Now that the NDP has expunged the dreaded word "socialism" from its constitution, there's no Left left in Canada's Left. What's stopping the Liberals and the New Democrats from burying the hatchet besides history, habit -- and hubris?
The two parties keep conjuring up a tyranny of small differences to justify their ongoing electoral battle although voting patterns prove their split means the conservative 30 per cent of the electorate could govern the 70 per cent of liberal/left Canadians well into the future -- a mockery of democracy.
An issue has arisen that should finally drive the "frenemies" into each other's arms.
It’s social impact bonds. And it's the latest scam for the rich to skin the poor. The Harper Conservatives are very interested. What's not to like about privatizing, competing and profiting from social policy?
An American invention, social impact bonds are issued by wealthy investment banks like Goldman Sachs to address the social pathologies created by the shredding of the social safety net. If the privatized program succeeds, the investors get their money back plus an additional profit of as much as 20 per cent.
Not surprisingly, Human Resources Minister Diane Findlay is keen to explore how social impact bonds could deliver social programs. They allow government to continue cutting taxes while rewarding corporations and banks for their "philanthropy."
This should finally scare Canada's two centre-left parties into acknowledging the danger posed to Canada's social safety net through their tyranny of small differences.
Although they have never joined in a formal coalition, the Liberals and New Democrats have worked together frequently since Mackenzie King and J.S. Woodsworth created the old age pension plan in 1927.
Andrew Cohen, founding president of the Historica-Dominion Institute, is the author of /Extraordinary Canadians: Lester B. Pearson./In a recent /Ottawa Citizen/ column, Cohen points out that Pearson's two minority Liberal governments from April, 1963 to June 1968 "were the most productive in Canadian history," introducing the Canada Pension Plan, universal health care, official bilingualism, the guaranteed income supplement, the flag, open immigration, student loans, the Order of Canada and the Auto Pact.
All were passed into law by Pearson's Liberals with the support of the NDP led by Tommy Douglas.
Less than a decade later, another de facto Liberal/NDP coalition, this time led by Pierre Trudeau and supported by Ed Broadbent, indexed the Canada Pension Plan to the cost of living and created the Crown Corporation PetroCanada at the height of the OPEC oil crisis in the early 1970s.
Nor was that the end of tacit Liberal/NDP co-operation. In December, 1979, Broadbent's New Democrats voted against Progressive Conservative Finance Minister John Crosbie's first and only federal budget, bringing down Joe Clark's minority PC government and forcing the February, 1980 federal election that returned Trudeau's Liberals to power with a majority.
And then there was the fatally flawed attempt to defeat Stephen Harper's Conservatives over the budget in December, 2008. The Liberals and New Democrats foolishly armed the prime minister with a prorogation club to beat back their non-confidence motion by whipping up public hysteria over their non-existent "coalition" with the Bloc Quebecois.
Finally, in 2012, the New Democrats chose as their new leader Thomas Mulcair, a former minister in the right-of-centre Quebec Liberal government headed by Premier -- and former federal Progressive Conservative - Jean Charest.
Now take a look at the parties' constitutional documents and policies. As the Sesame Street song goes, "one of these is not like the others."
The Conservative Party's founding principles talk of "the freedom of individual Canadians to pursue their enlightened and legitimate self-interest within a competitive economy; the freedom of individual Canadians to enjoy the fruits of their labour to the greatest possible extent; the right to own property...a belief that a responsible government must be fiscally prudent and should be limited to those responsibilities which cannot be discharged reasonably by the individual or others; A belief that it is the responsibility of individuals to provide for themselves, their families and their dependents."
The Liberals' principles declare "We are committed to providing a good and fair balance between the economy and social justice...to provide equal opportunity and security of the common good..."
The NDP's new constitutional preamble states: "New Democrats...believe we can be... a country of greater equality, justice, and opportunity...and a society that shares its benefits more fairly...We believe in a rules based economy...in which governments have the power to address the limitations of the market...by having the power to act in the public interest, for social and economic justice, and for the integrity of the environment."
Conservatives focus on individual rights; Liberals and New Democrats, on social responsibility and fairness. As the children's song goes, "One of these is not like the others."
The 2008 and 2011 elections had the two worst voter turnouts in Canadian history, 58.8 and 61.1 respectively. In 2011, the ballots of just 24.3 per cent of all eligible voters gave the Conservatives a majority until 2015 or 2016. A tyranny of small differences is burying our democracy.
