Let's grit our teeth and stay tuned

The 2009 Canadian budget probably makes many of us cringe and cry foul. I am no economist, but red ink is red for a reason, and deficits are a Tory's worst nightmare. Stephen Taylor, however, puts the issue into perspective far better than I ever could.

At gunpoint one can choose a honorable death while making a brave last stance or try to save one's own neck. Having missed a great majority opportunity in October, the Tories would have probably been destroyed at the polls had they delivered a designed-to-irritate budget. A paradigm shift occurred in the Cabinet (at long last, in my opinion), abandoning childish poking at the opposition and embracing a more mature form of legislative action.

Looking through some provisions of the Budget I noted, naively maybe, a definite conservative streak. The support for the forestry sector, for instance, is heavily focused on innovation rather than just temporary support. FPInnovations is no union-dominated morass seeking a bailout. Homeowner incentives are geared towards consumption (spend and thou shalt receive).

I have a qualm regarding social housing investment. Surely once completed it will allow the low income earners and pensioners to reduce their rent costs. However it may also create ghettos, with the risks associated with social housing estates in the long run for the community. I would have preferred support for people to maintain their current status as tenants, with allowances for moving to less expensive properties. However removing tenants from the rent market may spell disaster for estate companies and buy-to-rent landlords, who will find themselves with no rent income and a depreciated house. Social housing estate-induced community deterioration could be avoided with eventual ownership prospects, so occupants will be encouraged to maintain a neat, safe and attractive environment. If you're going to own it, you'll want it kept nicely.

Ultimately, it is a gritted-teeth Budget. We have not succumbed to the hand-out mentality of the Liberals and expect more from the money we pour into the economy than mere continuation of the status-quo. We are sending out a message that reads "if you wanted to invest or buy, the time is now". Admittedly, we couldn't do more.

This is a Budget which has Canada's present and future at heart, and a good campaign Budget too. Should the Liberals decide to vote it down they will have to bear the ire of voters who would have taken advantage of the stimulus provisions. And there's definitely more of those than coalition fans. One never knows, Jim Flaherty and Stephen Harper may yet turn out to have delivered a political masterpiece and a great economic experiment.

Luca's one step closer to being a permanent resident

The recent penury of activity is over. While some have bar exams, birthdays and throne speeches today, I had a Quebec Selection interview this morning. After a pleasant hour I emerged with a CSQ, which means I can apply for Permanent Residence.

A very pleasant interviewer, a very relaxed setting, a very happy Luca at the end of it.

A little digression on Putinland

Canadian cincinnatus rightly points out how unwitting pawns can buy into Kremlin propaganda and be duped into believing that Russia is the greatest world superpower. However, Cincinnatus falls into the opposite trap: buying into uninformed Western media reporting.

Cincinnatus contends that the Moscow apartment bombings that spurred the latest Chechen war were orchestrated by the Putin government. I don't believe they were. Considering how idiotic the russian administration is, such a ploy would have come to light and would have been botched up no doubt. Russian apartment buildings are a joke to get into, and explosives are easy to find if you know where to look. My odds that it was the government are at least 5:1.

Moreover, Cincinnatus rightly remarks that Putin won re-election twice in at times very murky circumstances. I am no fan of Mr P's, but I do see a general discontent among the population toward the alternative parties of power and the alternative candidates. Many of them lack credibility (kas'yanov, the oligarch's buddy?). Thus Putin is often the sole choice people have, lest their country be entrusted to someone without a power base (who will therefore seek it with the oligarchs, we've seen how this worked in the 90's) or someone completely deranged. Odds of Putin cheating are 3:1 in my books.

Next, Cincinnatus contends that Russia invaded Georgia on purpose and had the operation planned. The latter is true. The former is bullshit. The pot has been boiling for years and the Russians definitely had a plan to kick Georgian butt. Since the southern President has a tendency to bark at his neighbor while hiding beyond a fictitious veil of Western solidarity, it is no surprise that the offended party has a reserve plan to bust him. Moreover, Russians have a very powerful intelligence service. They knew what Georgia was doing, and therefore were ready to respond. Easy.

The whole area of the former Soviet Union has to be construed as a governmental IQ black hole. Assume that each and every government in the region is stupid. What would a stupid government do? Many crises explained, not least the latest gas standoff which was used as a trading horse between the warring orange factions.

