Opinion

Bill C-9 and the Coalition Imperative

Britain's new leaders have paved the way for what Ignatieff must do now.

By Murray Dobbin, 30 May 2010, TheTyee.ca

Michael Ignatieff

Ignatieff: His caucus said to want a coalition.

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

Related

Can the opposition parties, primarily the NDP and the Liberals, actually get their act together and save the country from more destruction by the Harper Conservatives? 

There is evidence that there is at least some talking behind the scenes about the formation of a coalition government. Widely reported remarks by Toronto Star columnist Chantal Hebert suggest that Jean Chretien and Ed Broadbent are talking. Bob Rae blogged last week on the 25th anniversary of the Ontario NDP/Liberal coalition government he was part of and ridiculed the Conservatives fear-mongering about the renewed "coalition threat."

Reports that members of the Liberal caucus are eager for such a move are also being strategically leaked to the media.

The formation of a coalition government in Britain, bringing together two parties at serious odds on many policies, has helped break what remains of the taboo manufactured by the Harper propaganda machine.

But secret, indirect talking is a painfully slow process when it seems so obvious to so many that a coalition is not just the only way to get rid of Harper but the only way to save the Liberal Party under Michael Ignatieff from further decline. Almost no one believes that Ignatieff has what it takes to win an election and the party has no obvious successor in the wings.

But a coalition coming to power following the defeat of the Harper government would give the Liberals the time they desperately need. It is assumed that the NDP would support a coalition and Jack Layton has said as much.

The best and most legitimate opportunity for such a defeat is, unfortunately, rapidly disappearing. That opportunity is Bill C-9, the omnibus bill that Harper introduced to implement the budget passed by the House in March. It has come in for severe criticism not just from the opposition parties but from parliamentary experts and commentators.

The omnibus bill has been characterized as the "dumpster bill" by which Harper can insert some of his favourite legislative goals into a budget bill, thus protecting them both from any parliamentary debate but most importantly from any separate votes and almost certain defeat.

Vote against C-9 because of one of these stealth items and the conventional wisdom is that this represents a question of confidence and automatically triggers an election.

One solution was an NDP effort to break up the Bill to separate these items, but the Liberals are so terrified of an election they let it pass through committee stage by making sure one of its MPs was absent. That allowed them to vote against it but ensure that it passed.

Our parliamentary system works as it should, most of the time, so long as everyone involved obeys the letter and spirit of the many regulations, laws and conventions that characterize the institution. But all it takes to subvert parliament and democratic governance is a prime minister ruthless enough and with enough contempt for the process to take power. This is a system, like most systems, that assumes everyone accepts the rules and plays by them.

Harper's distortions of democracy

It has been clear for at least two years, since Stephen Harper's phony prorogation to avoid defeat, that the man in charge of the country neither accepts the rules nor plays by them. Among Harper's many violations of democracy, two stand out.

First is his open contempt for the institution itself:

The handbook on disrupting the work of committees;

The refusal to recognize parliamentary supremacy in refusing to hand over Afghan torture documents (he's up to it again this week, breaking the agreement reached just weeks ago);

The deliberate sabotage of Access to Information; two unprecedented examples of abuse of prorogation; the muzzling of several watchdog agencies and more.  

The second category of abuse of democracy is Harper's willingness to use executive spending powers to eliminate things he does not like, with no reference to the House of Commons and no public debate:

A dramatic shift in Middle East policy tilting towards Israel;

A continuous assault on women's rights;

Diminishing the role of science in the economy;

Attacks on the cultural sector;

Eliminating the funding for advocacy organizations which criticize the government.

The omnibus bill represents another order of abuse, one copied directly from the corrupted legislative system in the U.S. If you want a piece of legislation passed but don't have the votes, add it on to a popular piece of legislation that Congress will not want to defeat. The Omnibus Bill does just that. It would allow Harper and his cabinet to change pension rules, waive environmental assessment of projects like tars sands expansion and oil pipelines, and privatize parts of Canada Post.

A crisis and an opportunity

This is how Stephen Harper intends to continue seizing the power of a majority government when Canadians have not given it to him. If this is not the signal for the opposition to end this dictatorial rule then it hard to imagine what would move them. The trigger for a vote of non-confidence is the loss of confidence of a majority of the House of Commons. That condition now prevails.

