The Tory paradox
Politics: Anti-spending message at odds with Harper’s track record
Finance Minister Joe Oliver finally announced the date of the budget, speaking to the cameras in front of bored-looking garment workers on the floor of the Canada Goose parka factory in Toronto.
His stodgy announcement Thursday opened the second phase of the Conservatives final pre-election parliamentary sitting.
Earlier in the week, the Commons passed C-51, the security bill, and voted to extend Canada’s war against the ISIL for a year with air strikes in Syria.
For good or for ill, the Conservatives’ winter of security has had the desired effect. Significant numbers of seniors have been frightened or angered by all the tough terror talk and have shifted their support from the Liberals to the Tories or New Democratic Party.
Now that that’s done with, it’s time to discuss the issue that decides most elections: the economy, which should dominate the debate until we go to the polls.
The 74-year-old finance minister will present his first (and maybe last) budget on April 21, which might just knock the Mike Duffy trial off the front pages for a day or two.
He hasn’t got much money to play with, since the Tories have already made their biggest promise — the “family tax cut” — to be promoted with all the subtlety of a stereo shop going-out-of-business sale, thanks to a $7.5-million propaganda budget.
The best ad for the tax cut will be the cheques themselves landing in the mailboxes of parents across the country in July.
It will be tedious, but fair for the Tories to go on about this. Elections are about choices; the Liberals and NDP would undo the tax cuts, and spend the money on other things.
But when Oliver goes on about the danger of debt, as he did Thursday, he’s stepping through the looking glass.
He warned voters of Opposition plans for “a debt burden our children should not bear.”
He bragged Canada’s debt is half that of the Group of Seven average, adding, “There’s a moral issue here, because to the extent we pile on more debt, we’re basically asking our children and grandchildren to pay for our expenditures.”
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has added $122 billion to the federal debt since he took office. If Canada has a solid debt to gross domestic product ratio, it is not because of Harper, but because of his predecessors Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, who added only $33 billion in debt from 1993 to 2006.
The Tories were right to borrow to stimulate the economy during the recession, but they should blush when they brag about their record as debt fighters. They repeatedly missed their targets and drove us deeper into debt than necessary, slashing the goods and sales tax and offering boutique tax cuts that cluttered up the tax system without making it fairer or boosting productivity.
It’s the “starve the beast” technique, invented by Ronald Reagan. The idea is you cut taxes, go into debt, then cut spending, which makes it hard for your left-leaning opponents to tax and spend. It’s fair ball, but Canadians are suckers if they let themselves be convinced by it all.
The opposition has the opportunity in the next six months to portray the Tories as economic bunglers.
You can certainly make the argument.
Harper made big bets on oil, which is now selling for just $50 a barrel. Unemployment is up. The loonie is worth 80 US cents. The Bank of Canada governor says the first quarter of 2015 will be “atrocious.” Some economists think we are facing a dangerous housing bubble.
The PM has presided over a (likely inevitable) collapse in central Canadian manufacturing, but he spent all his political capital chasing pipeline projects that haven’t happened.
He’s now pushing to balance the budget for political reasons, when we probably would be better off with a little bit of debt-financed stimulus.
This is not to say the opposition can succeed in convincing Canadians they would do a better job of running things. They have their own problems.
The Conservatives have a big brand advantage on this issue, and in uncertain economic times voters may want to stick with the steady hand on the tiller.
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is not likely to do well in a head-to-head debate with Harper over the economy. The NDP’s Tom Mulcair is a stronger debater, but his party has a brand problem.
Harper and his battle-hardened loyalists know he needs a majority to hang on to power, and they play to win.
Trudeau often seems unsteady on his feet, but he’s likable and his team doesn’t make many mistakes.
Mulcair is a distant third in the polls, but he’s a tough guy and he has recently given his team a shakeup, bringing back some of Jack Layton’s people.
It should be diverting to sit back and watch them vie for our affections.