Cincinnatus further states that Putin ordered the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko. I doubt it. Firstly, the guy had no real sensitive secret to hold. At most he was a good conspiracy theorist. Secondly, he kept sketchy company, including convicted and wanted terrorist Ahmed Zakayev, who is KNOWN to have organised deadly attacks. Thirdly, if Putin and the FSB wanted to assassinate Litvinenko, a gun shot in a dark alley would have been the chosen method. Any chemical is easy to come about in Russia provided you look hard enough. I wouldn't have risked such negative publicity for such a pawn. Poisoning Berezovsky, on the other hand, would have been a clear FSB job mandated from high above.

Don't get me wrong. I too believe Putin is a thug, that he is incompetent with the economy and very murky in his dealings. However I refuse to believe that someone would risk so much for so little, whether the so little is humiliating Georgia or poisoning Litvinenko. But again, stupid is as stupid does. One never knows.

Thank God for research - Duh!

Privatization kills, or so say UK academics who published an article in the Lancet. Examining the death rate in countries undergoing sweeping economic reform, they noticed that periods of privatization apparently coincided with an increase in the death rate among the population.

Now, when jobs that provide pay and healthcare vanish it is all too obvious that unemployment will rise, the quality of healthcare will deteriorate and th morbidity may increase. With less tax income, doctors in a public health system will be paid less and resort to taking bribes for faster treatment, or leave the profession altogether. Unemployed people may take to the bottle or illegal means of procurement. Diets veer toward the unhealthy side (as the paper rightly points out).

However it is an unsanctioned reasoning leap to suggest that economic reform leads to death. It is contrary to any academic standard, and flies in the face of the old axiom that correlation does not imply causation.

Questions for the scientists:

1) Should countries therefore not undertake economic reforms and go under?
2) Should economic development (e.g. building factories) be shunned in favour of less-risky forms of economy such as call-centres and basic agriculture?
3) How large was the spike in mortality, if any, in Britain during the Thatcher years? I bet my testicles it was not large, if there was any at all.

Bad privatization causes havoc. Bad science kills. Bad policy can cause huge damages. The moral of the story is that when you screw things up the population loses out. We certainly didn't need a team of academics telling us the bleeding obvious and getting the wrong end of the stick in the process.

DUH!

Bailout pothole

Despite the CBC and many of its commenters being biased to the liberal side, one useful way of probing public opinion is ranking the comments by "Most Recommended".

Read the story on the stillborn auto bailout for Ontario and you'll know the Tories are in for a nasty shock if they go through with the cash handout. You don't need to be logged on to CBC to recommend a comment, and despite the obvious allegations of double voting et cetera the top 20 comments being all explicitly against the bailout does ring a few bells. Many of them are also hostile to the trade unions.

Tories, drop this bail-out nonsense. The US side isn't delivering, and their unions are hostile to making any concessions. It isn't going to go through, and Canadian taxpayer dollars will be wasted.

My suggested course of action would be to strike out the bailout language and go through the banks. Have a board of bankers examine a regular loan application, and if they give the green light forward the banks the money to cover the commitment, with the banks themselves footing a proportion of the bill (15%, say). Otherwise we'll be seen as ready to squander money and go into the red. Not Tory-style, not cool, not wise.

Charest delivers!

Jean Charest wrestled a majority in the National Assembly today. What conclusions can we draw?

1. Support for Pauline Marois' Parti Quebecois has not waned. Conclusion: whetever happens, PQ support is unshakable.
2. Dumont is off the map. Populism doesn't fly in QC. Neither did a local Conservative Party.
3. The sitting government wins during a recession. Conclusion: Charest is a good friend to have.

With this in mind, I believe the (sadly not may) Tories in Quebec should rally behind the one party that can unite the anti-PQ vote and deliver something resembling brindled capitalism to the province. If we are to bring about a paradigm shift in Quebec while keeping the province safely out of sovereignist hands we should work with the LPQ and through policy and initiatives blend moderate Tory and libertarian ideas into LPQ platforms.

I strongly urged my friends to vote LPQ, and I am thus very happy for a federalist majority government in Quebec City.

UK Parliamentary Privilege extinct!

Britain's House of Commons is no longer a safe place to conduct business contrary to the Government's agenda. It isn't a safe place to be an MP anymore, to be blunt. The Independent reports how gradually, since 2000, Labour has eroded the inviolability of Westminster, and how it prepares to deliver its final blow with the new Political Parties and Elections Bill.

[The Political Parties and Elections Bill] would extend the authority of Electoral Commission inspectors – or police on their behalf – to give them access to MPs' offices as part of any investigation of alleged breaches of funding regulations. The only authorisation required would be a "disclosure notice" issued by the commission itself.

