not force an election over the speech from the throne, adding that he wants to make Parliament work.

"The throne speech we heard, with all of its weaknesses, has to be assessed in light of the fact that Canadians don't want another election right now," Dion told the House of Commons on Wednesday. "They want Parliament to do its job …

CBC

This argument has always struck me as odd. Usually, Leftists argue that democracy (one person, one vote) is the best protection we have against the world's larger powers. Who should be shy of an election and letting people have their say?

Americans vote every November (with complex ballots and many names) and vote several times during the year in primaries and local elections. In a similar vein, the Swiss have reserve duties every summer. In Canada, we have only to pay our taxes and people complain about having to go to a voting booth more than once a year. This is a reason not to have an election? Really?

----

We should not be shy of having an election and we shouldn't ever use the argument that it's too expensive. The cost of an election is small compared to the cost of a government making bad decisions.

I happen to believe we should have a federal election soon and I offer up two opinions to justify it. I want to see a debate, where power is at stake, between Harper and Dion about the future of the country.

Liberal support among francophones in Quebec under Mr. Dion has all but evaporated. The historic role of the Liberal Party being the principal political bridge between French speakers in Quebec and people outside the province no longer exists. Without that role, just what is the place of the Liberal Party in Canada?

It certainly cannot be to outnational the nationalists in Quebec. That political territory is already occupied by separatists, autonomists (Action Démocratique du Québec) and decentralizers (Conservatives). And yet, the temptation exists for the Liberals to believe that their desperate circumstances in Quebec can only be improved by playing in this nationalist sandbox with the others.

That is why Mr. Dion was counselled not to campaign vigorously against Prime Minister Stephen Harper's "Québécois as a nation" resolution and the giveaways of federal money to "solve" the so-called fiscal imbalance.

Maybe he will listen to these same voices and go with the flow on Mr. Harper's latest attempt to fetter federal authority even beyond the social union agreement that Paul Martin negotiated with the premiers.

Or maybe Mr. Dion will pick a social program - national pharmacare, say - and stand on the other side of Mr. Harper's line by insisting Ottawa use its constitutionally affirmed spending power to negotiate a federal-provincial deal in an area of direct concern to all citizens.

It would be a fine national debate. On one side would stand the Conservatives opposing pharmacare as (a) an expensive, unnecessary program, ( an intrusion into the sacred provincial jurisdiction over health, © a further expansion of government into the lives of Canadians, and (d) an insult to Quebec.

On the other would stand the Liberals proposing pharmacare as (a) a necessary extension of medicare, ( a program once supported by at least five premiers during Mr. Martin's time as prime minister, © an affirmation of the federal government's relevance to citizens, and (d) the best way to restrain soaring drug costs.

Jeffrey Simpson

Frankly, I think a national pharmacare plan is a crazy idea. Such a plan exists in Quebec now (it's a private public thingee) and one consequence is that Quebecers are among the most drugged people in North America.

But, as Simpson points out, it would at least engage a multi-faceted debate.

More intelligently, Andrew Coyne had this to say about Dion's announcement that he would cut corporate taxes:

A radical tax-cutting agenda would not merely offer some much needed balance to the Liberal program, after a spring and summer spent chasing the NDP and the Greens further and further out to the left. It would turn the political spectrum inside out. It would be unclear just what "left" and "right" meant any more. As Mr. Dion put it, if corporate tax cuts are a right wing policy, then "Sweden, with its low corporate tax rate, is the hotbed of neo-conservatism while the United States, with its very high corporate tax rate, is a socialist paradise."

But it has to be radical. Conservatives are all about "incrementalism" these days, to allay fears of a hidden agenda. Liberals have to be radicals, just to convince people they have an agenda.

Fortunately, there is ample room for radicalism on the tax front. Liberals have a historic opening to propose deep cuts in tax rates, corporate and personal, without cutting a dime out of current (vastly profligate) levels of spending. Three factors combine to make this possible.

The first is the surplus. The long fight against the deficit, years of raising taxes and cutting spending, have given federal finances a virtually unstoppable momentum toward surplus. The Tories will likely draw down much of this to pay for tax cuts of their own, but Liberals could go further, if they also make use of factors #2 and #3.

Tax reform is factor #2. The tax code has long been cluttered with all sorts of useless, distortionary tax preferences, encouraging people to make decisions for tax purposes, rather than for productive purposes. Strike these out, broaden the base, and you can cut rates even more.

And factor #3? Whisper it, Liberals, if you dare: a carbon tax. Conspicuously missing from both parties' global warming plans, it is universally regarded as political poison. But what if the revenues from a carbon tax were used to slash -- and I mean slash -- income taxes? Then what you have is a cleaner environment, a more productive economy -- and maybe a winning political strategy.

