Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
There has been a lot of speculation about whether we will face another federal election this fall after barely a year since the last one. To some degree, it has become a game of chicken.
This week, Parliament will finally be reopened with a Speech from the Throne and currently all signs point to a significant move to the left by the Trudeau Government. There will be more spending, more government programs and, likely, little more than lip service to the incredible national debt—already exceeding a trillion dollars, not to mention the current deficit of nearly $350 billion. These are unenviable records for Canada, outside of wartime. There is little doubt that both of those potentially devastating economic statistics, which the parliamentary budget officer states are unsustainable, will be significantly increased in the coming week.
Will the Trudeau Government get away with it? Clearly, they are gambling on doing so, one way or another. They will style it as a “recovery agenda”, perhaps even with a recovery tax, intended to continue to protect Canadians from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and to pave a new path to the future that leans heavily on a green and progressive agenda and the costs that go with them.
Of course, events during the past year have made a good deal of this increased spending necessary, but as we move forward Canadians will have to ask themselves if even larger deficits and the accumulation of more debt, in the name of the COVID-19 pandemic, is anything more than an opportunistic move by a scandal-ridden government to escape from that narrative and continue to hold on to power.
This week, the Trudeau Government will be throwing down a gauntlet to the opposition parties, daring them to force an election. That likely will not happen.
Jagmeet Singh, leader of the New Democratic Party, has said they will vote against the Government if they do not bring in universal pharmacare. He is just blowing smoke. The Liberals may throw him that bone, but even if they don’t the NDP will not join a move to bring the Government down if they have the slightest belief it would succeed.
First of all, they are broke and cannot afford an election. Second and more importantly, with their new agenda and platform, the Liberals will be moving directly into NDP territory, making it harder for many of their members to be re-elected.
In my view, it is Justin Trudeau in spite of what he says, and not the opposition parties, that would welcome a quick and immediate federal election. There have been at least three signals indicating this.
First there was the $2 billion gift to the provinces to assist them in reopening schools. Not part of a federal mandate, but clearly an opportunity for a popular election goodie. We can expect more of these next week.
Then there was Trudeau’s very recent support for Julie Payette whom he described as an “excellent Governor General” at a time when she is under investigation by his Privy Council Office for workplace harassment. Many people thought this was surprising. I did not. After all, if the Prime Minister concludes it is in his best interest to hold a snap election, he needs her good will. It is she and not he who has the ultimate power to make that decision.
Finally, and most illuminating, was his carefully crafted political-speak when asked last week if he thought a snap election would be appropriate. He said this: “I do not want an election…[but] I think it’s irresponsible to say that an election is irresponsible.” Right.
The movers and shakers in the Liberal Party want a quick election. They just do not want to be blamed for it so soon after the last one, and in the middle of a pandemic.
After all, the Government has regained a lead in the polls by six points. They also know that with the more progressive agenda they will be proposing, they will pick up seats from the NDP and possibly the Bloc Québécois. A new mandate, especially a majority mandate, would allow them to bury any further attempts to hold them accountable for previous scandals including the fallout from WE Charity. They would be able to hold on to power for another four years and pretty well do whatever they want. Not a bad strategy for them when you think about it.
Failing a successful vote of non-confidence by the opposition parties in Parliament, it will be interesting to see what the Prime Minister will do. He could move ahead and try to get promises made in the throne speech into legislation and have them successfully passed by Parliament. But to do that he would have to keep the minority Parliament sitting and at any time his government could be brought down.
Or the Prime Minister could approach the Governor General and say his political agenda is so ambitious that he needs a new mandate to ensure that he can get it through Parliament and, therefore, ask her to issue a writ of election and dissolve the current minority Parliament.
My bet is that sometime relatively soon that is what will happen. Unless of course the three main opposition parties recognize it is not in their collective interest to go to the polls in the near future, and they find enough common ground to form an accord that would ensure a stable government for at least the next two years, giving them time to get their respective houses in order and to be ready to effectively fight an election. That is exactly what David Peterson and Bob Rae did in Ontario in 1985 to depose the Conservatives, without an election, after decades in power. There is precedent for this, and Governor General Payette would have to listen seriously to such a proposal.
All of this is to say that the next few months will be an interesting time for all Canadians and especially for political junkies! It is definitely a game of chicken.
It will be fascinating to see who blinks first.
Hugh Mackenzie
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-what-if-we-never-repay-the-national-debt/#comments
Hugh, you already know that I’m on the side of my fellow alumnus, Mr. McCormick: Maybe there was something in the Kingston water; back when the Earth was still cooling.
I agree with you, of course, about the debt and deficit; but not about your qualifier, “outside of wartime”. If this is not war (against an incredibly strong and invisible enemy); kindly tell me what it is. At least we stood a better-than-even chance in our former wars.
Secondly, I feel strongly that a Basic Annual Income will be a positive result of all the government aid during the pandemic.
