It may have been a while since Parliament last sat, but things seemed pretty much back to normal last week as MPs returned to the House after nearly three months of prorogation. Opposition critics questioned the government aggressively and were consequently met with the same glibness and condescension that has become characteristic of the Conservative government. Same old story.
One might have expected to experience a sense of anticipation surrounding the federal budget—a document that allocates billions of dollars for public expenditure, which is meant to set the national course for years to come, and which undoubtedly represents the most important moment in the annual parliamentary cycle. Furthermore, given that the Prime Minister’s pretext for his highly dubious prorogation was that his government needed time to “recalibrate,” it was reasonable to expect an ambitious budget, or at least one that addressed major national issues in an interesting manner.
Not really. The rationale behind this unbelievably boring document is that reducing the federal deficit is the primary concern of the government. And certainly, the deficit is a major issue that needs to be confronted. In addition to the billions spent on economic stimulus, an aging generation of baby boomers is expected to greatly reduce the federal tax pool and, once retired, will need major investments in pensions that will further deplete government resources. In response, the Tories have proposed to radically shrink the size of the federal government by freezing salaries and departmental growth. They’ve refused to hike taxes and have instead lowered corporate taxes to their lowest rate in at least 10 years.
There’s a real logic to this kind of policy—it’s predicated on a particular notion of “growth” which it assumes happens from the top down and not from the bottom up. The only problem is that “growth,” of this kind usually relegates its benefits to a select few, while doing nothing to combat deficits or fund social programs to help those who really suffer during a recession. Slashing the deficit by shrinking government also gives small-c conservatives something scrumptious to chew on. (Who needs a government anyway when there are nice, friendly corporations who care about public welfare and the environment?)
Perhaps as a distraction from this drab and unimaginative document, the Conservatives threw in a little motion to amend the lyrics to our national anthem to make them more “gender neutral.” Unsurprisingly, the most angry reactions came from the party’s own base, with the proposal prompting a small grassroots insurrection on Facebook and in the blogosphere. Two days after announcing it, the PMO cancelled the plan, releasing a statement saying the government had “gotten the message loud and clear” that there was no desire among Canadians to change the national anthem. It’s likely most of the Conservative caucus, including Harper himself, would have been against such a move, but, being the shrewd tactician that he is, the Prime Minister successfully controlled the news cycle for a couple of days and deflected attention from his lacklustre budget. His only sacrifice was a minor, and quickly forgettable, squabble with a tiny portion of his base.
Yet one burning question remains unanswered. The small issue of the Afghan detainee memos, demanded by a majority of MPs in Parliament in December, is yet to be resolved. In delaying the release of these memos, the Prime Minister is not only disobeying a direct order from the country’s democratic representatives, but is hinting strongly that the government has evidence that will seriously injure their credibility when made public. There seems to be no other explanation for a move that could result in members of the government being held in contempt of Parliament. During the parliamentary break, former Conservative chief-of-staff and Harper mentor Tom Flanagan made headlines when he criticized the explanations given by the government for its prorogation during a CBC interview. “The government’s talking points don’t have much credibility. Everyone knows that parliament was prorogued in order to shut down the Afghan inquiry,” he said. Last week’s developments, which have seen the Conservatives increasingly on the defensive about releasing the documents and desperately trying to downplay the issue, lend even more weight to this argument.
Though not much has changed since December in the House’s daily proceedings, at least on the surface, the government now sits about 12 percentage points below its comfort zone in the national polls. It also faces two sustained efforts by all three opposition parties—one to check the powers of the Prime Minister’s Office by regulating the rules of prorogation, and another to secure the release of un-redacted versions of the documents concerning the Afghan detainee issue. For the first time since the early days of December 2008, the Conservatives find themselves in some very hot water.









Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced the 2010 federal budget on March 4.

Comments
If the Conservatives are "12 percentage points below their comfort zone", I have ask either (a) since when are they polling at 28 percent or lower, or (b) when have they ever polled at 49 percent?!