There truly is in this ongoing crisis an opportunity -- for a coalition government that represents a majority of Canadians. And, following that, the reform that will guarantee majority rule in the future: proportional representation.  

If the Liberals cannot overcome their fear of losing and put the country first, they will continue their decline and bear the sole responsibility for future assaults on the nation by Stephen Harper. [Tyee]

Murray Dobbin's "State of the Nation" column runs every other Monday in The Tyee and on Rabble, and he also publishes articles on his blog.

32 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • CanadianLatitude

    1 year ago

    But a coalition coming to

    But a coalition coming to power following the defeat of the Harper government would give the Liberals the time they desperately need. It is assumed that the NDP would support a coalition and Jack Layton has said as much.
    ===========

    Too late now. Iggy had his chance and declined. Plus Queen Jean would send us to the polls anyway. She does what Harper wants and not best for the country.

    The libs also will not share power, they still think they are entitled to run the country. What the libs need to wake them up is obliteration come next election. Yes that would leave us with a Chairman Harper majority but he basically has one now, Libs almost always back him up and he runs government like he has one.

    Who is there in the lib party that wants the job and can do better than Iggy?

    It is too bad the libs held on to Iggy for so long, (I guess they borrowed a page from the BC NDP and Ms. James) Harper is in the low to mid 30's in polling and yet the libs can not capitalise and Iggy is all over the place grasping at issues hoping one sticks...

  • chrisale

    1 year ago

    careful

    "[Jean] does what Harper wants and not best for the country."

    She is simply "following the rules". The GG takes the advice of the Prime Minister. Otherwise, we'd still be living in an absolute monarchy.

  • Barryeng

    1 year ago

    Coalitions?

    Canada is one of the few parlimentary democracies that does not have at least some form of party coalition. In fact, the present Conservative party is actually a coalition of the Reform party and the Progressive Conservatives. This is not a new thing.

    The only thing wrong with a coalition, is that Harper wouldn't like it.

  • jim1966

    1 year ago

    Who Would Lead This Coalition?

    I can't see Iggy leading any party. Jack Layton would be a good leader. This might work well if the new left so to speak could actually defeat the Cons. Isn't this issue telling us all something?. No one likes any of the parties trying to run our country. Not everyone likes the Cons, or the Libs or the NDP. It seems like a majority gov't was a long time ago in Ottawa. I think that Canadians are not happy with the Cons acting as though they do indeed have a majority when they do not. As to having another election all I can say if that what our democracy says we must do then that's what we gotta do. People are frustrated in the election process because of the outcomes in the last few years. The Libs need to get it togethere (same as the BC NDP)and start being an effective opposition. There has been many chances to go to the people. The Libs are terrified of an election?. Maybe but if they decide to form a coalition then Iggy has got to go, if he does not it'll be the same old same old come next election day.

  • MichaelT

    1 year ago

    Layton Led Coalition would defeat CPC but not a Iggy-led

    La Presse, translation below

    http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cyberpresse.ca%2Factualites%2Fquebec-canada%2Fpolitique-canadienne%2F201005%2F30%2F01-4285263-une-coalition-plc-npd-dirigee-par-layton-deferait-harper.php%3Futm_categorieinterne%3Dtrafficdrivers%26utm_contenuinterne%3Dcyberpresse_B42_acc-manchettes-dimanche_369233_accueil_POS1&sl=fr&tl=en

  • Sally Bowles

    1 year ago

    This is an about-face.

    Coalition governments have been a staple in civilized countries for generations. It's a slower process, but a better reflection of the majority.

  • Bobb999

    1 year ago

    Give me Coalition or give me DEATH!

    If,next election,Tories again win but a paltry purality, & Iggy rejects coalition, he will thereby stick the majority of Canadian voters who voted center-left or left (Libs+NDP+Bloc = a clear majority) with more years of Tory-tyranny-of-the-minority. To me, this will be unforgivable.I'll then be forced to view Iggy as Harper's best pal & ally, rather than his foe.

    Coalition's likely the only viable path to evict Harper from 24 Sussex Dr, and the only way to restore gov't representing a majority of voters.

    Iggy seems to be likeliest potential weak-link, the one most likely to reject coalition, as he wasn't hot on the idea last time.
    I'll view Iggy as worse than useless if he again props up a Harper minority by rejecting coalition.
    I can't take any more years of Tory power abuse!
    Ig,don't mess up your best, probably only chance to form gov't!

