Affording Democracy - Canadian Idle

When public services are only driven through a partisan lens, the effects on a country like Canada can be devastating, in part because they occur below the surface and away from the public eye. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Look at this chart. We've heard repeatedly in the last two years that the government's stimulus plans projects are heavily concentrated in Conservative ridings - something which is borne out with closer scrutiny. For some reason, Vaughan, Ontario received a hugely disproportionate share compared to other ridings, much higher than the Ontario average. The reason? We all know the answer - the recent by-election that saw Conservative candidate Julian Fantino eek out a narrow victory. Sure, it worked out for Vaughan, and for the governing party itself, but if you live in one of the other ridings, you've just been had.Is this unique? Hardly. Every former Liberal or Progressive Conservative government adopted similar practices. What is different, and troubling, about our present circumstances, however, is that this rather skeptical approach to providing Canadians with the services they require has become epidemic across all regions of government. As noted previously, this has turned the Conservative government into an agent of strategic spending for pure political purposes, and it's expensive. True conservatives shudder at the thought of it, but the PM isn't concerned about them anyway; he feels they have little alternative but to support his party. And why not? They continue to comply.This kind of spending binge, targeted merely for political purposes, caused the International Monetary Fund to claim "significant risks to long-term fiscal sustainability" in its December report concerning Canada. The man the Conservatives love to hate, Kevin Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer appointed by Stephen Harper, has been sounding this alarm for two years, only to be totally ignored and ridiculed by both Tony Clement and Jim Flaherty.When the government opted to dole out billions in stimulus funds as quickly as possible, it was managed with an eye to an imminent election. Designed to move the polls instead of assisting Canadians toward growth and productivity, the result has been far more dangerous than just a staggering deficit. Economists agree we'll never get out of this fiscal hole by Flaherty's prescribed date of 2016. Furthermore, our national debt it accruing at a faster pace than previously thought - $200 billion more since 2006.All of this has now led a normally vibrant country into a structural deficit - the sinews of economic life have atrophied beneath the surface. It also means the government has emptied the bank, leaving it unable to stimulate productivity. How will it handle a rapidly aging population amid the perils of slower growth? To date, it has put out no plans. How will it deal with the increasing rise of poverty rates? Simply saying they're a provincial matter will hardly arrest the situation, when it costs $100,000 to maintain a homeless person, according to Alberta's Premier Ed Stelmach - a situation made worse by the lack of any kind of national housing plan. Poverty costs this country $30 billion each year and without the feds at the table, the provinces can't cope with the load. One-third of our workforce will retire in the next 20 years and yet still the federal government only tinkers with pension reform. A 1% rise in literacy rates would equal $35 billion in productivity increases, and yet still there is no federal plan to make this a smarter nation.It's all gotten serious enough that Maclean's magazine queried in a feature article, "Are the Tories Bad For Business?" This failure to invest in healthcare, students, entrepreneurship, the green economy, home care, early childhood learning, pension reform, not to mention open government, has left Canada with a human deficit incapable of plugging the holes. By investing in bridges, buildings, prisons and military procurements without a bidding process, the Conservatives have somehow left people behind. We can only afford democracy when our entire population is productive. By depending solely on oil and other natural resources, free trade with other countries, and having a fiscal plan that will see deficits and increasing debt continue long into our future, there is simply no way we can get ahead. And placing so much hope on corporate tax cuts for the wealthiest of corporations is just bone-headed. What's competent about his kind of fiscal management?Perhaps that's what the PM wants - a democracy that costs too much. That way he won't have to deal effectively with poverty, aboriginals, environmental decline, pesky citizen groups, unions, beleaguered provinces, or municipalities and rural areas. "We're broke," is all he has to say. He can pass on the severe deficits to later governments, so long as he can win this next vote by refusing to tell the truth to Canadians and dealing with our structural and human deficits. It's the new version of Canadian Idle, where the country relaxes, stands still, while China, India, Brazil, and other growing economic giants take to the field. The famous college football coach Bud Wilkinson was once asked what he thought football had done for America. His response? "I see 80,000 people in the stands, eating popcorn and drinking sodas, while 22 individuals on the field play their heart out. That's what football has done for this country!" Unless Stephen Harper finds a credible way to restore the human capacity in this country, we might become mere observers, but we'll never be agents of growth, productivity and compassion required to give our kids a better life.