The Bill also permits the watchdog's inspectors to enter the homes and offices of MPs and anyone who has donated to a political party, if there is a "reasonable suspicion" of a breach of the rules. A magistrate's warrant is required but no prior notice will be given and parliamentary authorities would not be consulted in advance.

In both cases, it would be a criminal offence not to assist the inspectors or to obstruct entry. The Commons Speaker would thus be breaking the law if he refused entry, with or without a warrant.

Let me get this clear: if you donate to the Opposition the politicized police force can bully you just because they SUSPECT you may have breached the rules. They can bust into an MP's office without a warrant for any reason.

Parliament has to be a fortress. It must have its own police force, accountable to the Sergeant at Arms and Black Rod. No law enforcement officer from outside should be granted access to the premises under any circumstance. MPs should be free to say whatever they want in the House (yes, even if it's false). If an MP used his or her Parliamentary office for anything beyond his scope as MP then he or she should be sacked without further ado. Labour's meddling with Parliamentary privilege spells the end of the Westminster system as we know it.

For God's sake hire a spin doctor!

So we prorogue Parliament and table a campaign budget. It better be good! And we'd better spin it right this time. Look at how the media spun the pay equity issue: CBC and Gazzette.

They accused Harper of doing nothing to address the current economic crisis and slammed what they saw as ideologically driven measures such as [...] limits on the ability of women to sue for pay equity. (CBC)

This will be no surprise to women's groups. Sue Calhoun of Business and Professional Women Canada was already saying of the Nov. 18 statement, "How can we trust this government to weather an economic crisis when its track record shows it opposes measures to advance the economic equality of half the population?" (Gazzette)

So we want to take pay equity out of HRC jurisdiction. I assume it would go to the criminal courts, making pay discrimination an indictable offence. Or it would go into the collective bargaining, thus strengthening the unions. How did we spin it? Did we spin it at all?

The saddest part of it is that we have stumbled TWICE on absolutely minor matters. Arts funding (a few million), the party subsidy (again, a few million). For God's sake, Tories, hire a spin doctor and wage fights people can come out with pitchforks to get involved in. The Wheat board, the other monopolies, the entrenched privileges, you name it.

If I were paid anything above twenty grand after taxes I bet I could do a better job for the Tories. Christ, the communications strategy is frustrating!

Advice to the contrary for the PM

Canadian Cincinnatus recommends falling over a confidence motion on party financing. I digress, because we are the party that made it clear we were focused on the economy and not petty ideology like the carbon tax. If we decide to fall on the financing issue we will lose that credibility. Table a clear and solid economic plan, take the hit, take a bathroom break while the kids throw all their toys (and their support among Canadians) out of the pram.

They're kicking around so desperately they'll end up kicking each other in the nuts. I'd keep mine safe for later.

Dear Prime Minister

Don't dodge the House. The Opposition has been planning this scheme since the last federal election, and is highly determined to set a precedent. As we're faced with the prospect of imminent defeat, I urge You to take the following ten steps:

On the House side:

1. Demand the details of a potential stimulus package from the opposition parties immediately. If they are so adamant to take power, they will already have a draft budget. Let them show the cards.
2. Attempt to find a negotiating point with at least one of the Opposition parties. Make clear what you're willing to concede. A reasonable concession could give us enough breathing space to table a Budget. Also, this would call the Opposition's bluff by showing them for the intransigent power-seekers they are.
   
3. Failing that, table a detailed binding blueprint for the next Budget, making it a matter of confidence. If we have to fall, let us fall over a clear policy rather than an economic update whose alterations would take too long to explain to the average voter.
4. Recommend to the Governor General that she refuse all Senate appointments by the incoming Government due to the lack of a coalition mandate from the voters of either party. Any Senate appointments shall be made after the next federal election.
5. Not ask for the Governor General to prorogue Parliament. Shutting House business is the last thing we need in these turbulent economic times

In other areas:

1. Not be afraid to lose. Minority governments have the tendency to fall, and ours is no exception.
   
2. Acknowledge that this Country has had its fair share of both good and bad Governments, and 13 years of Liberal rule didn't make it into a socialist gulag. Their policies may be wrong, but they're nothing we can't set right with a majority.
3. Talking majorities, double-check the Party's communication strategy.
   
4. Present the Opposition with a copy of the Cencelli handbook, which was instrumental in giving Italy a new Government each year.
5. Remain undeterred as Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.