Opinionated Fool

The Globe and Mail makes an almost convincing argument as to why it is Ignatieff should take ownership of the healthcare issue in Canada. It’s originally a liberal/NDP issue. Michael Ignatieff is in command, barely but in command, of the liberals. Therefore, it should default to being his issue. The Globe rightly points out it doesn’t fit Stephen Harper if you follow along party lines, what with conservatives–at least, if you look south of the border for your definition of conservatives–opposed to anything government regulated on basic principle. But what the Globe and Mail leaves out, and this is what surprises me, is that Ignatieff isn’t in much of a better position to take ownership of it. If anything, he’s in a worse position than Harper.

Prior to his career in politics, Stephen Harper wasn’t a whole lot different from the average Canadian. Sure, he might have been president of the National Citizens Coalition, but he was still subject to the same rules and regulations as everyone else living in Canada. Still fell under the jurisdiction of the very healthcare system he may or may not still want to turn inside out. He, his wife, his kids, were all subject to it–and would therefore be perhaps a little better qualified to have an opinion on exactly what to do with it.

Michael Ignatieff? His healthcare consisted of pretty well full coverage, most likely, while he was living in Boston. Likely paid for both by his employer and, if that wasn’t good enough, out of pocket. Prior to that, he found himself living in the UK. Where he again, most likely had some form of private insurance in addition to, if he ever used at all, the public option as exists across the pond. He has had no experience, either positive or negative, with Canada’s healthcare system since the 1970’s. Certainly he returned to Canada in 2005, and also entered politics at that point–he would be in waiting for Stephane Dion’s eventual implosion before taking charge of the liberal party, but he’s still had no actual experience with the healthcare system as faced by average Canadians. So to expect him to fit into the issue his party has traditionally taken ownership of in the past is, perhaps, a bit of a stretch.

If any one of the three would be the most likely to fit into the healthcare issue, and I cringe to publish this realization, it would almost have to be Jack Layton. Not that I’d be interested to see what he’d do with any kind of actual power, but he seems the most likely candidate for a defense of Canada’s current healthcare system both in and out of Canada. And, in fact, it might make slightly more sense than the Globe’s suggestion that simply because Ignatieff is the liberal leader, it should be his issue–the NDP was, after all, the originating entity that brought about healthcare. So, to exercise the Globe’s logic a bit farther, the issue of healthcare in Canada is actually an NDP issue. And, as such, should be written rather firmly into Jack Layton’s platform come next election. Stephen Harper should steer clear of it–it’s far too liberal for him, as should Ignatieff–it’s far too “Canadian” for him. Or, better yet, why don’t we just not make it an election issue at all. After all, it’s not like previous elections have brought about any real significant changes to it since the 1980’s or so.

At least, if you want to take the word of one liberal president Alfred Apps as golden. He let fly with an email on Monday, escentially stating the conservatives would much rather let Canadians die than actually, you know, come out with a solid plan for distributing of the H1N1 vaccines to Canadians. Oh, he may very well be right–the plans for vaccinations could have probably been much better executed than they have been, particularly last week. But he overlooks one very minor detail. That detail, rather abruptly, was rather pointed out to him in a direct reply email–from another liberal party member.

Based on all reports the roll out has been an unmitigated disaster. It appears provincial health officials couldn’t organize a two car parade!!

Yep, even some level-headed liberals who still have 3 functioning brain cells are putting responsibility for distribution exactly where it needs to be–on the shoulders of provincial governments. Some of which, naturally, are also liberal. Oops. Keep trying, Alf. You’ll catch on someday.

For his part, Michael Ignatieff is pretty much… well, um… doing exactly the same thing–pinning the absolute mess of a provincial distribution system on the conservatives. He, his health critic, and the NDP’s Jack Layton himself stood up in Monday night’s emergency debate, demanding the federal health minister take responsibility for the failure. because, you know, the federal government has all kinds of controll over Canada’s provincial health system. Well, at least their consistent. Not necessarily right, but since when has that ever stopped them?

The Star Phoenix roughly explains why. In short, no one likes paying taxes. No one likes paying higher taxes. And no one likes paying taxes on things that weren’t being taxed yesterday. Hence the poison in the supposed pill fueling recent election talk. But it’s only an unpopular move because unless you’re an economist, or paying really close attention to what all kinds of actual economists are saying, you haven’t the slightest idea how it’s supposed to benefit you.

