The present Harper Conservative government is probably doomed to fail. The menace in the wings, a Liberal takeover under Ignatieff, if elected, will also fail. So long as either government cannot or will not govern in the best interest of the majority of all Canadians, any election is a waste of time.
In fact, no government can now govern in the best interests of all Canadians because of the myriad of structural factors that now exist in establishment circles. Uppermost in the ranking of such factors is the everlasting curse of the Albatross of Quebecois oriented appeasement that never fails to distort our once vibrant democracy.
Any political party, or any budding ambitious new party whose members think their particular formula can substantively change what has been virtually cast in stone by a myriad of unworkable laws and policies from 1965 on; including the obnoxious Canadian Charter of Fights and Fiefdoms, are blowing in the wind.
Prime Minister Harper’s losing Battle
The mass media has made Harper out to be a cold fish personality with a penchant for total control, a hater of unions, public servants, women’s equity struggles and a liar to boot. Let us contrast this imagery with the Prime Minister’s actions while trying to put in place necessary new policies or rectify existing ones, in the best interests of Canada and all Canadians. In attempting this, we have to admit Mr. Harper has made several strategic electoral mistakes but at least he has had the integrity to try to do the right thing.
The Income Trust affair
Before he was elected, the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) campaigned on the basis that they would not interfere with the favorable tax treatment Income Trusts provided for Canadian investors. When elected, it was not long in office when Mr. Harper’s finance minister, after examining these trusts in detail, realized that if industry began to massively make use of these instruments to raise capital, instead of issuing the usual corporate shares and bonds etc., the cost to Canada in lost revenue would be massive and eventually unsupportable.
The CPC admitted their mistake and reversed their decision in the best overall interest of Canadians and the financial health of Canada. The opposition and the majority media called him a liar, rather than allow that he had the courage to admit his error. But they failed to call for a vote of confidence knowing that the decision was the correct one.
This was a bad start for a new minority government, but a good decision for Canadians.
The National Day Care policy
The opposition was busily promoting another massively expensive government run national ‘entitlement’ program with a limitless costly ceiling. It was another socialistically inspired unaffordable plan; a warm and fuzzy vote-getter for those needing inexpensive (to them) daycare services.
The irresponsible opposition well knew that such a national daycare plan would not only win the votes of young struggling families, but also the votes of civil service unions and daycare workers. Such a plan would have created yet another massive increase in union membership and union power.
All parliamentarians had to know that once daycare workers were subject to union control they would inevitably threaten to strike. If they did strike the result would have devastated the female workforce with children in daycare. The opposition fully understood but cared nothing for the responsibility of governing in the best interest of Canada as a whole.
The opposition enlisted the help of professional “childcare experts” to proclaim that early child education was a panacea for better “outcomes” for children. What the opposition did not discuss was the unhealthy threat of state indoctrination of babies and children (3 years old and up) into union or government mandated philosophies. Many parents well knew that most of our teacher’s unions are already busily engaged in indoctrination practices, in spite of parental objections.
The Harper government saved Canada from this serious misstep by the alternative of direct payments to the working parents of young children. Parents retained the ability to decide on the type of daycare they could afford and assure that no indoctrination of views with which they disagreed would take place. Canada was saved from growing state and union interference in Canadian family life.
The endemically leftist mass media of Canada, parroting the opposition, clamored for a Quebec-type daycare program, largely funded by the rest of Canada’s taxpayers through the much abused “equalization” tax redistribution system. Quebec parents pay $7.00 per day for daycare, a grossly unrealistic, government subsidized scheme. Mr. Harper saved us from making this huge financial and sociological mistake.
Once again, the Quebec Albatross hangs its heavy weight upon the rest of Canada. Few citizens can even begin to comprehend the real and eventual costs of such a program. Is it possible for the present government or any government to reduce transfer payments to Quebec? Do not hold your breath.
The Financial Crisis
The present financial crisis had begun in earnest and the opposition called for “Action Now! Quick, quick, hurry, hurry - spend money! We have to follow the Americans and stimulate the economy!” Mr. Flaherty and Mr. Harper tried to keep cool and keep the Canadian public from panicking, as the USA had done.
“We can do better, Harper isn’t governing for Canadians. We Liberals and NDP have formed a “Coalition” and with the voting support of the Bloc, will bring down your government! Harper is too slow, we will act!” Think about the chutzpah of these brash and outrageous claims, with the Harper government elected by voters all across Canada just five weeks before. They never did explain the hidden deal they made for the Bloc’s support.
It was a real laugh if it wasn’t such an abuse of the system. Imagine the Liberals and the NDP wanting to emulate George Bush and the United States! Had these arrogant people’s tiresome mantra not always been that Harper was just a George Bush flunky that hung on to his coattails? Who dat flunky now?
