Why we can’t let Harper win

October 8th, 2008 Posted in Politics

I have been asked a few times recently to defend my anti-Harper stance, but, more precisely, to provide and defend an alternative. While being anti something is all well and good, it has been pointed out that it can be a waste of energy if you don’t provide an alternative which would be a much more effective way of encouraging others to vote. How can I go around saying “I don’t like what you like,” and not back it up?

I’ll start of with my anti reasons as there is more of that than pro anything else.

The Arts: What are the “arts” and why does Harper have such a hate on for them? It has been pointed out several times by friends and articles I’ve read that the arts include more than just the stereotypical artist living off grants. The arts are the roots of our culture. They are the voice of dissent. They are the creatives that that enrich our lives. They are the innovators, the experimenters. They are the individuals that think outside the box, push the envelope and make people think.

It was pointed out by Margaret Atwood in an online interview for the Globe that the arts are not without benefit. We can’t grow as a nation if we don’t encourage our creatives to produce, export, inspire and spread and image of our country throughout the world.  It was also noted in the interview that art is subjective. This is true. But art is also the only sector that has the freedom of movement to create outside what we are comfortable with.

The Environment: To me this is a no brainer. Regardless of which party plan you agree with, there is a distinct lack of action coming from the Conservatives.

Dissent: I’m sorry, but I cannot trust a party who dismisses people because they don’t tow the party line, especially when the influence reaches outside the party itself. That is just plain dictatorial. How can a party change and evolve with the times without a little dissent? If a leader can’t accept criticism from within the party ranks, what makes us think that he will listen to the people who he represents? Also note: the Conservatives are not the only party to do this.

The Conservative silencing of dissent reaches further than the party itself and into “independent” institutions who disagreed with their Conservative government. The prime example of this was the firing of Linda Keen (another source), the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission in January. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is (was?) an independent nuclear safety watchdog. During her tenure, a nuclear reactor was shut down due to health and safety concerns. At the time of her firing, the Conservatives were taking heat in the media because the reactors provided radioactive isotopes used in chemotherapy.

I’m not going to go into details, but the point I’m trying to make is that Harper will not accept dissent. Period.  A few more examples: Adrian Measner President of the Canadian Wheat Board. The dismissal of Garth Turner, MP in Halton, from the Conservative ranks for speaking out on his blog and defending the people who elected him. There was also Rona Ambrose, who put forward Harper’s Clean Air Act. Conservatives took a lot of heat, Rona took the fall.

The Economy: I am no economist, but I disagree with Harper’s “laissez faire” (to quote Duceppe) attitude towards the current situation.  My (very) simplified understanding of economics is as follows: if we spend more, the economy will do better. For people to spend more, they need to have more. Currently the rich-poor divide is growing and if the majority of people cannot afford to invest in our economy, it stands to reason it will suffer.

In order for people to spend more, they need more and they also need to be comfortable spending what little they have. In my eyes, the solution doesn’t lie in bailing out the companies and corporations that hire people, but in educating and supporting the people who do the actual work.

Aside: There is so much more to this, but I’m not going to go into it because I wouldn’t even begin to do the topic justice.

Private vs. Public: My life has been saved twice by public health care. To be able to go into an emergency room and have your appendix removed without having to sign your life savings away is an enourmous comfort to me. You can also look at health care as a long term investment.  You will more than get your moneys worth from the system when you hit old age. Although, as things are right now, you might have to wait a while.

Living in Ontario I have also witnessed the public to private transition and it’s effect on a few industries. For example, the disassembly and sale of Ontario Hydro during the Harris years, or the building of the 407 and subsequent sale to a company in Quebec.

If these are any indication of the private system at work, I want nothing to do with it. The taxpayers pay to build and establish the system, then it’s sold off for a fixed amount. Following the sale, taxpayers have to pay again to use the system and the cost of use does not reflect the amount we have already contributed. How is that fair?

Child care: Though I have no children, I am a supporter of a national childcare system. The $100 a month per child the Conservative have offered is enough for two or three days of dependable daycare. Which leaves parents with another twenty or so days to cover. If there was a national system (think education) that is universally accessible, parents can go to work with the peace of mind that their children are being taken care of and not have to worry about the next week. An example already exists in Canada — Quebec currently has a child care system in place and though there are a few wrinkles, they have taken the first step.

Another thought. If people can save money on child care, they would have more money to spend on other things, (luxury items, culture, entertainment) which would probably help support the economy. It’s strange how things are all connected, isn’t it?

Sub-Conclusion: I guess that leads into my final point. In order to encourage and enable people to support the economy, they need to have the support of their government. Whether that be through child care, education, culture, jobs, or health care if our government refuses to chip in, we will have to spend more on survival and less on growth.

My thoughts: The point of this whole rant wasn’t just to explain why we can’t let Harper have a majority, but to suggest an alternative.  Looking at the polls it’s seems inevitable that the Conservatives will probably end up with some form of a minority, although they’ve been dropping like the economy lately. Overall, I’m much more comfortable with a minority government than a majority as there is a much stronger check and balance system.

With the Liberals in a bit of a disarray, the most obvious (national) solution is the NDP. Jack Layton in the opposition leader’s position would make for a very interesting Canada indeed.  The Liberals have demonstrated for the past few years that they can’t/won’t stand up to the Conservatives for fear of reprisal. I doubt Jack Layton would even flinch.

If the NDP stands as opposition it would also give the Liberals a chance to focus on rebuilding. When/if the Liberals lose, Dion will be done. That means they’ll have to go through their leadership race again. While that is going on, they haven’t (historically) been able to focus on much else.

So who should you vote for? My friend recently sent me a link to a site that outlines strategic voting options based on the environment.  While I don’t entirely agree with the idea of strategic voting, that’s how our system seems to be working this time around. Without strong candidates on all sides the whole race seems to be slightly one sided.

If you search the website using your postal code or just browse the directory riding by riding, they will show you who won last time an by how much. They also list the candidates who are running in your riding and all the latest poll results. This is alone is a brilliant resource, although it would be even better if there were links to each candidates website.

Based on past results and polling data they make a recommendation. For example, my riding in Hamilton Centre is a safe NDP seat. And they recommend voting “with my heart.” But if you look at more contested ridings like Oakville you’ll see that the Liberal candidate only lost by about eight hundred votes. They recommend voting for the Liberal incumbent. Looking at the previous election results and existing polls, I’d have to agree.

Conclusion: To make a long story longer I think the best thing for Canada is a minority, and for that to happen we need people to voice their opinions. Even if you spoil your ballot, please get out and vote. Every marked ballot is counted. If we all get out and mark a ballot the diversity of Canada will be reflected in our government and (we can hope that) we will all be better represented nationally and internationally.

This is my first time really sticking my neck out on this blog. If you agree or disagree please feel free to let me know, but I reserve the right to filter harassing comments from all sides.