Original Article
Source: nationalnewswatch.com
Author: Frances Russell
The two parties keep conjuring up a tyranny of small differences to justify their ongoing electoral battle although voting patterns prove their split means the conservative 30 per cent of the electorate could govern the 70 per cent of liberal/left Canadians well into the future -- a mockery of democracy.
An issue has arisen that should finally drive the "frenemies" into each other's arms.
It’s social impact bonds. And it's the latest scam for the rich to skin the poor. The Harper Conservatives are very interested. What's not to like about privatizing, competing and profiting from social policy?
An American invention, social impact bonds are issued by wealthy investment banks like Goldman Sachs to address the social pathologies created by the shredding of the social safety net. If the privatized program succeeds, the investors get their money back plus an additional profit of as much as 20 per cent.
Not surprisingly, Human Resources Minister Diane Findlay is keen to explore how social impact bonds could deliver social programs. They allow government to continue cutting taxes while rewarding corporations and banks for their "philanthropy."
This should finally scare Canada's two centre-left parties into acknowledging the danger posed to Canada's social safety net through their tyranny of small differences.
Although they have never joined in a formal coalition, the Liberals and New Democrats have worked together frequently since Mackenzie King and J.S. Woodsworth created the old age pension plan in 1927.
Andrew Cohen, founding president of the Historica-Dominion Institute, is the author of /Extraordinary Canadians: Lester B. Pearson./In a recent /Ottawa Citizen/ column, Cohen points out that Pearson's two minority Liberal governments from April, 1963 to June 1968 "were the most productive in Canadian history," introducing the Canada Pension Plan, universal health care, official bilingualism, the guaranteed income supplement, the flag, open immigration, student loans, the Order of Canada and the Auto Pact.
All were passed into law by Pearson's Liberals with the support of the NDP led by Tommy Douglas.
Less than a decade later, another de facto Liberal/NDP coalition, this time led by Pierre Trudeau and supported by Ed Broadbent, indexed the Canada Pension Plan to the cost of living and created the Crown Corporation PetroCanada at the height of the OPEC oil crisis in the early 1970s.
Nor was that the end of tacit Liberal/NDP co-operation. In December, 1979, Broadbent's New Democrats voted against Progressive Conservative Finance Minister John Crosbie's first and only federal budget, bringing down Joe Clark's minority PC government and forcing the February, 1980 federal election that returned Trudeau's Liberals to power with a majority.
And then there was the fatally flawed attempt to defeat Stephen Harper's Conservatives over the budget in December, 2008. The Liberals and New Democrats foolishly armed the prime minister with a prorogation club to beat back their non-confidence motion by whipping up public hysteria over their non-existent "coalition" with the Bloc Quebecois.
Finally, in 2012, the New Democrats chose as their new leader Thomas Mulcair, a former minister in the right-of-centre Quebec Liberal government headed by Premier -- and former federal Progressive Conservative - Jean Charest.
Now take a look at the parties' constitutional documents and policies. As the Sesame Street song goes, "one of these is not like the others."
The Conservative Party's founding principles talk of "the freedom of individual Canadians to pursue their enlightened and legitimate self-interest within a competitive economy; the freedom of individual Canadians to enjoy the fruits of their labour to the greatest possible extent; the right to own property...a belief that a responsible government must be fiscally prudent and should be limited to those responsibilities which cannot be discharged reasonably by the individual or others; A belief that it is the responsibility of individuals to provide for themselves, their families and their dependents."
The Liberals' principles declare "We are committed to providing a good and fair balance between the economy and social justice...to provide equal opportunity and security of the common good..."
The NDP's new constitutional preamble states: "New Democrats...believe we can be... a country of greater equality, justice, and opportunity...and a society that shares its benefits more fairly...We believe in a rules based economy...in which governments have the power to address the limitations of the market...by having the power to act in the public interest, for social and economic justice, and for the integrity of the environment."
Conservatives focus on individual rights; Liberals and New Democrats, on social responsibility and fairness. As the children's song goes, "One of these is not like the others."
The 2008 and 2011 elections had the two worst voter turnouts in Canadian history, 58.8 and 61.1 respectively. In 2011, the ballots of just 24.3 per cent of all eligible voters gave the Conservatives a majority until 2015 or 2016. A tyranny of small differences is burying our democracy.
Original Article
Source: nationalnewswatch.com
Author: Frances Russell
No comments:
Post a Comment