So That's It

for the fringe outifts--although the fact that they have candidates out there, I suppose, means they each have some degree of support.

One of the disadvantages of a proportional representation system is the idea that such parties might get a legitimate voice. PR is often reccomended as better representation from a braoder spectrum, but under certain circumstances it could be a tyranny of the minority-multiplied.

Just imagine a hundred-seat parliament in which the governing party holds 30 seats, the opposition 20, and a rump of assorted parties hold the rest. That agglomeration of minority parties could stymie absolutely ANY legislation that came its way. Unlikely, perhaps, but it's what the Bloc Quebecois is praying for.

Now let's examine some of the real contenders:

In the position of Least Likely, the New Democratic Party. Led by Jack Layton and represented in my riding by Steve McLurg (who already labours under the disadvantage of having a name that sounds like a noisily-draining bathtub).

What do the NDP want for Canada?

(Quoted portions from the Toronto Globe and Mail of June 14th, and from the NDP Web site where possible) Note: This is the only site I've seen from a Canadian party that offers itself in Mandarin or Cantonese.

1) In the matter of health care, they want to add $28 bn in funding over the next four years. Can't argue with that--save by adding the reforms I really desire (see my post of June 17th).

2) The NDP would fight crime by fighting poverty. But to appease the law-and-order crowd they'd add tougher sentences, as well as parole conditions. Sounds a bit like giving with the left and taking with the right to me. But I like the first half. But how exactly are they going to "fight poverty"?

3) Retrofit buildings for Kyoto and pollution compliance (and I'm certain the companies and people in the buildings will be grateful to pay for it too). Assemble a Crown Corporation for green jobs. Greenpeace loves the NDP (which makes me suspicious, generally). Invest in wind power--Never mind the fact that no-one wants it in their back yard, that we have several cheaper ways, that Canada has a massive surplus of hydro power as it is, and that in terms of efficiency you'd get about the same effect by installing solar panels in your basement. Yeah--that's exaggerated. But no-one has yet convinced me that what we need is more power. We need people to turn off their lights at night, use their air conditioners less, etc.

Of course, since we need to move off fossil fuels too. . .Maybe investment in other energy sources could be a good idea. But I want it to be cheaper than hydro or gas ($7.65 per Gigajoule = 950,000 BTU = 278 KWh, thus 3¢/KWh) before I put my nickel in.

4) Drop tax on income under $15K, add tax to inheritances over $1M, increase child tax benefit, drop corporate tax screens and freeze UI rates.

Um. Okay--now how do you intend to keep the companies here? You'll have to be ve-e-ry cagey about keeping them in the coutry if you suddenly start taxing them more than previously. What purpose does freezing UI rates serve? And as for raising the child benefit--I could probably wait another couple years for that, being currently rugratless.

That consumer link--I don't warrant the accuracy of its info, by the way. And the lady whose second link that is: Don't ever call me for a date, woman. You creep me entirely out the door.

5) Debt: debate the use of funds for paying down our debt. Debt will shrink as economy prospers (clearly they're not planning for a recession of any sort). Push the Bank of Canada to adopt lower interest rates.

Why encourage borrowing? Is this not a party that was severely concerned about individual consumer debt at one time?

6)Family matters: Dump Goods and Services tax from "family essentials" (do condoms count? I mean, they're really a means of avoiding a family, right? How about Moon Pies?). Add 200,000 daycare spots (5.2bn), 2 national holidays, and intrduce pay-equity laws. Guarantee access to safe abortions (that's a "family" issue? See "condoms").

Again, not especially germane to me--but do I think it'd be good for the country? Aye, there's the rub.

I notice that thus far they don't mention their stance on things like labour. In fact, the Web site is particularly uninformative. There is NO platform page.


7) Give about 2bn per year to cities, build affordable housing, subsidise mortgages for the poor.

8) Increase foreign aid to 0.7% GDP by 2015 (their first mandate will expire in 2009). Finally something I wholeheartedly agree with. But to whom should it go? I'd skip China (which seems to have enough money to put a man into space but takes huge amounts of aid) and many of the South American Nations, such as any having to do with Hugo Chavez. Instead, we should concentrate on the well-governed nations that exist in sub-Saharan Africa: Nigeria and Kenya to name two stable-but-poor states.

Triple our contributions to the global AIDS fund. Okay.

Cancel poor-nation debt--Fine, but which nations? Argentina, which has been playing brinkmanship games with the IMF for many years, is not incapable of paying--merely reluctant to do so. They don't deserve forgiving (but that cruel IMF does so every bloody year!). Myself, I would have cut the cord long since.

9) Renegotiate NAFTA. The Web site says they want to "protect Canadian jobs". I'm all for that. In order to do that, the best thing to do is to fast-track all tariff disputes. But there's no mention of what the NDP wish to acheive by the renegotiations, and they're not very NAFTA-supportive. Do you negotiate when you want to scrap something?