Dion is on to something here. Socialist Sweden has lower corporate tax rates than capitalist America, and the Swedish government works better as a result. There is much evidence that government tax policies, if done properly, are critical in fostering economic growth. Canada has far too many stupid, distorting taxes and exemptions that slow the economy down.

-----

We came close to an election in the past few days. It seems inevitable that we'll have an election in the next few weeks or months at most. I happen to think that we should have one sooner rather than later.

Edited October 18, 2007 by August1991

[Wilber]

Aside from the cost, 300M isn't peanuts to me, there is the fact the country stops being governed and is just administered for months. All current legislation goes in the dumpster and we start over with a new Parliament. The job of a government is to govern, not have elections. They can debate in the house. I think you are going to get your wish though.

[Michael Bluth]

The job of a government is to govern, not have elections.

Absolutely agreed the job of the government is to govern.

The opposition parties haven't been allowing them to do that. The Conservatives, NDP and BQ all agree that this Parliament isn't working.

The Liberals do too privately. But they'd rather save their arses than do what is in the best interest of Canadians.

[geoffrey]

We need a majority. Things need to get done that just aren't getting done now. There is no direction, and these minorities are costly in terms of spending.

We may spend ourselves broke if we don't have a majority of some kind soon, and that, requires an election.

[Leafless]

We need a majority. Things need to get done that just aren't getting done now. There is no direction, and these minorities are costly in terms of spending.

How can you have direction when the politcal system that creates the fabric of Canadian politics is dysfunctional.

We may spend ourselves broke if we don't have a majority of some kind soon, and that, requires an election.

I agree we may spend ourselves broke but what makes you think a majority is going to save the day and further spending.

It cost money to keep all our dysfunctional fragmented societies happy, Quebec, Aboriginals, immigrants and the ROC.

Remember Ontario's Mike Harris and his 'common sense revolution'.

It didn't work.

I think frequent elections of 'opportunism' will become the norm in Canada.

Edited October 18, 2007 by Leafless

[Shakeyhands]

Absolutely agreed the job of the government is to govern.

The opposition parties haven't been allowing them to do that. The Conservatives, NDP and BQ all agree that this Parliament isn't working.

The Liberals do too privately. But they'd rather save their arses than do what is in the best interest of Canadians.

The opposition parties have been allowing what now?

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...ba-cdd83bccfce7

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/05/17/...ent-delays.html

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics...99e&k=61038

Edited October 18, 2007 by Shakeyhands

[Michael Bluth]

The opposition parties have been allowing what now?

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...ba-cdd83bccfce7

Not very much. Take a good look at this link and it proves the oppositions obstinance. Thanks for supporting your new government Shakey.

[Guest trex]

A constant refrain fo Liberals is that Canadians don't want an election. Three elections in three and half years is too many.

They are wrong, I want an election right away. And I'm sure that many other people do too... so I hope Dion will bring it on. If not, then he and the liberal party are truly despicable. Then he really deserves to lose his job. In fact I don't see any other way for him, he would be an idiot not to vote them down. Its the only way he will keep his job and it will bring his party together.

[old_bold&cold]

I think Harper did set the tone for the throne speech and in a way that said let me govern, and it you can not agree, then either call and election or get out of my way. It is the Liberals who have made such a mess of their job of official opposition, that has done the most harm in all of this. They know that going to the polls will be suicide, for their party. Never mind the polls, even the liberal party does not believe them, and with good reason. They know that if any scutiny was given to what the party stands for, and there will be a flood of voters running from thier party. It is not just the infighting, but the very background and make up of it, that will scare voters away. They need lots of time, to sweep the party clean and renew. It may well take decades. If they had called an election last night, you may well have seen the liberals dropping to third or even fourth party staus, and that is why crow was on the menue and they all were taking second helpings of it.

I think though that they will have to call an election sometime soon. Even with all the massaging they do, it still will not be able to run a proper election call. First off I do not think the liberal party has the money to put the call forward for now. Second, Dion needs to be made to look like a leader in some way or another, or he will have to resign and have a quick convention, before they can call an election. This will meand that for the next 2-3 months Harper can pretty much do anything and it will pass the HOC. As for the senate, I do not see them holding things up too long again, as this will feed Harpers plans to have triple E senate, and the peope will vote that way, if this senate is seen being obstructionist.

I really do not see a down side for Harper and he will only get much stronger the longer it takes the liberals to agree on what direction they will go with all of this. Dion, is toast either way, and I do not see him staying leader for any time longer then 6 months at most. I think it is only a matter of time before Harper gets his majority, and I do not think the voters will be swayed by any scarey CPC tactics anymore, but it will be scarey Liberals, they will now see. Like a man having a fit and you do not which way he will strike out at.