Finally, a shift to the left (with or without universal pharmacare), and embracing some Green policies, can only mean that our chronic problem (climate crisis) will no longer take a total backseat to our acute problem (COVID-19).
Yes, it is an opinion piece (in a “publication” that you own). And it isn’t even that you are a conservative ideologue. The thing that I find so distasteful about these columns is that they take every event, every aspect of the Canadian experience and every local trend and reduce it to just another “political game” Yes you declared yourself to be a political junkie. But is necessary to view the whole of real people’s existence as simple mental jousting.
Your “opinion” pieces simply contribute to the divisiveness that ravage’s western society and offer nothing constructive. For example, the following is the breakdown of how Covid emergency funding has been budgeted:
Protection of Health and Safety (PPE and such) $ 25.617 Billion (2%)
Support for Individuals (CERB etc and including
the wage subsidies given to business) $191.364 Billion (16%)
Business Support $214.255 Billion (18%)
Business Relief $386.450 Billion (32%)
Domestic Stability Buffer $300.00 Billion (25%)
Tax Liquidity Relief $ 80.0 Billion ( 7%)
Total 1.197 Trillion (100%)
With business getting well over 50% (not counting their portion of tax payment deferral or the Stability fund) does this look like “the left gone wild” as you have portrayed it? What would you have cut?
I suggest that you hold your conservative views, as that conversation and debate is always welcome. But you need to inform your opinion….and that takes work
I don’t always agree with you Hugh but you do make a person think. Keep up the right winged support. Haha
Don McCormick I have read a lot of left winged information and sorry to say Trudeau is killing Canada. He is still giving away money. The rich like him because he works with the rich. Try being a lower income family who will be stuck with more tax than they can handle and a deficit Canada can’t sustain. Just from the articles in the news there is no way in hell I want Trudeau to stay PM. Get someone in there that knows how to budget. And knows how the majority of Canadians think and want.
Hugh Holland, hear, hear! There should not be billionaires in Canada. I don’t know what it will take for the US to recognize that greed, capitalism run amok, and the gap between rich and poor is at the heart of much of the social unrest and lack of trust in government – regardless of party. The public common good of our citizens is essential for peace, order, and it is good governance to raise revenues from the very wealthy of our society. Fair competition in business is another key factor in a healthy economy. Largely unregulated multinationals are not the answer.
Don McCormick and Hugh McKenzie; though I agree to the need for a robust opposition, there are still some of our citizenry who expect that government levels will work together, during these times. Let the political parties distinguish themselves by their platforms at election time. Hugh, you are a political junky, as is my husband; you can’t get your fill of the political maneuvers, scandals of those in power, and you have an enduring appreciation for Canadian civics. I get it. Please remember that many of our fellow citizens are concerned about the growing debt, yet also concerned with safely schooling children, work, healthcare, our elderly population, and the environment. The key is to make your articles poignant, yet to recognize that we live in divisive, pivotal times the likes of which we have not witnessed since the Second World War. Thank you for listening.
Point taken Hugh. But, perhaps Doppler should consider recruiting other opinion writers with more centrist or left-leaning views to balance your professed right-leaning views. Does Doppler wish to be branded as a right-wing leaning news outlet? It’s just that I find the constant attack on our politicians – especially Trudeau – trying to do a very difficult job in very difficult circumstances depressing. I guess that, ultimately the solution for me is to just stop reading your opinion pieces.
Economists report that in first 6 months of this pandemic, the top 1% in the US increased their net worth by $400 billion, while 30 million MORE workers lost their jobs, income and employer-paid health insurance. A recent report showed that a similar trend, although not as big or pronounced, happened in Canada. That is unsustainable. Coincident with that was a big spike in social unrest in the US. With the instant communications provided by satellite TV, the Internet and social media, such gross inequality is increasingly unsustainable. The average ratio of the top 10% to the bottom 10% by income is 18.5% in the US, 12.7% in Russia, 9.4% in Canada, 8.1% in Denmark, 6.9% in Germany, and 4.5% in Japan. There are many reasons and myths about inequality, but if now is not an appropriate time to try to level the playing field a little bit, then when is a better time? Everyone needs to eat, and a warm and dry place to sleep.
Don: Listen Up is an Opinion Piece,. It is intended to provoke debate and we welcome all respectful viewpoints. I make no secret about my personal political viewpoints being somewhat to the right of centre. But I try to be fair and I do not hesitate to to write about things I believe are wrong on either side of the political spectrum On occasion, I have been supportive of folks like John Turner, Paul Martin, Andy Mitchell and even Ken Black! From time to time, I have also taken a crack at folks on the right, especially the far right. I try not to be an idealogue, but I do write from my personal perspective. You are welcome to do the same at any time.
Hugh, your own political colors are glaringly obvious here. I expect a little more objectivity and balance in your commentaries. I don’t think Doppler should be your personal soapbox for pushing your personal politics
My favourite statement by the Liberals is the Canadian government is taking on this huge debt so individual Canadians don’t have to.
My question is where are they going to get all this money from?