With only a very minimalistic amount of actual research, there’s a fair laundry list of taxes, administrative costs, etc the HST proposes to eliminate. This is exactly the same HST, complete with proposed 13% harmonization, that New Brunswick adopted in 1997–yes, under a liberal majority government.

A study (PDF) was done in 2000, which outlined that prices in the atlantic provinces did fall with the advent of the HST, due to a combination of lowered tax rates (eastern provinces were seeing taxes upwards of 11% or higher) and lower overall costs in administration. Fortunately, items that are already being taxed provincially in Ontario–at an already existing rate of 8%–won’t see any real price increase when the HST comes into effect for items already not exempt from the PST–they’ll be in line now with the tax situation in atlantic Canada. People in BC, however, might actually fair out a little better. Their provincial tax sits at 7% right now, and will probably still be that way when they harmonize. The Globe and Mail has a sort of hst FAQ posted that explains roughly where it is consumers should expect to see prices fall, and where they should expect to see them increase. The article also points out we won’t actually know how the specifics will play out until it actually happens. Or, until the parties in support of the HST come out with something you don’t have to be an economist to translate.

And that’s the crux of the problem right there. Conservatives and liberals alike are telling Canadians the HST is a good thing, without really explaining why. I mean, beyond the standard responses that businesses will pay less to produce what we need, and consumers therefore should pay less to purchase/use what we need. But it never is that simple. Without details, and without knowing exactly what it is we’re supposed to be absolutely overjoyed to see come into effect in 2010, we’re left guessing. And the guesses a lot of folks are coming out with are that everything up to and including the kitchen sink will probably end up costing more–a theory not hindered by Jack Layton’s general opposition to anything that won’t buy him votes.

Not everyone has the time to actually go and look at how it’s been implemented in every other province who’s doing the harmonization. For that matter, not everyone really cares–they don’t live there. All that matters is how HST legislation everyone knows is coming down the pipe sooner or later will effect them. And right now, beyond Layton’s crying about it and the rough estimations of economists not involved in the actual legislation, that’s precisely what Canadians are not getting. If the net result is going to be lower taxes/prices all round, then say so. If HST provinces will simply be paying more taxes at the cash register and less off their paycheck, again, say so. Stephen harper and Michael Ignatieff’s parties would both support this tax. Stephen Harper is behind the push for the tax to come into effect. An expectation that he, or someone in his government, would be able to provide some degree of an explanation of exactly how such a change would be carried out is not, you’d think, an unreasonable one. So let’s have a crack at that. It might help the move’s popularity some. And really, it could use some help.

Judging by the campaigning and writing coming out of that side of the country, some might argue it is. With opposition candidates for the liberals, and jack Layton himself for the NDP, shifting into ultra anti-conservative mode, one wouldn’t be called out for making the argument. Both parties criticise Stephen Harper’s government for not honouring the atlantic accord, while at the same time not really saying anything else about it–oh, sorry, Jack said he’d actually do it. And of course, there’s the usual commentary about Harper’s apparent meanness and uncaring. Where’s the platform? You’re prepping for a bilection, and you’re running with that?

Well, at least you aren’t criticising the stimulous spending you twisted Harper’s arm into throwing out the door. We’ll leave that to the halifax Herald to handle. Still, the liberals and NDP are both not exactly doing all that well poll-wise. Their best chance at making any actual progress, and that’s only if the conservative candidate in the disputed riding doesn’t pull off a little timely platforming as well, would be in atlantic canada–the polls out there are closer than, say, Ontario. But even in atlantic Canada I’d imagine you have to have *something* to run on other than “Harper mean, vote for Harper bad”, and a vague promise to stick to the atlantic accord. They might be a little more laid back out there, but they’re no less inteligent–or irritated, for that matter–than voters in central or western Canada. And their non-platform platform isn’t helping there. Not sure what or who’s telling them it’ll help them in eastern Canada, but someone out there should probably find a better source of advice. I’m looking at you, Jack.

And once again, it’s all Jack Layton’s fault. Ignatieff must really be thrilled with him now. Layton has already stated he would prop the conservatives up again to pass legislation that would include the home renovation tax, among other things. He’ll continue to decide to prop up the conservatives until his poll numbers stop royally sucking. Then, he’ll be brave enough to help Michael Ignatieff get exactly what he doesn’t want–an election with a 10 point spread between himself and Stephen Harper. Layton’s not made it a secret there’s a time limit on his support for the conservatives. Meaning, it doesn’t matter what legislation gets pushed forward at this point. If the NDP decides time’s up, time’s up. He could hammer through EI reform at that point, or he could hammer through senate reform. It won’t end up making a whole lot of difference–once the NDP decide they liked being the party of not conservative more, it’s game over for this minority. We now await the return of the attack ads–that is, assuming they took a vacation to begin with.