  • Fish-counter

    1 year ago

    You can only get so far with a wry grin....

    There has to be a soul under the suit. I feel sorry for the Liberals. They cast off one leader who had substance - Stephane Dion - for one who doesn't. Ignatieff has no spine. He has zero charisma and zero for guts. Dion had a distinct platform the environment - which I for one would have changed sides for. I am not political at all, and think the ConLib spectrum lacks colour and life of any kind.

    It is sad to think that Jean Chretien would even talk about a comeback, but there is no one else in his party with anything remotely like a following.

    Ignatieff looks like he was just caught creeping out of his next door neighbour's bedroom after an unsatisfactory romp with the wife. He couldn't lead a horse to water.

  • alive

    1 year ago

    given time???

    Perhaps enough time has elapsed that the great unwashed public can begin to accept a coalition?

    For many the very idea was an unknown and offensive because they all along had this idea that only the libs or conservative had any business being in the parliament at all.

    Maybe it is lucky to democracy that a tyran like Harper appears, so they can wittness what can happen when the laws of the land are bent to suit a dictators purpose.

    We did not all see Hitlers maneuvers first hand, those who did will never underestimate the glib talking bastards again.

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    Interesting

    If Iggy offers Canadians himself as half a PM along with the other half, Jack, it will be quite interesting. Quite a step-down.

    If Iggy goes with the old gang; Libs/NDP/Bloc then maybe Canadians will say no, the way 60% did the last time.

    If Iggy goes with a 'New & Improved' version without the Bloc it will be interesting to see how Québec reacts to being left out. The other twist is that unless they get more seats than last time it won't be enough to govern, unless the Cons get less.

    Quite a gamble for the previously-known-as 'Natural Governing Party'. Would the top party brass risk a double-whammy loss rather that wait for a new leader?

    Lucienne Robillard has just this week been brought out of retirement to head the Québec wing. She knows tradition and she knows that the next leader, by tradition, will be a Francophone. Maybe she fancies the top job.

  • RickW

    1 year ago

    alive

    Quote:
    Maybe it is lucky to democracy that a tyran like Harper appears, so they can wittness what can happen when the laws of the land are bent to suit a dictators purpose

    Well gosh darn it if there ain't a sizable number of folks out there who think that Harper is actually doing a fair job. Of course, they get their "information" from the likes of Andrew Coyne.....

  • RickW

    1 year ago

    PS

    And Iggy is the "kinder, gentler" side the coin represented by that cretin Chretien -- and would fully support the policies put into place by that former prime minister. He hasn't much credibility with anyone I know or talk to.

  • AHHA

    1 year ago

    Coalition is not a dirty word

    It seems to me that the last time around the cons did a very good spin job of convincing the public that a coalition is a coup, they later modified that to power grab. A coalition was the obvious remedy for our hung parliament. The mainstream media played along and did not point out to the public that this was disinformation of a type perhaps not quite treacherous but in every way against the public interest. As most of us know a coalition is not a big deal and quite normal in parliamentary democracy. The U.K had not had one for quite some time but they did not resort to what was played out here. A coalition was the obvious remedy for our hung parliament most of us knew that. Yet the next round of spin was let’s have everyone sing in unison “we don’t want another election” as we were trained and supposed to do. Oh but how we cried as was scripted for us that 300 million dollars to have an election was not worth the price for democracy.

    Ignatief like Dion have played the liberals as craven and despite having nearly a hundred opportunities would not bring the government down (they will never see my vote ever again for that). At this point I believe discerning eyes see politicians for what they have become for the most part and that is up to their piggy snouts in self-interest. So what is new, nothing and nothing is likely to change. The parties of greed, self interest and corporate subservience have had hundreds of years to figure out how to rig a parliamentary democracy. It is only because of the inter-web that we are now collectively figuring this out in large numbers. The only way to begin to escape from this is some form of proportional system, the political parties have us by the pubis and are not about to let go. We may as well load up the benches with the results of the popular vote, it will at least bring greater accountability to the status quo and may ultimately wrestle democracy back to where it belongs, in the hands of the public, not in the hands of the very few political party elite.