The Albatross very nearly brought down the government, yet not one Canadian from the Atlantic to the Pacific, outside of Quebec, had voted for the Bloc Quebecois.
Sad, but the reality of the coalition threat was that Mr. Harper was forced to put forward some hastily designed financial policies of unnecessarily massive stimulative spending, far ahead of any immediate need, in order to retain his minority government. But when caught between a rock and a hard place, survival permits one to fight another day.
The Harper (CPC) Attempt to make Strikes in the Civil Service illegal
Employees have the right in Canada and in western democracies to organize and form unions. It is a legitimate way to balance the power of employers with that of workers. Workers (employees) have fought hard for that right and have been able to obtain appropriate living wages, health benefits, pensions, reasonable conditions of work and so on. Employers have benefited by having a steady and reliable well-trained group of employees that abide by a fairly negotiated agreements outlining their duties, hours of work etc., and the length of time the agreement is to remain in force.
The employer cannot arbitrarily dismiss a worker or workers without contractual cause and the workers cannot arbitrarily go on strike or refuse to work contrary to their agreement with the employer. A wildcat strike is a strike that is contrary to the terms of the union-employer agreement.
All agreements run for specific periods of time. At the end of that period they must be renegotiated. Conditions of the economy or competition may make the parties to agreement find it difficult to arrive at terms satisfactory to both parties. When this occurs, either the union or the employer may take action to end the impasse. The usual action is that the union will call for its members to go on strike (refuse to work). The employer alternatively may lock employees out and prevent them from coming to work.
The Difference between Public Sector Unions and Industrial or Commercial Unions:
In the private sector, the strike is always a threat to the employee’s jobs because the entire business may collapse. If the corporation collapses, the all the company’s non-unionized management and unionized employees jobs will cease to exist. It therefore pays the union and the company to settle their differences as quickly as possible because otherwise both will suffer greatly. The owners of the Company may lose everything.
In the public sector, the strike is no threat to the government because no matter how long the strike goes on, no group of unionized employees has the power to put the government out of business. On the other hand, the employees can suffer a great deal in loss of pay and benefits, plus incurring the public’s anger. Sometimes the anger is directed at the government, other times at the union; it depends on public perceptions.
Ultimately, if the government comes under too much pressure it must resolve the strike. It can either fire all the employees and rehire or more usually, pass legislation to force the employees back to work, usually coupling that legislation by the appointment of an arbitrator to set the terms of a new contract. Arbitrators tend to look around at other jurisdictions and compare wages and benefits of similar government jobs, recommending wages and benefits equal to the highest going rate. Everybody goes back to work smiling, except the ripped-off taxpayer. The politicians sigh with relief.
So once again, Mr. Harper and the CPC understood and tried to rectify the unfairness and socio-economic cost of the “right to strike” in the public sector. The politicians who years ago gave this right to public sector unions, justified their decision by saying, “all private sector union employees have the right to strike; is it not only fair that public sector employees also have that right.” How dumb can these people be? The answer has to be; “dumb as hell,” especially when it’s our money they are spending.
Governing in the best interest of ALL Canadians
This writer has many reasons to dislike some of the moves that Prime Minister Harper and his government have made in their attempt to win a majority. But overall, if Mr. Ignatieff were to gain the right to govern, his character would never allow him to govern in the best interest of all Canadians.
He is a confused navel-gazing academic that cannot distinguish between socialist-liberal governments that rule by edict and force, and governments that exist to uphold the laws and principles of a free society. A society that insists on being governed in accordance with only those laws approved by common consent or carefully established over the centuries by judges prepared to adhere to the ancient English common-law rules of precedent.
Mr. Ignatieff as leader of the Liberal Party; is but a rag doll, subject to his whimsical views of a politically correct Canada; touting this country as an example to the world in all things multicultural and bilingual.
This man, a stranger from the tenured paradise of academia, is a fraud. His touted vision of Canada is a contrived blindness to reality. In fact, we are now a carefully controlled and manipulated society. A society ruled by bastard Human Rights tribunals; payoffs to every special interest group under the sun; special laws for special people and a judiciary that spouts they have the right to dictate social policy or change laws according to their personal whim.
Canada must once again become a society of English-speaking Men and Women that will no longer tolerate this misrule but will stand proudly and state;
“I am a free man, I will not tolerate being silenced or ruled by government or judicial fiat. Tribunals that try to dictate my behaviour are playing with fire. I will speak any language I damn well choose and how I choose. We free men will rule our government according to our ancient beliefs, you will not rule us. Should you dare to continue to ignore the fundamental principles of our English-speaking people, you do so at your peril.”
It is this writer’s view, that Mr. Harper has the leadership qualities to survive and keep a steady hand on the tiller in these troubled times. However, he and the Conservative Party of Canada would be well advised to remember who they once were and where they came from and nourish their English-speaking constituency. They must stop feeding the curse of the Albatross.
