Watching Paul
Martin and his "transition team" is like following the
television melodrama The West Wing. The characters always confuse
their own power-lust and bureaucratic infighting with national vision
and real accomplishment.
Martin reminds me
more all the time of John Turner. An old man pretending to be a young
man. A political virtuoso, we're told, but somehow on television he
always seems nervous. A policy-planner, we're told, who somehow
reached his long-sought goal with no policy plan.
Instead what we
get are buzz words--"transformative policy," "politics
of achievement," "democratic deficit."
There are really
only two kinds of leader, and two kinds of politician: those who see
government as "dynamic," "creative" and
"progressive," and those who see it merely as a dangerous necessity.
Martin, like most,
is of the first sort, and the most irritatingly earnest variety. He
BELIEVES--in himself, in his career, in his cliches, and in the
miraculous power of the State to transform society, to guide and
nurture, to get things done, to be the heart and mind and soul and
conscience of the nation.
It's a 'sixties thing.
He fuels himself
with metaphors about change. He talks about a "new deal,"
"a new confidence," and "great national
achievements." "The status quo," he declares
challengingly, "is not an option."
For instance he's
going to fix our failing health system. How? Apparently by putting a
new national bureau in charge of it, and shoveling in a couple
billion more tax dollars.
More bureaucracy
and more government spending. How transformative!
He's going to
rebuild trust from the provinces while at the same time invading
their constitutional jurisdiction over urban affairs.
He's going to stop
the Chretien practice of appointing party favorites to run as Liberal
candidates in strategic ridings, while at the same time ensuring that
52% of Liberal candidates are women.
He will make peace
with the West while increasing the presence of francophones in the
civil service and refusing to appoint senatorial nominees elected in Alberta.
He wants a
political system that "lets leaders lead," and
parliamentary reforms that let backbenchers stop them from leading.
He wants stronger
ties to the U.S., but also stronger ties to U.S. opponents.
He wants more
spending but lower taxes while paying down the debt.
The more Martin
declaims on how he's going to solve the urban green space crisis,
solve the homeless crisis, solve the national daycare crisis, solve
the Indian crisis, and lead Canada into a decade as transformative as
the 1860s, the more I can't help wondering if he's an idiot.
But he probably
isn't. He understands there's an infinite capacity among most eastern
Canadian voters for self-delusion. Martin shares it.
Politics to them
isn't about maintaining a just governing order. It's about dreaming
the impossible dream. The fact that their delusions actually wreck
our country never seems to occur to them.
What really would
constitute a new national vision is a leader who respects Canada's
constitution and makes the nation's judges do the same, allows people
to keep more of their money, liberalizes charitable exemptions to
build society, and reduces government activities and intervention.
A leader, that is,
who trusts Canadians to create their own solutions instead of having
governments try and fail to do it for them.
THAT would be a
new national vision.
- Link Byfield
Link Byfield is
chairman of the Edmonton-based Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy.
"Just
Between Us" is a feature service of the Citizens Centre for
Freedom and Democracy. The purpose of the Citizens Centre is to
improve the quality of life for all Canadians by promoting policies
that foster individual initiative and personal responsibility.