[Wilber]

I think frequent elections of 'opportunism' will become the norm in Canada.

When were they not the norm? If they weren't we would have gone to fixed dates long ago.

[Topaz]

One thing about these parties is when they say "Canadians want or don't want" or "Canada had 13 years of this gov't" Let's face most of those guys don't know how we feel they only do or say what they want to say or do!! Minority gov'ts usually don't work but when voting in a party we not sure of that's what voters do. I could be wrong but I don't think Harper could get a majority govt. The Libs need to have an election to get in new faces and I don't think Harper would want that and he could lose in the Martimes Provinces and Ontario and we still have a minority govt. So maybe its best to wait till later in the spring.

[scribblet]

I'd rather wait until the spring, people are electioned out, Ont. for instance has just finished a provincial election.

Dion would be 'despicable' if he were to bring down the gov't now, 'despicable' for putting the voters and the gov't through an unwanted and costly. If I were a Liberal, I would think him 'despicable' for throwing Liberals into an election when they are not anywhere near ready for it, and are less likely to win.

Mind you, it would be good for Canada if we could get a conservative majority, the economy is booming, and tax cuts are looming LOL

[Michael Bluth]

I think frequent elections of 'opportunism' will become the norm in Canada.

Not at the Federal level.

That is a benefit of the fixed election date law. (American-style or not.)

Without that law the Conservatives would be dropping the writ as we speak. The political costs of doing so now are too high.

[Fortunata]

We need a majority. Things need to get done that just aren't getting done now. There is no direction, and these minorities are costly in terms of spending.

We may spend ourselves broke if we don't have a majority of some kind soon, and that, requires an election.

It takes two to tango and the Cons don't want to learn how to dance.

[Guest trex]

I am not so sure that the conservatives would win in an election now, not necessarily. I know lots of people who just want to see this government gone, anything but the conservatives. So even this pathetic liberal party could have a chance, could be preferable by Canadians if Dion could get his act together. An election will certainly keep them working together on a common goal, if they want to keep their jobs they better get to work as a team.

But that would require leadership, which is somewhat lacking at the moment. The fact that they have collapsed as a party, especially during a time which gives Harper another government practically by default, makes one wonder, how deep does the espionage and backstabbing go up there, on the hill? Could it be only a coincidence? Certainly for Harper it worked out very well that they chose Dion to be the leader, and then gave him Ignatieff as mocking bogeyman.

[scribblet]

Thought you all might like to see this one, I'm loving it.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/10...4584008-cp.html

Liberal leader becomes target when he says Liberals are tough on crime

Oct 17, 2007 06:28 PM

THE CANADIAN PRESS

They call laughter the kiss of death in politics – and the smooches rained down upon Stephane Dion from the Conservative benches today.

By the time he finished a 45-minute speech in which he declared he would not bring down the government, the Liberal leader was deluged with derisive guffaws.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper joined in as his troops chuckled openly at Dion. The laughter first erupted when Dion declared that the Liberal party was tough on crime.

The mockery grew louder as Dion launched into a lengthy defence of his record on climate change while lambasting the Tories' abandonment of the Kyoto accord. cont...

[Michael Bluth]

The article is great. The fact that it appeared in the Toronto Star is amazing.

Harper keeps running the tight ship and he can keep building momentum until the set election date.

[M.Dancer]

The article is great. The fact that it appeared in the Toronto Star is amazing.

Harper keeps running the tight ship and he can keep building momentum until the set election date.

Canoe is part of Quebecor....the Toronto SUN.

[g_bambino]

Canoe is part of Quebecor....the Toronto SUN.

Yes, but the article was written by The Canadian Press, which means any paper could purchase it and run it.

Edited October 18, 2007 by g_bambino

[August1991]

Dion drew the loudest laughs as he read press releases from environmental groups who accuse the Tories of cancelling Liberal programs and replacing them with inferior ones.

"And I quote the Sierra Club," Dion began.

"Federal programs were slashed and the importance of climate change was downplayed. An entire year was lost. End of quote.

"But I continue to quote the Sierra Club. . ."

Dion is simply too earnest. Does he even have a sense of humour?

Yes, he does - sort of. "Paf le chien."

In some ways, Dion reminds me of our resident Liberal, Dobbin. Same earnestness.

Edited October 19, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Dion is simply too earnest. Does he even have a sense of humour?

Yes, he does - sort of. "Paf le chien."

In some ways, Dion reminds me of our resident Liberal, Dobbin. Same earnestness.

I'm far funnier and more popular.