After watching the mindless, petty bickering that kick-started another federal election, I wonder what the average Canadian thinks of Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe?
It is difficult to see their reasoning for forcing an unnecessary election. These three stooges are foolishly and recklessly endangering our continued wellbeing by undermining nation political stability, which has been a fundamental element in this country’s ability to weather the global recession.
This election is a clear choice between principled national leadership and political opportunism. A coalition would stall economic growth by penalizing corporate expansion, scaring away foreign investment, drastically raising taxes and reducing employment — especially in the nation’s manufacturing regions already suffering from outsourced production to rising economic giants. In addition, a coalition would mean separatists would be involved in the functioning of our national government.
The Opposition claim the Conservatives were in contempt of Parliament, with respect to information provided to the Commons’ committees examining the government’s purchase of F-135 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft for the Canadian forces. It was the Opposition’s dominance by sheer force and numbers who made the allegations the Tories were in contempt of Parliament. In fact, these committees were delivered all of the information that was requested and more. In collusion with each other and their plurality on the committees, they refused to accept it all.
The budget proposed by the government has been characterized as sound by most quarters of national economic forum, from industry and labour to the banks and academia. It was a budget at least one of the opposition parties should have supported.
It would appear the Opposition’s claim of contempt doesn’t seem to hold much water (or interest) in the minds of the public.
Looking at the leadership of the Opposition, one would only see how disastrous a coalition government would be. To begin with the Liberals are divided between Michael Ignatieff, and the leader “hoping to be’, Bob Rae (although this is not something the party will admit to nor wants to have advertised). Rae is the ex NDP premier of Ontario and drove that province, during his tenure as premier, deeply into debt causing great stress to the people of Ontario. Wouldn’t he be great as Minister of Finance? Ignatieff, although a distinguished academic, has proven to be a substantial liability as a politician, with about 14 per cent of Canadians believing he could be a competent national leader. He was heralded as being the second coming of Pierre Trudeau — that does make one shudder.
Jack Layton and the NDP is the second element of this “axis of doom”. Layton and his wife lived in public housing when he was on Toronto City Council. The combined wages for Layton and his wife at that time was about $120,000. Although they paid market price for rent, they took accommodation away from a lower income family.
The budget allocated an extra $300 million for Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) just to placate Layton, but true to his nature, he demanded $700 million — an amount out of reach.
It could be postured he caused the election. He has also demanded the oilsand project in northern Alberta be shut down.
Incidentally, the president of the Canadian Labour Congress expressed his approval of the Conservative budget, and was confounded by Layton’s rejection of it. Perhaps Mr. Layton isn’t quite as willing to listen, as he would have us believe.
And lastly, there is Gilles Duceppe, leader of the Bloc Quebecois. What does he offer Canadians, other than guaranteeing to break up their country? Let us not be fooled, he is only interested in Quebec. Make no mistake, in a coalition government he would demand a senior cabinet posting as ransom for his party’s legislative support in the House of Commons, likely that of Minister of Finance or the presidency of the Treasury Board. Imagine how disastrous it would be for a separatist to be placed in charge of the public purse, (with a socialist and a utopian academic)?
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been steady in his leadership of this country since 2006, and has honestly told Canadians where he stands on the nation’s problems. In contrast with past Liberal prime ministers, and the current Opposition leaders, he has not cratered to the media. Instead, he has acted responsibly towards the public, and in such a way the media cannot distort the substance of what he has said, a hobby of theirs for which they wield an admirable talent and have considerable experience doing to other public officials, both past and present.
His stewardship of the nation’s economy during the global recession is superior to that of nearly any other country. Reducing the GST from 7 per cent to 5 per cent; establishing the Universal Child Care benefit providing $1,200/year/child; creating the Children’s’ Fitness tax Credit of $500/child towards the cost of organized sports and community fitness programs are just a few examples of his focus on the priorities of Canadian families.
The Conservatives have improved the national socio-economic conditions for the Canadian people by the reduction of personal income tax from 14 per cent in 2006 to 11 per cent in 2010, and reduction in corporate income tax to approximately 18 per cent, one of the lowest of the industrialized countries and half of our largest trading partner, the United States; a good reason why our economy has weathered the global economic recession.
There is no doubt Prime Minister Harper has demonstrated the capacity for effective national leadership and with a minority government as well.
I feel, as do most Canadians, this election could have been avoided had the Opposition been guided by the public’s concerns.
I would appeal to the Canadian people to exercise their democratic rights and vote with a whole voice to re-elect Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party to office with a parliamentary majority.