And right smack in the middle, with not a whole lot of support beyond his own loyalists–which, at last check, were dropping like flies after a non-confidence motion that came before he even read the latest economic report card–is Michael Ignatieff. The conservatives have been pounding him from the right since January, and everyone could tell it was getting to him. And now, with the recent switcheroo pulled off by Jack Layton and the New Democratic Party, it puts them in a position to pound the liberals and Ignatieff from the left. A position they, with very little hesitation whatsoever, are taking full advantage of.

The press release from the NDP office hits on areas that have been weaknesses for Ignatieff since day one. In particular, his flip-flopping on just about everything, his tough talk when it comes to the governing conservatives, and the fact he generally seems as though he genuinely has no idea what he actually wants to accomplish. He dangled the threat of an election over Stephen Harper’s head in June on employment insurance. And, when the deal was struck to have each party send 3 into negotiations to work out a plan for EI reform, there was some faint hope for this newly minted intelectual turned liberal leader. Then August came. And went. And through it all, he never budged from his original demand.

september showed up, Ignatieff had absolutely nothing to show for it, and it was all the government’s fault. He went no confidence right from the start, forcing the NDP and Blocke Quebecois to quickly back the conservatives on employment insurance reforms–the same reforms that were rejected by all three parties just a few months ago–in order to prevent an election none of the three would benefit from. He made his intentions known even before parliament got down to business, which was way before Harper’s economic statement–something the NDP was criticised for back in January by both reporters and readers alike. The same liberal party also voted no to a ways and means motion only 3 days before Harper’s economic statement.

The flop reappeared again not very long after that, though. When the motion passed, Ignatieff went on the record saying his party will work to fast track the temporary measures in the bill. “We don’t want to give the NDP an alibi to continue to support Harper’s government,” was his excuse.

Sadly, all the twisting and turning he’s doing on just about everything isn’t making it any easier for him to avoid what’s coming his way, thanks largely to the newly begun attack from the NDP. If Ignatieff decides an election would be a bad idea after all, it wouldn’t be entirely all too surprising. Both because he’d probably not come out of it with more than he has now, and because he’ll probably flip flop on that in a couple months as well. This National Post article has a partial list of the various flip flops he made during the last session of parliament. And I’m sure there’ll be plenty more to come.

To look at the current political situation, you might be inclined to think so. The liberal party is tied in the polls with Stephen Harper’s conservatives in the middle of a recession that some say Canada is on its way out of. Jack Layton’s New Democratic Party is getting ready for an all out dog fight with the liberals and conservatives, using some of the same strategies–namely, attack ads etc on Michael Ignatieff–as were employed by the conservatives for the past 6 months. And there’s some speculation going around that perhaps Ignatieff’s own party may be setting him up to fall flat on his face.

The liberals are still desperately trying to recover from their last leader, a virtually endless supply of stupid, while at the same time trying to shake off the last remaining pieces of an advertising scandal that plagued them during much of their time in power since the early 90’s. Combine that with the fact the currently governing conservative party is dead even with them in the polls, during a time when governments typically face a lot of heat over finances, and you don’t have a very comfortable position if your name is Michael Ignatieff, who would need at least the NDP’s support in order to secure anything resembling a majority were an election called today.

For the NDP’s part, they might support the calling of an election. They might even encourage Michael Ignatieff to do so. But for all intents and purposes, that’s likely about as far as it’ll go. The NDP has made it abundantly clear they’re no fans of either Ignatieff or Harper. But they don’t have enough federal support to make any significant headway on their own. They might have enough in the tank to maybe produce another minority government, either liberal or conservative, but that’s about as far as it goes. Realistic chances of the Block Quebecois being any help are slim to none, unless they could possibly get something out of it–like, say, more seats in Quebec.

There is also still the unknown but very likely support penalty any of the major players will take for calling an election. Particularly if an election’s called before 2010, during a time that most asuredly would not be popular among voters. If in fact Michael Ignatieff does so this fall, as he’s threatened to on more than one occasion over his proposed employment insurance reform, it may be a very short political career for the professor. If it happens during the opposition day granted him by Stephen Harper in September, it may sink his, and the liberals’ ship for the foreseeable future. If they’re not already sinking though, they’re at the very least taking on water. Either way, I would not want to be them right about now.

