Canada: Tory brutes yield to sunny Liberal deceivers

Scan page 12

12 SOCIALIST ACTION NOVEMBER 2015 It was a shift from dark, overtly reaction­ ary ideas to a deceptively sunny version of the prevailing corporate agenda. That’s what voters across Canada got on Oct. 19.

Many people were spooked by the auto­ cratic, racist wedge politics of the Stephen Harper Conservative regime. Desperate for “change,” they opted for the major party that seemed to offer a bigger break with the mean, fearful, bleak status quo. That was the Liberal Party, led by photogenic, 43-year-old Justin Trudeau.

In the process, change-seekers demoted the labour-based New Democratic Party of Tom Mulcair from first to third place in the polls.

Mulcair made it relatively easy for Trudeau to appear to outflank him on the left. The NDP chief ran a stodgy, overly cautious election campaign whose balanced-budget mantra appealed futilely to fiscal conserva­ tives. It offered little respite for the suffer­ ers of the war on wages, and for victims of the ravages of precarious employment. On pipeline building, Mulcair went from being an advocate to being ambiguous. His weak policy on the environment, including his feckless “cap and trade” position, hurt the party in Quebec as much as his principled defense of the right of Muslim women to wear a veil in public.

A great amount of money was spent on the 11-week campaign, the longest in modern Canadian history. Over $40 million was spent just by the Liberal Party, and over $50 million by the Tories. The NDP likely spent a lot less. But the big spenders pumped up the Liberals from third to first place.

Which begs the question: Why did significant sec­ tors of big business turn away from Harper, and to­ wards Trudeau, especially over the past year? Could it be that the Conservatives’ harshly confrontationist, bullying behaviour hurt more than it helped the rul­ ers to implement the capitalist austerity agenda in Canada? Perhaps a significant section of the corporate elite would rather access the scientific data that Harp­ er buried. Perhaps the bosses prefer not to risk shat­ tering illusions in bourgeois democracy when Liberal deception will suffice.

Time for Mulcair and his team to go!

In any case, the triumph of the Liberal Party was not just a condemnation of the authoritarian, manipula­ tive rule of the Harper-led Conservatives. It was not just a rejection of their loaded omnibus bills, repeat prorogations of Parliament, and voter suppression tactics. Nor was it simply a triumph of style over sub­ stance, a la Trudeau. It was also an indictment of the overall political direction of the NDP.

The course taken by the party is not exclusively the fault of Tom Mulcair. But those responsible for it certainly include the staff he selected and the stifling political culture that he, and the iconic Jack Layton be­ fore him, fostered.

As a Globe and Mail column argued on election day, “The most unpardonable mistake, however, was to think the NDP could move blandly to the centre with­ out the Liberal Party filling not only the progressive vacuum left behind but also seizing the ‘change’ man­ tle that allowed it to claim its legitimacy as the true alternative to the Tories.”

Certainly, Canada’s “first past the post” electoral sys­ tem grossly exaggerated the parliamentary outcome in favour of the Liberals. With only 39.5 per cent of the popular vote, the Liberal Party captured 55 per cent of the seats in the House of Commons (184 of 338 MPs). The Conservatives’ 31.9 per cent share of the votes translated into 99 seats, or 29 per cent of the Commons. The NDP’s 44 elected MPs, a precipi­ tous drop from 103 seats in 2011, represents only 13 per cent of the seats, despite garnering nearly 20 per cent of the votes cast in 2015. Also underrepresented are the Bloc Quebecois, which picked up 10 seats, and the Green Party one.

But there is no denying the massive move to the Lib­ erals. Millions of ballots were transferred from past NDP supporters, as well as from new and occasional voters. The overall turnout rose from 61 to 68 per cent of the eligible electorate. The union-linked NDP, which campaigned like a fiscally conservative big business party, failed to win the hearts and minds of people looking for action to lift the country out of economic stagnation, and to reverse deepening social inequality.

In the wake of “the NDP’s disastrous move to the mushy middle,” as described by Desmond Cole in the Toronto Star on Oct. 15, the NDP Socialist Caucus called on Tom Mulcair to resign as federal leader. It asked the party’s federal executive to set in motion a process to select a new leader and adopt a new politi­ cal course that will advance the interests of working people, youths, seniors, women and the victims of big­ otry, racism, and militarism.

The NDP “brain trust,” including Brad Lavigne, George Smith, Ann McGrath, and Karl Belanger, ought to go too. They vanished the party’s adopted policy resolutions from the NDP website. They blocked or removed pro-Palestine New Democrats from being party candidates. They silenced Linda McQuaig for stating the obvious—that oil and gas resources must be left in the ground if Canada is to meet its carbonemission goals and curb catastrophic climate change.

Clearly, the problem is not just the Leader and a small group of party officials. It is a large, super-cen­ tralized apparatus; it is a lack of internal democracy and debate; and it is a general political direction that subordinates the needs and aspirations of millions to the survival of an outmoded and environmentally toxic economic system. Lasting change must be gener­ ated from the bottom up. But surely, that must include seeking the removal of the Leader and officials who do not listen to the membership.

Enter the Lyin’ Liberals Folks, get ready. Be prepared to be disappointed by the past-masters of deceit and deception—by the par­ ty that held the reins of government in Ottawa longer than any other in the 148 years since Confederation.

Trudeau and the Liberals promised a tax break for middle-income earners. It will amount to peanuts. Slightly higher taxes on upper incomes will not put a dent in the banks and giant corporations that are raking in billions, often hiding their riches in offshore accounts. In fact, the politically well-connected superrich in the construction sector will be the prime bene­ ficiaries of new expenditures slated for infrastructure repairs.

Law C-51, which boosts police powers, will not be repealed, only amended to insert an “oversight” mechanism. Will that be anything like the “oversight” exercised by judges, acting in secret, concerning Mus­ lims and Arabs detained in Canada for many years without formal charges or trial? In addition to vot­ ing for C-51, the Liberal Party backed Harper’s law against “Barbaric Cultural Practices,” objecting mainly to the name.

Perhaps they will rescind the “snitch line.” Perhaps they’ll repeal the law to strip the Canadian citizenship of dual citizens convicted of “terrorism” in thought or deed. But curb police powers? Just ask newly minted Liberal MP Bill Blair, the former Toronto police chief who was in charge when over 1000 G20 protesters were detained without charge in 2010.

Justin Trudeau said he wants to examine the stillsecret details of the Trans Pacific Partnership agree­ ment. He hastened to add that the Liberal Party is protrade. That really means it favours corporate property rights over the needs of the vast majority of the popu­ lation. Expect to see the TPP ratified in Parliament, and CETA likewise, regardless the cost in auto and farm jobs, higher medical drug prices, and the loss of environmental and social protections that will be even more subject to corporate challenge before trade dispute tribunals.

Will the promised public enquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women produce another hol­ low “apology,” or will it lead to punishment of negli­ gent police officials? Will it issue a set of recommen­ dations destined to gather dust, or cause a real trans­ fer of corporate wealth to indigenous communities to foster good jobs, quality health and education servic­ es, and end the super-vulnerability of young women to drugs and sexual abuse?

Trudeau pledged electoral reform. But you can bet (continued on page 11, in “[Education for Activists Conference: ‘Reform or Revolution!’ 7…]”)