Canada Needs the Old Liberal Party

[August1991]

I'm sure they spend... governments always spend.

Majority governments spend less than minority governments.

In addition, the Chretien Liberal government (with Paul Martin as Finance Minister) was careful spending our collective money.

This Harper government has been profligate.

----

I would suffer Sponsorgate, even a hotel in Shawinigan, to bring back a Chretien as PM and a PM as Finance Minister.

I want a government that spends wisely, and less.

----

This Harper government spends like a drunken sailor. Too much , and unwisely.

[Borg]

The creature, mister dithers and iffy - three great liberals - oh, lets not forget that little franco guy with the weak chin, the fluffy hair, the funny glasses and a wife who told him what to do - what was his name again? I think his dog Kyoto got more publicity. Hmmm - he got confused about a question and lost an election so I suppose it does not matter who he was anyways.

Yup - we need more liberals.

Actually we need more Canadians to vote.

Borg

[Argus]

Majority governments spend less than minority governments.

In addition, the Chretien Liberal government (with Paul Martin as Finance Minister) was careful spending our collective money.

This Harper government has been profligate.

----

I would suffer Sponsorgate, even a hotel in Shawinigan, to bring back a Chretien as PM and a PM as Finance Minister.

I want a government that spends wisely, and less.

----

This Harper government spends like a drunken sailor. Too much , and unwisely.

It's nice to be nostalgic, eh? You don't have to pay much attention to realities either.

Chretien didn't HAVE to spend much. It had big majorities and no threats from the opposition. What was the point of spending money on new initiatives? Why bother to even address problems, like the growing gap in health care funding? Who cares? If you're a politician guaranteed re-election you don't have to put a lot of care into anything but your endless vacation planning. That was Chretien. What? You have a problem? Tough to be you. Now I think I'll go on another vacation.

Anyone who thinks the Harper Conservatives would be spending like they have been if they'd been in the same fortunate position as Chretien is a fool. Likewise, the Chretien government quickly demonstrated that it had no fear of spending money wildly if it thought it needed it for electoral purposes. Because as soon as the Right amalgamated and Chretien saw it as a threat the wallet came out and the promises began flowing. Chretien had, in fact, by the time Martin took over, not only reduced the yearly budget surpluses to zero, but he had committed the federal government to expensive, multi-year programs. Martin came in and promised even more, cranking the money taps even further open.

You can whine about how great it would be to have majority governments again that didn't feel the need to buy votes, but we're likely to always have minority governments now because of your province and it's tribal mindset which keeps sending its own separate party members to Ottawa.

Unless Quebec gets out. If that were ever to happen. If Quebecers, in a fit of nationalist pique over some great imagined insult, finally decided to leave and form their own little primitive, bankrupt nation state, Canada would once again be governed by majority governments with big surpluses.

[Michael Hardner]

It's nice to be nostalgic, eh? You don't have to pay much attention to realities either.

Chretien didn't HAVE to spend much. It had big majorities and no threats from the opposition. What was the point of spending money on new initiatives? Why bother to even address problems, like the growing gap in health care funding? Who cares? If you're a politician guaranteed re-election you don't have to put a lot of care into anything but your endless vacation planning. That was Chretien. What? You have a problem? Tough to be you. Now I think I'll go on another vacation.

This is a strange take on it. I've never read a criticism of the Liberals NOT spending Martin made tough choices in the mid-1990s in cutting EI and transfer payments.

People don't just vote in governments who spend more and increase taxes, or Harris wouldn't have won a double majority in Ontario.

[Argus]

This is a strange take on it. I've never read a criticism of the Liberals NOT spending Martin made tough choices in the mid-1990s in cutting EI and transfer payments.

Maybe you slept through all those years where Martin's biggest challenge as finance minister was trying to come up with clever accounting tricks to hide the size of the yearly suprluses. All while health care continued to deteriorate. Every election they'd talk about how health care was a great national treasure, and portray themselves as the great defenders of public health care. But they let it fall apart because they didn't see any electoral benefit from addressing the growing problems. Chretien was left, after eleven years in power, trying to do things like create a museum to serve as his legacy. Because he'd done so bloody little with most of his time in office.

[Molly]

Anyone who thinks the Harper Conservatives would be spending like they have been if they'd been in the same fortunate position as Chretien is a fool.

Lets not be leaving any sense of luck to this: Chretien's 'fortunate position' in majority was because the voters of Canada chose to give him majorities. Voters were well aware of his warts, but they chose and re-chose his governance, because they approved of what his government did, and intended.

Harper doesn't get majorities because the voters of Canada don't like, trust or approve his brand of governance enough to vote for his party in similar numbers. It's un-'fortunate' for him that so many disagree with him, but luck has nothing to do with it.

[DrGreenthumb]

Majority governments spend less than minority governments.

In addition, the Chretien Liberal government (with Paul Martin as Finance Minister) was careful spending our collective money.

This Harper government has been profligate.

----

I would suffer Sponsorgate, even a hotel in Shawinigan, to bring back a Chretien as PM and a PM as Finance Minister.

I want a government that spends wisely, and less.

----

This Harper government spends like a drunken sailor. Too much , and unwisely.

I miss Cretien too. If you want a fscally responsible socially liberal government, Jack Layton has one waiting in the wings. The New NDP is a lot like the old liberal party, that is why I WAS a Liberal and NOW I AM a New Democrat.