  • cutting emissions

    1 year ago

    Bill C-9 and the Coalition Imperative

    Any semblance of democracy in Canada is fast slipping away under the Harper government. It’s imperative that we act together to protect our social and economic systems, prevent further environmental degradation and restore the trust of the Canadian people.
    We can look to the south to witness our fate if we continue on our present course. Even under Obama’s leadership, unbridled corporate dominance is such that the US government has been squashed like a bug by the investment banks and the petroleum industry. Financial disaster is pending, according to Harvard professor Niall Ferguson, interviewed Sunday on BBC World News. And due to lax and lacking regulation, the Gulf of Mexico oil blowout has caused the most appalling environmental tragedy the US, and perhaps the world, has ever suffered. Droplets of oil and dispersant drawn into the air by Gulf storms may someday rain down on Canada.
    The “too little, too late” US moratorium on offshore oil drilling must be an annoyance to the oil companies. They know they’re in trouble and they’re looking at our country to solve their problem. Efforts will be redoubled to extract every last drop of oil from the Alberta tar sands, at unimaginable cost to our environment and our citizens. Just as disturbing is the increased interest in drilling in Arctic waters. Things are bad enough in the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico, but imagine how much more difficult it would be to repair and contain a blowout and spill in the Arctic.
    The US oversight agency for offshore drilling, the Minerals Management Service, has been shown to have been corrupt. As for Canada, we have the National Energy Board, with ten of its twelve members appointed by Harper. And if Bill C-9, which exempts a wide range of commercial projects from environmental regulation, becomes law, there will be no way left to protect our beautiful land from uncontrolled extraction and exploitation of our natural resources.
    Stand together, everyone. Let’s take back control of our government.

  • Frank

    1 year ago

    Jack Layton as PM?

    The following is from Norm Spector
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/spector-vision/prime-minister-layton/article1586238/

    "In one respect, the results of an Angus Reid poll to be released on Monday are not surprising — the Conservatives are at 35 per cent, the Liberals at 27 and the NDP are at 19 per cent; in Quebec, the Bloc leads with 37 per cent.

    However, the poll also asked Canadians how they would vote if the Liberals and NDP went to the polls offering Canadians a coalition government, and here things get interesting.

    According to the results published in Monday’s edition of La Presse, the Conservatives led by Stephen Harper would defeat a coalition led by Michael Ignatieff 40-34 per cent.

    With Bob Rae as Liberal leader, the coalition and Conservatives would be tied.

    However, if the coalition were to propose Jack Layton as prime minister, according to the Reid poll, it could defeat the Conservatives by 43-37 per cent.

    The reason: Jack Layton is well-liked by Quebecers but they don’t vote for the NDP because they see no chance of the party forming government; with the prospect of Mr. Layton in the prime minister’s office, 44 per cent of Quebecers would vote NDP — 10 per cent more than the Bloc. "

  • G West

    1 year ago

    Interesting observation from Mr Spector

    And just another significant indication of the problem that Ingatieff and the Liberals find themselves in...

    People from Quebec are, and have been for at least a generation, the most progressive people in the country - politically and socially.

    If Pee Wee begins to see this as a threat it won't be long before the conservative 'brain trust' rekindles the phony 'separatist' argument about a coalition government.....

  • morechatter

    1 year ago

    Who will be our next leaders?

    If the governments come together for the better of the whole dosen't leadership takes a back step as the leaders of the various parties come together to address issues affecting Canadians from all walks of life. Are three heads better than one? Can Leaders work together on the issues most important to Canadians because Harper certainly isn't.

  • Steppeup

    1 year ago

    Coalition

    Murray, you really do hate our present government hummm???
    I find it really funny how everyone thinks that a liberal/ndp coalition is what everyone wants. Just because if you add the two together they got more votres than the current government, you automatically think everyone who voted for those two losing parties would automatically vote coalition. That would have to be proven to me in an actual election with everyone knowing going in that these two parties would form a coalition government.

    And please don't quote the british election coalition to me. When you do you show your ignorance. The party with the MOST votes is leading that coalition government. Not the two parties with the least amount of votes. Not the party with the biggest decline in elected members from the previos election. But that is what you are proposing, and wishing for and praying for here. You are really losing it now Murray. Is your hatred of Harper that strong??

    Our country is heading in the right direction for a change. we finaly have some backbone and pride for our country is shining brighter than ever. Thank you Mr. Harper.....