Luke, you do realize that you've been writing dire missives about the government's political situation for the better part of a year, right? Canadians are frustrated with the government, but when compared with the Liberals, who for months have been desperately grasping at straws to find a pseudoscandal that anyone outside of the anti-Harper crowd actually cares about, or the NDP, whose only notable action in the last year was to prevent the fall of the government over EI (after which they immediately crawled back underneath their rock). I don't take the BQ seriously enough to even notice what they have been doing.
The government is not strong. But the opposition is so damn weak that Harper isn't going away anytime soon. The status-quo isn't going to change until the opposition parties stop just reacting to what Harper does and actually get real platforms of their own.
Mar 11, 2010 at 06:55 PM
There's still the Green Party.
Mar 11, 2010 at 11:14 PM
The Green Party is actually helping the Conservatives by stealing the protest vote from the NDP and giving it to a party that doesn't actually get any representation.
Mar 11, 2010 at 11:16 PM
Hi Rishi,
My concern in these columns is to right about the political reality as I see it. I thnk you'd agree that the political reality and public opinion are often separate (although they can, at certain wonderous moments coincide!) and my job, as I see it, is to provide a commentary which ignores spin as much as possible and focuses on what's actually going on in Parliament.
Many of the so-called "scandals" like the current furry over Rahin Jaffer ARE nothing more than trivialities which the Liberals in particular stick too because they don't know any better or have any real alternative to offer. But denying the democratic wishes of Parliament is a REAL scandal, whether the public realizes it or not. What's been happening in Ottawa these past few years is incredibly serious from my point of view and not what should be happening in a functional democracy. With this in mind, I try to provide this kind of commentary every few weeks with a view to keeping it real, inasmuch as it's supposed to function, that is!
And as for the Conservative comfort zone, I'd put that at around 45% (which is about what they were polling at in October-November) and they're now around 30-33% which presents a scenario in which they'd definately lose seats. The public may not be entirely tuned in but people are starting to listen.
And, lastly, I also loath the Greens but that can be the subject of another article.
Mar 12, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Luke, I agree that proroguing Parliament was a shameful act. Our parliamentarians get so little done in a session anyway that short of a war or natural disaster I can't find an excuse for Parliament to take any more breaks. A recurring theme with the current government is their tendency to try to sweep unfavourable issues under the rug rather than address them head-on. I expect better from the Government of Canada. The only good news is that the prorogue killed a lot of bad legislation (particularly bills C-46 and C-47). At this rate, no government bills will ever reach Royal Assent!
Though we rarely see eye-to-eye I appreciate your political commentary. Much of what is written in the mainstream media tends to have a distinctive party slant to it (editorials in the Toronto Star or National Post have so much bias that they are hardly worth reading). I come from the other side of the political spectrum, so I tend to feel that this budget, like all previous Harper budgets, once again fails to deliver on his purported fiscal conservatism. To me, fiscal conservatism isn't about small government per se, but about spending taxpayer dollars responsibly and efficiently. We wouldn't be in such a deficit situation right now if Harper & Co. hadn't blown the $40-billion surplus they inherited. This year's budget is big on rhetoric, but small on, well, anything substantial.
Mar 12, 2010 at 02:58 AM
The arrogant Conservatives will probably stay in power until the big egos on the left side of the house can put aside their personal careers long enough to unite the left and include the smart ideas from the Green Party. Canadians deserve better than the capitalist driven and controlled Conservatives. People before corporate profits.
Mar 12, 2010 at 08:42 PM
What about the environment? The Conservatives don't care.
Please join this FB group:
Climate Action Now (Canada) http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=346257176985
Mar 13, 2010 at 12:50 AM
You're quite right John. There's absolutely nothing in the budget about the environment meaning that the conservatives have abandoned their four-year charade and are finally admitting they'll do nothing. At least it's in the open now.
Mar 13, 2010 at 03:24 PM
Your column certainly shows the requisite superficial understanding of underlying issues, naivete, and propensity for hyperbole and exaggeration that is de rigueur at NOW or Eye Weekly, say.
Hats off to you, sir.
May 16, 2010 at 10:57 PM
Post a Comment