NDP Leadership #102

Thank goodness the previous leadership thread is done - what a waste.

I'll re-post #99 by Brachina though as it does have some substance:

"Btw any buddy have research/science platform? I'd love Canada to be a world leader on stem cell research, more funding for developing pernnial crops, more for research on non addictive painkillers, and more money for studying the holographic theory of physics. Plus more science stuff."

Here's arguably the top most concern for me.

Austerity.

I've read a few articles this week talking about Ontario, saying that in order to balance the provincial budget there would need to be cuts even bigger than those in the Mike Harris years.

Few pundits talks about taxes. And no one acknowledges the Dutch Disease, which is killing the Ontario economy. No one acknowledges the horrific labor conditions in countries like China that are literally impossible to compete with until they have some kind of labor movement of their own.

And I've been reading articles in the international press, which talk about a Greek economy that's been so horribly mismanaged that no one in the ideological spectrum would defend it. But the mismanagement is pinned on "socialism". And the Greek situation is often used as justification for the idea that we need to slash the social safety net in Portugal and Ireland. Even France.

And then the idea gets imported overseas. I see "progressive" American sites suggesting that the only way to be "fiscally sustainable" is to slash social security. In the burning house that is the Liberal Party of Canada, I hear some people saying that their path back to power is to take a "courageous" stand to "save" health care and pensions by slashing them. Only in the LPC would anyone consider that "courage".

In good faith, I don't think any of the candidates believe in austerity. Not even Brian Topp, who praised the Greek austerity to make a point that we don't want our social programs to be vulnerable to the whims of bankers. I take his point in good faith: we're not trying to emulate Greek austerity, we're trying to avoid getting into that position in the first place.

We're trying to avoid a huge deficit, for the sake of social democracy.

And then I look at the Conservative government. They're slashing taxes and growing the deficit, and using the deficit to justify the idea that "one day we're gonna have to slash spending". The Occupy movement has given me some hope that maybe we can restore taxes to where they were before, at a minimum. But Conservatives point out that tax revenues have been increasing despite tax cuts, proving that low taxes are good for everyone. Which ignores that tax revenues might be even higher without those cuts.

What worries me the most isn't even that the conservatives will cut spending. What worries me is that Conservative governments around the world have been happy to NOT slash spending. Just cut taxes, create a huge deficit, and hand the car keys to the supposedly more progressive opposition. Then those progressives will have to make the kinds of cuts that no Conservative could get away with.

I'm concerned that by 2015, even if we elect a New Democrat, we're going to inherit the worst economic situation in Canadian history. A record deficit with a shaky recovery. Maybe even a double dip recession, if not a world community on the verge of one. Our NDP leader is going to have the car keys, and the pundit class is going to overwhelm him or her with the steady drum beat of "austerity, austerity, austerity".

Even though I want to advance a progressive and social democratic agenda, I often find myself worrying about whether we'll even be able to withstand the attacks on the social safety net.

I'd really like to hear one of the candidates call out this problem for what it is.

Moi aussi.

Je suis confiant qu’on va gagner » - Thomas Mulcair

http://www.pointdevuemonttremblant.com/Actualites/Politique/2012-02-19/a...

A while back I expressed some reservations about the way Mulcair's child care promise was phrased in his Proposal to Advance Women's Equality.  Some suggested that I write my concerns to him, so I did on February 10.  I still haven't heard back from him or his campaign. 

Here's a copy of the email I sent:

I may be overreacting to his not including the "enshrined in law" phrase in his backgrounder.  Still, I feel child care should be treated the same as health care (via the Canada Health Act) was.  So, I'd prefer the NDP to stick to the path that Olivia Chow set out.  I am glad that Brian Topp has reaffirmed his commitment to this path within his Support For Families document.  Anyway, if Mulcair ever answers me, I'll let people know.  Is Mulcair going to take part in a "questions for Thomas Mulcair" event in the near future here on Babble?  If so, perhaps I could ask there.

Thanks. I figured we would hear within a few days. I was just curious. 

If Rae becomes permanent Liberal leader he will be close to 70 by the time of the next election. He is looking flabby-faced and loses his train of thought more and more - imagine what he'll be like 3.5 years from now. Best for the NDP to just subtly suggest that he is a "has-been" retread who has been on the shelf long past the "best before" date.

This is absolutely the most important issue and it is an issue on which I think the candidates have been all too silent -- or, at least, all too indirect.

In the Ontario context, Drummond at least has the honesty to stress -- repeatedly -- that looking at tax levels was specifically outside the Commission's mandate and that there are tax measures that would make his proposed cuts unnecessary. The rest of the punditry, of course, make no such qualification. What is actually least satisfactory about the Commission's report is that, despite much vaunted talk about "transformation", there really isn't anything the least bit transformational in the document -- it's just more-of-the-same "efficiencies" (that haven't worked) plus cutting some major programs.

In the broader context, the big issues that sdm points to simply aren't front-and-centre in the race: Is it Canada's goal to be a Germany or a Saudi Arabia? Being a Saudi Arabia is perhaps compatible with having a Chinese-type manufacturing sector, but not a German-type one. And the Conservatives clearly see Canada in Saudi Arabian terms. But, there is a complication in even the comparison. For German-type economies have been built on the impoverishment of other economies -- traditionally, in our now-emerging "Third World", more recently, in the eurozone's periphery. Again, there is a transformation called for -- high mass consumption and "social safety nets" have depended on a kind of world economic inequality that is rapidly changing, but who is talking about how we can adjust, save for the Right telling us to accept poverty?

I've long said, "I'd rather be a tax-and-spend liberal than a borrow-and-spend conservative". But with the caveat that I'm not actually, and don't want to be, any kind of liberal. I respect that Topp has made increasing taxes the central plank of his candidacy. Not only is that an essential part of any longer-term social democratic strategy (no matter who wins), it also shows an excellent appreciation of the need for "branding" in a crowded competitive field. But, I have the same concern as sdm about 2015. I think that competing on "increase taxes" v. "cut spending" isn't likely to be especially politically profitable, but I'm not convinced that -- even if it works in the election -- it'll actually do the job in the economy.

So, I come back to transformation. Where is the discussion of how to have a prosperous economy that doesn't need expensive "social safety nets", high taxes and endless "government programs" (because reliable, equitable consumption standards are the "automatic" outcome of that economy's operation)? How to have a prosperous economy that doesn't depend on having most of the world living in "Third World" conditions -- or returning us to those conditions? I have the unpleasant feeling that this leadership race is going rather too much like the recent Ontario election -- where no one talked about any of the nasty hard problems -- with the result that we really have no idea how to address the emerging world and will end up easy prey for the Right's lethal nostrums.

Cullen is addressing the austerity issue and I believe he is going to do a lot better in this Leadership race than many realize. 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/ndps-cullen-would-make-rich-cana...

nicky, it is similar to a call I received a couple of weeks ago, in which it was claimed that Romeo Saganash couldn't speak fluent French.

My hunch is when things are not going well in your campaign, the campaign strategy may be what do you have to lose by adopting a scorched earch policy.

Don't get me wrong, i like Brian, I also think he could do a commendable job as Leader, but my perception is that his Leadership campaign is in a lot more trouble than anyone expected.

i've had three calls - each time i've signalled my strong support for mulcair in no uncertain terms ("i'm strongly supporting thomas mulcair") and each time the caller respectfully thanked me and didn't ask me a follow up.

Going on now as we speak.

And I wonder how Peggy Nash's event went last evening at the CAW's Hall in New West.

http://www.saanichnews.com/news/139649013.html