  • Steppeup

    1 year ago

    Isreal

    And what is wrong with supporting the only democratic country in the middle east. Do you actually prefer to support the arab muslim countries and states that teach the total destruction of the state of Isreal? is that what you prefer? I cannot believe that any sane and reasonable person would stand up for the people that that want to wipe the state of Isreal off the map, that teaches in their schools and in their mosques that it is expected and desired to kill Isrealies, kill Americans, Kill all the non believers... Thyis is what you want to stand up for? Thats pretty bad Murray.

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    Québec most Progressive, Politically and Socially

    ...says a poster here. At what cost one might ask. Is it that easy?

    Well, there is a cost.

    "The March 2010 Quebec budget introduced:

    a) user fees for health care ($25/visit tax deductible); b) increasing university tuition fees starting in 2012 to the Canadian average (although university officials expect liberalization of professional programs); c) increased electricity rates (which are kept lower than the North American average market rate, because Hydro-Quebec is a crown corporation); and d) increased provincial sales taxes.

    The breadth and depth of government services is remarkable, particularly for its means. Quebec offers 26 per cent more services than Ontario but is 14 per cent poorer. This asymmetry is the result of four decades of profligacy that has saddled Quebec taxpayers with a debt as a percentage of GDP of 50 per cent (Ontario's is 30 per cent). According to the OECD's measurement, Quebec is the fifth most indebted jurisdiction in the developed world. "

    Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Quebec+model+Waterloo/3054954/story.html#ixzz0pf3e276P

    A wonderful legacy for the grandchildren. "Here, my son the good news; I leave you this grand mansion where everything is for the taking. Unfortunately, there is a massive, and I mean really big, mortgage and the property taxes will make you wince. There are a number of debts for you to take on too. But it's a nice place.

    BC's debt is a little over 30 billion, by comparison Québec debt is nearly a hundred and seventy billion.

  • G West

    1 year ago

    At least Québec gets some value for its public debt.

    At least Québec gets some value for its public debt...In BC we have more child poverty, less affordable housing and far more homelessness – not to mention a rotting public education system at all levels…and we have a much smaller population.

    BC public debt, by the way, is a lot more than 30 billion - it was $37.3 billion on March 31, 2004 and it's gone up in leaps and bounds since then... In fact, if you add the 'contractual obligations' of $24.7 billion (to the out of date number of 37.3) the total comes to about $62 billion beans... and that's only up to the end of fiscal 2008/09 remember.

    Property taxes and home ownership costs in Québec are considerably more affordable than here in BC...

    Fact is, BC hasn't much to show for its debt - Québec actually does.

    Of course, the hundred and fifty or so members of the BC ruling elite are doing very well.

  • shedding_light

    1 year ago

    Either~Or Thinking versus Creative solutions

    We haven't taken seriously the possibility that MOST Canadians don't want Harper and MOST Canadians don't want Ignatieff either. They don't want Layton. What outside-the-box options can we think up?

    Most Canadians don't want to be given pre-fab choices of who is going to dictate to us, we want democracy. Even a truly representative democracy (a rep listening to their Riding's voters), would be a huge step up, from what we've got now. A meaningful representative democracy requires that WE, all of us (not the few who really decide who's going to be on the ballot now) nominate the candidates and then select one in each Riding.

    Even better if maintaining an elected position requires maintaining the confidence of the constituents. Why CAN'T we change our votes if we see the person we trusted isn't worthy of our trust? (Remember David Emerson and Vancouver-Kingsway? Those voters wanted to change their votes all right!)

    It would save a bundle on election hype, spin, voter stress, and distortion, not to mention costs. Keep local records, like a bank account, of each citizen's vote, which they can place or change at will. A suitable buffer of, say, 3 months, before a serving rep would be replaced by another who had gained and maintained more votes, and a phone number you can call to get the current numbers standing for each candidate in your Riding. The details can be worked out to prevent fraud.

    We can't get accountability if we can't change our votes. Just knowing we can, will change the attitude of our representatives, and free them from control by a dictatorial party leader.

    We're using this system of ongoing democracy to help operate the Canadian Action Party, and many of us would like to see it become the way of the future on every level of Canadian democracy. It would sure help B.C. in our current situation! And city councils, mayors, why shouldn't they be accountable? All the time, not once every few years, at which point they manipulate the message for a few weeks and we never get a real choice we can trust.