Ditch missile defence. Okay.
Rescind the agreement allowing US soldiers to come into Canada in the event of an emergency here. Okay too.

10) Defence: My private hobby-horse. "Support safe helicopters"--uh. Yeah. I do too. But being in favour of them is a far cry from actually buying some. No other defence committment, not to equipment, not to our troopies. Oh, wait: require parliamentary approval to send troops overseas. Yeah, why not get something nearly no other nation on earth has. While parliament debates it, the troops just have to get ready for a deployment, then spend the nerve-wrenching hours waiting to see if they get to go or not. Believe me, the waiting's bad for morale too.

11) Education: Set up more grants. Cut tuition fees--And we've all seen how well that works out in the long run. The NDP governemnt in every province cut tuition during their last reigns. Last year most tuition fees went up by about 10% to catch up with their arrested development. Over the past few years, subsequent governments have had to jack tuition over 30% in many provinces.

End privatisation of research--how? if companies aren't motivated to fund reasearch directly here, they'll do it elsewhere. Instead, why not rely on scientific integrity to create scrutiny from both one's peers and one's fellow citizens.

Credit student loans interest against student income tax. I like it! Although, why not just create an interest-free loan structure? Better yet, how about this structure:

First year of post-secondary education--paid in full by governent of Canada.

Second year of PSE-- top fifty percent of all students get this year paid for. Remainder pay their own or by student loans with a reasonable rate of interest.

Third year: Again, the top fifty percent don't pay, the bottom do.

Fourth year: Now you're paying for 1/8th of the total number of students. Many have stayed in, some have dropped out.

A system like this would stop people wasting that free first year and add incentive to focus and get a degree.

But that's MY party platform.


12) Farms: Subsidize "family farms" until US subsidies are cut (ie. until tomorrow--and we all know when that comes). Ban "animal-to-animal" feed.

I'm actually not terribly opposed. I loathe the farm subsidies of this country (although unlike the US we don't actually pay people to grow weeds).

Lessee--so humans wouldn't eat pigs, dog food would have to be vegetarian, and eagles' beaks would be wired shut to stop them snacking on fish? I approve, in principle. Besides, it might be fun.

POLITICS, n.
A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.

Ambrose Bierce: "The Devil's Dictionary"

13) Businesses: Small businesses would get "fairer taxes" and better financing. Seeing as a small business goes under about every ten minutes, why not wait until such a business has been around awhile? The NDP wishes to create tax incentives to produce fuel efficient cars and add "mandatory emission controls for car manufacturers".

So they want to give us things we have already? Hell, the main reason to produce fuel efficient cars is so that people can buy them--apart from the morons who drive H2's. But if even gas pigs like this are getting on the bandwagon, can the death of the 10-cylinder exhaust hog be far behind? Oh please, oh please, please!


14) At last! Something I devoutly desire: Abolish the friggin' senate! Hallelujah! Referendum on proportionate representation--NO! You absolutely never trust really important questions to referenda. To quote George Carlin: "Just think how stupid the average person is; then realise that half of 'em are stupider than that."

Lower voting age to 16. Well why not? And by the same token, for God's sake WHY? At 16, I suspect most people aren't fit to vote. I'd rather see the driving age raised to 18, myself--and the drinking age dropped to 16.

An independant ethics commissioner: Now here's a brave step--give the people something the LAST bunch promised. The current Ethics Commissioner, hired to bring closure to the Grand-Méré scandal, reports to the Prime Minister. Who was the subject of the Grand-Méré scandal.

15) Increase accountability for expense accounts (I presume they mean parliamentary ones), tough conflict-of-interest guidelines.

This speaks to the steamship scandal faced by our current PM. I mean come on--most members can see conflict-of-interest long before they decide to engage in it! As for expense accounts--have you not heard that ye should not bind the mouths of the kine who tread the grain?

Oh--and they want to ban the sale of rifles and automatic weapons.
While I'm all in favour of gun control, I don't see this as helpful. Most firearms deaths in Canada, I suspect, are by unregistered and unlawfully owned handguns, rather than hunting rifles. And assault weapons are only available to collectors anyway.

The main problem is, Jack, you haven't yet told us where the money's coming from. At my estimate you need over $50bn to do all this. You'll never get even the $28,000,000,000 for health care.

You want to add a tax to inheritances over $1 million--a mere 900,000 citizens. Aside from the possibillity and hope that I may one day have to pay such a tax, there's the fact that in affects only about 3% of all Canadians. That's not enough to offset the revenue you'll lose in the first year.

I might vote for you strictly on your promise to wipe out the senate, though. . .

Remember, you promised!

Next: Swing Right, Sweet Chariot