Update: Nevermind equality. Ignatieff is now officially trailing Harper in the polls. And we still don’t have any idea who he is or what he stands for. Canadians don’t like the “I don’t know” vote.

Well, okay, so they’re only thinking about removing the “new” from their name, but still. That’s probably the first actual change I’ve seen that particular party put forward in a very long time, if ever. Of course, the fact it doesn’t make them any more relevant hasn’t seemed to enter into the party’s head, but then again they did elect Jack Layton as their leader.

In semi-related news, the opinionated fool has submitted for their consideration the suggestion that they change their name to the party of not conservatives. They’ve issued no comment in response.

Dear conservative, liberal and NDP members of parliament,

I don’t know the correct way to say it, so I’ll just say it. Canada absolutely does not want a fall election. Least of all, Canada doesn’t want a fall election based on a non-platform–hear that, Michael Ignatieff? The polls are a dead lock between liberals and conservatives. The NDP may or may not actually get anywhere if an election’s called. And those other guys from Quebec are dreaming.

I can hardly say I speak for all Canadians, of course, but for God’s sake, unless you can offer something beyond “what Stephen Harper’s doing is wrong”, don’t hit that red button. You’ll probably end up not liking the result. Oh, and if you happen to be Stephen Harper and you call an election on your own, I won’t be held responsible for the lambasting you take in the polls. Why? … Did you even read this? Canadians don’t want a fall election. If any of the 3 big players in the House of Commons slap that button, I will be more than happy to throw my vote away on someone that doesn’t have a shot in hell–yes, even one of those guys from quebec if there’s one running here. Because, if you refuse to listen when you’re told we so do not want an election, none of the 3 big players in the HoC deserves to come out on top. Least of all someone running on a non-platform–yeah, Mikey, I’m looking at you again. Deal with it.

I believe Canada’s parliament is supposed to sit for a maximum of 5 years before an election absolutely has to be called. Since the last 2 elections, it’s not even been a year. And those two elections occured 8 months apart. Let’s try to make it last a little longer, shall we? It’s good for you. Of course, if you choose not to take that advice, you have been warned.

Sincerely,
the Opinionated Fool

A prime example of why minority governments in Canada just plain don’t work. Jack Layton, leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party, has already made it clear it’ll be very unlikely his party will back anything proposed by Stephen Harper and his conservative party. Which effectively leaves matters in the hands of the waffler and Quebec’s only legitimate complaining party, the Blocke Quebecois. Not that it’s all that much of a surprise–the US has the party of not democrats, so we should get a party of not conservatives, right? Harper needs at least one of the 3 opposition parties to back him in order to avoid an election. Right now, Michael Ignatieff seems to be waffling in his general direction, but a month from now that might change. As for Layton, well, at least he’s being consistent. That has to count for something.

He’s been the leader of the liberal party of Canada for months now and we still don’t have much of an idea what he, or his new version of that party, stands for. Throughout the last months of the 2008-2009 parliament, he seemed to be almost as not conservative as the New Democratic Party, lead by Jack Layton–except rather than force an election over the summer, he agreed to a compromise with prime minister Stephen Harper over employment insurance issues and a review of same. But he’s not quite managed to answer the one question those not already committed to voting liberal want answered–what would *you* do differently if we handed you the country?

Now, as things start to gear up yet again for the return to parliament in September, there are those who find themselves wondering if this almost anything but conservative strategy he has going for him is actually going to work for him. Ignatieff is travelling down a very dangerous road if he plans to maintain this strategy leading up to the reopening of parliament. Canadians are getting tired of minority governments, but at the same time, neither party has managed to secure enough of the voters’ trust to win a majority–and the NDP is pretty well shot out of a federal government run unless they can come up with something that isn’t the exact opposite of whatever the government’s putting forward.

The conservatives are on shakey ground due to the recession, and the fact the more vocal critics are saying they’re understating the severity of the economic downturn–and not heading into the upturn fast enough. The NDP seem all too eager to do the exact opposite of whatever the liberals and conservatives want to do. And the liberals don’t seem all too eager to do a whole lot of anything differently–or if they are, they’ve not put anything forward. Right now, that means advantage conservatives. But only if the economy actually begins to rebound in some sort of tangible, job-creating way. And if that happens before the liberals can manage to get their feat under them, that ship might very well find itself sunk before it even gets out of the harbour. Which might be exactly what the doctor ordered.