    The biggest spin-off of such a system is that it rewards and motivates citizen participation, without which, ultimately, we can't have a democracy at all.

    Can you imagine how empowering it is to know that if you learn about and develop trust for a better candidate to replace one you're fed up with, you can immediately let that show in the legal, binding votes? Elected reps who want to stay elected will HAVE to listen to their voters! I believe Canadians' huge diversity of creative ideas is being wasted in the current system.

    "Professional" politicians are not what we need, we need listening ones who can collaborate and find solutions that work for all of us. I believe that's possible, but not the way the system is set up now. So let's change it!

  • zalm

    1 year ago

    Psychosis

    How did Israel get into this screed? Somebody have some unacknowledged guilt over killing nine unarmed protestors in international waters? Try explaining that one according to your "holy scriptures". The much more likely explanation is what the European press is calling it - state terrorism.

    Anyone who would copy the nonsense argument from Joan Peters isn't worth educating - too far gone. Luckily, steppeup's sort are only about 5% of the population and we can afford to keep them in their delusions without too much extra cost except to the rightful owners of that land - the Palestinians...

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    G West

    Please explain yourself. What does this mean in relation to government debt; "In BC ...less affordable housing ". Do you believe that the Québec government subsidizes home ownership from the public treasury? Let us know this secret, I have some friends that rent there and they'd love to have their own place.

  • jim1966

    1 year ago

    Recent Poll Results

    I like the idea of a coalition government.I also like that fact that the media are giving this ponder any thought. If the Liberals want power and they do, badly I think then they're are going to have to show me the goods so to speak, Why should I ever vote Liberal again?, After all they did hardly anything to oppose the HST in BC or Ontario for that matter. It's just something to think about these days hmmm?

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    The NDP on a roll

    "NDP strategists have apparently concluded that it is time to move in for the kill against a weakened Liberal party."

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/817622--hebert-jack-layton-s-surge-great-news-for-stephen-harper

  • G West

    1 year ago

    Realisticman - with pleasure...

    You're joking right?

    Perhaps your friends should move to Vancouver...that's where the 'really' affordable housing is.

    Please read carefully the last para. of this short article based on RBC data:
    http://www.nationalpost.com/homes/story.html?id=3084034

    Just in case the link doesn't work - and for those too lazy to click on it, here's the para in question (dated May 27, 2010)....

    The affordability measure for a detached bungalow in Canada’s largest cities is as follows: Vancouver 73.4% (up 4.8 percentage points over the last quarter), Toronto 49.1% (up 0.4 of a percentage point), Ottawa 40.3% (up 0.3 of a percentage point), Montreal 39.7% (up 0.9 of a percentage point), Calgary 36.5% (down 0.3 of a percentage point) and Edmonton 32% (down 0.5 of a percentage point).

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    Another Red Herring

    Nothing new there.
    The government doesn't sell homes in BC or in Québec. Neither does the massive level of Québec debt mean that one cent of that money went to subsidizing anyone's home.

    Perhaps this is one reason why BC is most expensive.

    "Stats Canada
    Latest release from the Labour Force Survey.

    Friday, May 7, 2010
    In April, employment rose by 35,000 in Quebec, and the unemployment rate edged down to 7.9%. Since July 2009, employment in that province has grown by 91,000 (+2.4%).

    In British Columbia, employment gains of 13,000 in April pushed the unemployment rate down 0.6 percentage points to 7.3%. Since July 2009, employment in the province has risen by 55,000 (+2.4%)."

    BC has a lower rate of unemployment and the population in BC is growing faster than Québec's.

    "Population projections for Canada 2009 to 2036
    Friday, 28 May 2010

    Ontario and British Columbia are the only provinces in which average annual growth would exceed the growth rate for Canada as a whole between 2009 and 2036, according to all scenarios."

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100526/dq100526b-eng.htm

    Interesting that you don't seem concerned about government debt.

  • G West

    1 year ago

    Not a red herring at all

    Ah yes! There is pretty decent growth in BC in the minimum wage category. A lot of lovely low-wage, no-future minimum wage (or less) jobs.

    And a minimum wage which is also a record for the whole country.

    Combine that with the highest cost of housing - relative to income - in the world.