[dizzy]

If I could trust them to not do too much damage, my ideal would be for the tories to win a small majority, clean up some of the insitutionalized thinking in government, gut HRSDC, impose two-tier healthcare (or restore full provincial responsibility for it, which would accomplish the same) and then lose the next election before they got into their candy issues like revoking same sex marriage, abortion rights, etc.

[Argus]

Lets not be leaving any sense of luck to this: Chretien's 'fortunate position' in majority was because the voters of Canada chose to give him majorities. Voters were well aware of his warts, but they chose and re-chose his governance, because they approved of what his government did, and intended.

Oh please. The two "conservative" parties split the vote and that was how he got in. He never got the majority of the popular vote. As for what he "intended" no one ever knew that since every election campaign was one lie after another.

[Argus]

I miss Cretien too. If you want a fscally responsible socially liberal government, Jack Layton has one waiting in the wings.

Jack Layton fiscally responsible??!??!?

What have you been smoking!?

Oh wait... never mind.

[dizzy]

Oh please. The two "conservative" parties split the vote and that was how he got in. He never got the majority of the popular vote. As for what he "intended" no one ever knew that since every election campaign was one lie after another.

Just as the left vote split is giving the conservatives minority governments now. The Bloc segment needs more dissection in terms of vote intentions, as many here would vote conservative because of the common ground on restraining federal powers. But as a sketch, most voters sit left of centre here.

BTW I miss Chretien/Martin, too.

[charter.rights]

Jack Layton fiscally responsible??!??!?

What have you been smoking!?

Oh wait... never mind.

Perhaps the same thing as Jack, but he now has a license for it.

[Molly]

Oh please. The two "conservative" parties split the vote and that was how he got in. He never got the majority of the popular vote. As for what he "intended" no one ever knew that since every election campaign was one lie after another.

Popular vote: ----- LPC ---- Combined conservative

1993 ------------ 41.3 ------ 34.7

1997 ------------ 38.5 ------ 38.2

2000 ------------ 40.8 ------ 37.7

The greater problem for the CRAP crowd was that their vote was so very concentrated in fewer ridings, not that it was divided.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Molly

[Machjo]

What we really need are more independent candidates keeping the parties, all the parties, in check.

[Topaz]

As I said before, I think Dom LeBlanc would be a good leader for the liberals.

[Smallc]

(or restore full provincial responsibility for it, which would accomplish the same)

That already is the way things are. Provinces can opt out of the Canada Health Act. They simply don't...because they'd be crucified...for good reason.

[Michael Hardner]

What we really need are more independent candidates keeping the parties, all the parties, in check.

Did you mean to write keeping the prairies in check ?

[bush_cheney2004]

bump

Edited May 8, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[dizzy]

That already is the way things are. Provinces can opt out of the Canada Health Act. They simply don't...because they'd be crucified...for good reason.

No politician seeking a second term would dream of opting his province out of the CHA. More importantly, there needs to be more room within the CHA for provinces to innovate, and that requires federal action.

[Smallc]

No politician seeking a second term would dream of opting his province out of the CHA. More importantly, there needs to be more room within the CHA for provinces to innovate, and that requires federal action.

Well, you said that you wanted the provinces to have complete control of healthcare. They already have that, they simply all agree to abide by the Canada Health Act (mostly). Innovation can happen within the act.

[kimmy]

Popular vote: ----- LPC ---- Combined conservative

1993 ------------ 41.3 ------ 34.7

1997 ------------ 38.5 ------ 38.2

2000 ------------ 40.8 ------ 37.7

The greater problem for the CRAP crowd was that their vote was so very concentrated in fewer ridings, not that it was divided.

Your figures illustrate the difference perfectly. Were Chretien running against a "united right", those figures would put him in minority government territory, not the sweeping majorities he ran throughout his tenure.

Chretien's 38-41% popular vote is only marginally higher than the 36-38% Harper has received in the past two elections, but the results are considerably different because of the location of their support. Having their support concentrated in urban ridings in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal has let the Liberals win a lot more seats than they would have if their support was spread evenly across the country.

-k

[maple_leafs182]

Majority governments spend less than minority governments.

In addition, the Chretien Liberal government (with Paul Martin as Finance Minister) was careful spending our collective money.

This Harper government has been profligate.

----

I would suffer Sponsorgate, even a hotel in Shawinigan, to bring back a Chretien as PM and a PM as Finance Minister.

I want a government that spends wisely, and less.

----

This Harper government spends like a drunken sailor. Too much , and unwisely.

Since technically we the people control the Bank Of Canada, why don't we try not charging interest on the national debt. Why would we want to continuously put ourselves into more and more debt.

[Pliny]

I miss Cretien too. If you want a fscally responsible socially liberal government, Jack Layton has one waiting in the wings. The New NDP is a lot like the old liberal party, that is why I WAS a Liberal and NOW I AM a New Democrat.

As we go further and further down the rabbit hole.....

[bush_cheney2004]

Since technically we the people control the Bank Of Canada....

Not true...The BoC is a crown corporation without any "public control".

"We the people..." is copyrighted by the United States of America.

[Pliny]

Since technically we the people control the Bank Of Canada, why don't we try not charging interest on the national debt. Why would we want to continuously put ourselves into more and more debt.

There are two possibilities here.

1. We, the people don't control the Bank of Canada. or..

2. It is a check on government to be fiscally responsible. (As if that could ever stop government spending.)

What do you think?