To hear it told, you would think that these two were the economic guru's of our time. They knew this was coming before anyone else. They took steps to mitigate the impact of a worldwide meltdown. Canada was the best placed country in the G8 going into this. Etc., etc. What nonsense.
They of course completely underestimated, or it could be argued ignored, the impact of the current state of affairs. The idiotic comments made by both of them during the election were either outright lies, or willful negligence. The steps they are claiming they took to mitigate the impact in this country had of course been planned long ago, specifically the reduction of the GST. Did they speed up the second phase? Yes, but I don't believe for a minute that it was designed as a stimulus for a lagging economy, or certainly it wasn't sold that way. It was delivered with all the political fanfare that is accompanied by trite slogans like, 'getting the job done!'or 'promise made, promise kept!'. Can't you just hear all the Conservative MP's in the House parroting these lines behind Flaherty?
The Budget Officer has stated that all of the numbers we are to be treated to on Thursday, when Flaherty gives his update, were known in August. Because they did not own up to our situation then and further lied about during the election, Flaherty and Harper have spent the past couple of weeks dodging and now they are setting the table for our unpalatable meal with terms like, 'essential deficit', 'technical deficit', 'unprecedented action is required' and so on. They are attuning our ear to the inevitable bad news and no one seems to holding them to account.
I know the conventional line is, we can't look backward at this precarious time, but come on! That phrase is becoming the new, 'you're either with us or your agin us!'
The Conservatives have managed the fiscal framework of this country in accordance with their ideology. Full stop. They have been swept up in a meltdown that they did not foresee and they will no doubt mouth the same phrases that other country leaders are considering, so as not to appear to be ideological. Here's the rub though. Current circumstances serve as the ideal foil for them to do exactly what they've wanted to do all along.
Do you think Flanagan's musings are just a pipe dream?
"I'm hopeful there will be some ideologically-driven, neo-conservative cuts to government," political scientist Tom Flanagan, a former chief of staff to Harper, said in an interview.
Think again.
We heard today that the government had more or less settled with the PS sector. That all sounds peachy until you consider that negotiations began 18 months ago. The plan to keep wages low was not a result of the current economic situation, it was simply the plan.
Now we're hearing that in spite of all the economists suggesting that a spending stimulus is necessary, Flaherty agrees, but will wait until the Spring. I don't however see that he'll be prevented from cutting programs or expenses in this comment.
"We will do whatever is necessary to protect the soundest financial system in the world from being put at risk . . . In good times or bad, hard choices are just part of the job description."
Wait for it folks. It may not be happening the way they planned it, but they are most certainly going to use this time to accomplish their goal.
Harper is listing to the political middle? In words only and we know how much those are worth when it comes to him don't we?
-------------------------------------------------------------
As an aside, I realise I haven't posted much lately. In spite of that, I'd like to thank who ever nominated me for best Political blog. It was beyond flattering and greatly appreciated. Now that the leadership race should be getting underway in earnest and the House is back, I expect postings will be more frequent.
7 comments:
We have seen all of this before.
Brian Mulroney made similar statements when the economy was going into the tank under his watch.
So did George Bush Sr., Margaret Thatcher and not to single out the Right, Bob Rae and Pierre Trudeau.
All suffered defeat and the recessions that brought them down were nothing compared to what this one is shaping up to be.
(Japan had a lost decade as a result of a credit crisis. The world wide one we are seeing now is Japan writ large and deeper, with the commenserate impact on the world's economy.)
In this situation governments' overarching need to to be seen to be doing something. What they have done so far has been to make all of the right noises without any action.
And with good cause because there are no easy ways out of the situation they are in and no matter what they do things are going to get worse before they get better.
So, they are going to lose support regardless of what they do.
If they go with their instincts they lose that support and they will cause those who voted against them into the one Party that can beat them, the Liberals
However, if they go with the "Liberal" approach they will lose that support and they will alienate their base. So far, their base has been rather forgiving but that will change if the recession has the effects on Conservative support that all recessions do to the sitting government.
It might be at that point that some Conservatives will look at the current electoral climate, realize that a majority government for the Liberals probably is not in the cards, and then decide that a Conservative loss would be a good way to facilitate the removal of Mr. Harper to be replace by a "real Conservative".
Mr. Harper and Mr. Flaherty are terrified of what is coming. Mr. Harper is sufficiently aware of political history to know what happens to governments who happen to have the misforture of being government during economic downturns. Considering the likely scale of this one he must be shaking in his boots at the prospects for his government in the coming 12-18 months.
Great to see you back and fighting!
You called it, the true measure of this moment for Harper is utilizing the spinners behind him, turning the comments of two months ago "I really think if we were heading to a recession we'd already been there" into forgotten, tossed lotto tickets.
He's been force-feeding his CON-bots a different koolaid every week, from liberal-lite to cirque de flip-flop. His platform is not hidden, it apparently is buried so deep that real conservatives are wondering if they are lost at sea.
He's fortunate that the Liberals are hip-deep in self analysis again, while Jack remains true to form with his ideological rigidity. Conservatives tabling a deficit? Those of us who haven't been swallowing the swill know that's no surprise. I'm just astonished that there's a market for it.
knb said:
"Now we're hearing that in spite of all the economists suggesting that a spending stimulus is necessary, Flaherty agrees, but will wait until the Spring. I don't however see that he'll be prevented from cutting programs or expenses in this comment."
Exactly what they want: to be able to make deep cuts to social programs so that they can "save the taxpayer money" for more important things - like, oh say, the military, eg. Oh, I think they knew this recession was coming, maybe not as badly as they thought, but enough knowledge to be able to put forth their agenda, like spending the surplus, cuts to GST, etc., ahead of these dire economic conditions so as to be able to cut even more & more quickly when the time, & circumstances, arrive & "allow" them to make "their choices" of where they will make further cuts.
I'm also seeing more negativity, finally, being directed towards the Cons by the MSM. Hope they keep it up. Still not enough "truth" but it's getting realized & spoken & written now to some degree.
And you're welcome on the nomination! ;) I couldn't resist as I love what you write & how you write & your wonderful insights & ability to clarify, clearly, on every point. And I'm so happy to see you blogging again!
Ottlib wrote:
"It might be at that point that some Conservatives will look at the current electoral climate, realize that a majority government for the Liberals probably is not in the cards, and then decide that a Conservative loss would be a good way to facilitate the removal of Mr. Harper to be replace by a "real Conservative"."
Do you mean a loss in the next election Ottlib? Or are you referring to something else? And I, for one, & like many others would like nothing more than to see the back of Harper.
One more thing. For the life of me I cannot understand the words "technical recession". I honestly can't get it. Would anyone care to explain & enlighten me to this expression?
"technical recession"? - like being a little bit pregnant?
LOL Sandi - best explanation I've heard. NOW I understand. It's called "trying to obfuscate the truth". Sleight of "mouth" so to speak. Thanks!
penlen:
Yes, I was referring to the next election.
Post a Comment