    Really, what ARE some people smoking these days?

    I recognize that many comfortable independent business people of a certain inclination don't care about the poor and the homeless - not surprisingly such folks also don't care about affordable housing for anyone.

    I suppose someone who lives in Kerrisdale doesn't have that on their radar...But, it's an obvious disconnect with any suggestion that realism comes into the analysis.

    I am far more concerned about personal debt and the inability of British Columbia's citizens to live a decent life than I am fretting about government debt.

    However, as previously illustrated, we have enormous and growing government debt AND none of the kind of enhanced social services to show for it. Not even a decent program of affordable quality day care – something Québec has now had for 13 years.

    Hand in hand with the enormous growth in BC government debt (which, one notes, has not been questioned) over the past 10 years we have seen an equally disgusting tendency for the government of this province to sell off OUR assets; mortgage our future and retreat in disarray from the obligations of the state to address the worsening situation for children, the poor, the sick, the homeless, the old and the uneducated.

    I'm very concerned about government debt but I'm much more concerned about the hateful and thoroughgoing refusal of the Campbell Government to actually do anything except pay off its friends.

    That's not a red herring: it's a pathetic fact.

    More pathetic, even, than the rather strange phenomenon that apparently intelligent and nominally well-informed individuals seem duty bound to support this record despite the evidence - and the blood - on the ground.

  • realisticman

    1 year ago

    Baffelgab

    The minimum wage has zip to do with government debt.

    I'll tell my Québec friends that you're very pleased with the Québec government debt because they have cheap subsidized day-care, even though it's right up there with Greece and all they have to do is keep spending and just borrow more.

    Did you know that a 1% rise in interest rates will cost Québec $1.7 billion extra interest per year?

  • G West

    1 year ago

    THat's not what Gordo and company say

    Perhaps you’ve forgotten their reasons for not raising it?

    Look, BC is right up there in terms of its government debt too - on a per capita basis - and, as I've been demonstrating - we've got sweet bugger all to show for it except: the worst child poverty in the country; the highest house prices; a failing health system; a broken system of public education; increasing homelessness; corrupt police and corrupt politicians along with an increasingly dysfunctional and unequal social fabric; a few increasingly rich and disconnected individuals of high entitlement and an increasing number of struggling former members of the middle class whose lives are steeped in hopelessness and angst – and often, of late, either angry, despondent, under the influence of drugs and or alcohol.

    Some value for money.

    However, I can't really blame you for not admitting you've been backing the wrong horse - probably for all your life.

    Enjoy.

    As for Greece, I prefer to compare BC with your other hero country Ireland.

    What example happened there my friend? No more emerald tiger I guess.

    The good men and women of Kerrisdale and the British Properties are doing just fine though, aren't they?

    As for day care in La Belle Province, I take it you haven't seen the data which show the provincial treasury is actually doing very nicely by that investment.

    Here's a study from Ontario you should read:
    http://www.childcareontario.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/ocbcc-_prebudget2009.pdf

    Unlike the investments Campbell makes, subsidized child care is actually a real way to spend money on actual people and an attempt to address 'real' social issues. Campbell’s investments hurt the majority of the population. Which is why he hasn’t got the sense to understand why the lowest minimum wage in the country isn’t a feather in his cap at all…

  • Des

    1 year ago

    Coalitions

    can be unlikely political partnerships arranged either before an election (when the electorate can consider the appropriateness of their win) or after an election (when the parties involved can consider the precedence of particular policies).

    In Canada's case, we are confronted by one party which is controlled absolutely by one powerful person only, a second party controlled by a cabal behind the scenes and fronted by a person with an impeccable record acquired in non-political endeavours, and a third party controlled by the members of the party and fronted by a very political leader. A fourth party is extremely provincial, while a fifth party exists primarily to reject the former four parties.

    Some people like the powerful master taking charge because that relieves them of having to think for themselves. Others find themselves confused because the non-political leader appears hesitant and confused too. For the third party, provincial wins (all reasonably successful) have never translated into federal wins.

    We need an election, but we need it to be one which is well-attended by the public. Afterwards, if public confusion continues, a coalition should be proposed immediately in order to change the government. That implies a previous arrangement and somewhat public discussion of the different issues which could be embraced, discarded or adapted in the event that another minority gets in.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.