Admitting to being a Conservative supporter is like coming out of the closet. You don’t know how people will react, and you’re afraid some might look at you differently once they know.
I was particularly silent about my political views during my undergrad at U of T, afraid to be Tory-bashed in class by both students and professors alike. I had always sided with the Conservatives, but was never fully into the hot political debates since I believed that we, the public, never knew the whole story behind each issue. Now I know for a fact that this is true.
Within a week of beginning my internship in a Conservative MP’s office on Parliament Hill, I had learned more about politics than an entire university course could offer. I attended Question Period every day for the first week, and twice weekly I accompany my MP to the Status of Women Committee meetings, a committee where political posturing often gets in the way of decision-making.
This week on Parliament Hill has been particularly interesting because of the high-profile budget announcements, which have proven to be highly contentious.
On the surface, it seems that the Conservative government is cutting social programs despite the large budget surplus. Critics are asking how this makes sense, and why the government is targeting programs that support literacy, the status of women, and minority groups. The media has also done a good job of taking a one-sided stance on the issue and stressing the loss of the social programs themselves. This focus is not entirely accurate.
The Conservatives claim that these are administrative cuts, and that they are implementing the auditor general’s recommendations on where to save costs. Most of the cuts are due to a lack of efficiency in the various systems, where only 30 cents of each government dollar is actually being used. Many programs are old and outdated; they need to be revitalized, or new ones must be created to take their place.
Bev Oda, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Status of Women, recently stated that some buildings being funded by the government are uninhabited, and that rooms are even being rented out. There is no need to fund things that are not being used. The Tories want value for money spent.
This leads us to the next critical question: if the Tories have just announced a surplus, why are they using it to help pay off the debt instead of allocating more funds to social programs? The answer is that helping to pay off the debt reduces the interest on the debt, and this in turn saves the country money. By putting approximately $13 billion towards debt repayment, the government will be saving $650 million in future interest payments that they can then spend on programs.
Based on the Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada (available online), the 2005-2006 fiscal year saw fewer liabilities and more assets, both financial and non-financial, than the previous year. Paying off the debt in this situation makes fiscal sense. Cutting down the deficit will benefit everyone, and so will making sure that programs are effectively run before money is poured in.
Skeptics will argue that the Conservative’s defense of their budget is deceptive. They’ll say that the evil Harper will give money to anti-abortion groups and organizations that oppose same-sex marriage. They’ll say that the money that the Conservatives claim to be saving will not be used for social programs, but will go to Conservative friends in the oil industry instead.
There’s no guarantee that the Conservative promises will be kept, of course. However, they followed through on daycare and the GST cut, and are in the process of trying to pass the Federal Accountability Act in order to ensure an end to government scandal and theft. Conservatives want a majority government in the future, and must prove themselves to voters and keep themselves accountable to all Canadians. Instead of only being skeptical of the government, citizens should be more critical of the media and the one-sided perspective it feeds to willing readers.
