Bulletin Vol.26 No. 2
Winter 2005
Alan Mercer Runs in By-Election
Chairman’s Report—By George Dance
Federal Election Websites and Blogs
About 20
people attended the Convention held at the Howard Johnson Inn and Suites at
Highway 401 and
Deputy Leader Kaye Sargent was unable to
attend, but Jim McIntosh gave her report.
Her Oxford Constituency Association has been quite active, meeting as
often as weekly when they were preparing for the Woodstock Fair. They were in the May 24th parade
with a decorated car. Kaye writes lots
of letters to the editor and is in the press frequently. Many people encourage her to keep running.
Chairman George (Dance) reported he has been
working on executive standards. Vice Chair
Heath Thomas has been busy setting up the Ontario Libertarian Youth
Association.
Nunzio Venuto, Secretary, organized the
Convention and the Barbecue.
Thanks to Peter Cuff, we had a great line-up
of speakers. Professor Glenn Fox of the
Dr. Dale Orr, Managing Director of Global
Insights ( www.globalinsights.com), a consultant to governments, reviewed some of the challenges facing
Our final speaker was
Elections were next on the agenda. Six party members were represented by
proxies.
The final event of the Convention was a short
“All Candidates” speech by
Leader –
Deputy Leader – Kaye Sargent
Chairman –
Vice-chairman – Heath Thomas
Campaign Director –
Secretary – Nunzio Venuto
Recording Secretary –
Treasurer – Jim McIntosh
Members at Large – Philip
Bender, Peter Cuff
Ethics Committee—
[Editor’s
Note: A provincial by-election was held
Jim
McIntosh volunteered to be my CFO and looked after finances. I was able to
raise $840 for my campaign from six supporters. The
I sent
out three press releases before the by-election (Oct 11, 15th, 25th), which
included announcements on my candidacy. The last two were responses to the
Throne Speech, and the second one resulted in an interview on a Christian Rock
radio station in
These
releases made the Scarborough Mirror aware of my candidacy early and provided
them with a photo. From day one, they gave me constant coverage, and conveyed
my views on the environment, property rights and other issues.
Jim
helped me design the literature, which featured my photo on the front panel. I
wrote my own platform out in bullet form, and added some libertarian
quotations. John put up the same material on the website. I tried to deal with
some tough issues like property tax systematically, and non-libertarians gave
me positive feedback concerning the pamphlets.
I’m
grateful for the help I received. I observed that libertarians and
non-libertarians felt very positive about this opportunity to take action as
part of a team. Jim,
I was
invited to and attended three all candidate debates. The first was organized by
the Malvern Community Coalition. There were a couple of prepared questions and
a gruelling series of questions from the floor.
The
second was organized by the Scarborough Healthcare Coalition with Ken Shaw,
News Anchor at CFTO-TV, as the moderator. Three health care professionals each
prepared three questions, which were distributed to candidates a few days
before the meeting. I think I was well prepared with Jim’s help, and I was able
to use the concerns to illustrate why the government should not be running
health care. This meeting was played on CFRB.
The third
meeting was at the Yee Hong Centre for Geriatric Care. The Mandarin translation
made it a bit tedious except when a Liberal supporter interrupted PC candidate,
Cynthia Lai, for doing her own translation. Then the sparks flew.
There
were two other debates during the campaign that I regretted not being invited
to. I sent the organizers a message asking them to consider me in future, but I
also think that three debates were more than enough with my busy work schedule.
The
preliminary results on www.ElectionsOntario.on.ca showed only 19% of the
registered voters turned out, because of the snow, and possibly due to the
expectation that Liberal Bas Balkissoon, a long-time city councillor in this
riding, was a shoo-in. He got 57.6% of the votes. The PC candidate received
24.9%. The NDP candidate received 14.9%. I came in fifth with 0.6% (100 votes)
after the Green Party with 1.0% (167 votes).
I’m hoping that I can somehow draw on the support generated from this by-election in order to help the federal campaign. My long-term goal is to create a local Libertarian association. I was surprised by how unfamiliar people are with libertarianism. However, there were some positive responses going door to door and at the debates. I think election times are a great time to encourage libertarians to set aside scepticism and disagreements and work together to share our ideals with others.
Once
again the end of the year is nigh, and we can look forward to a busy month
packed with all the usual events: shopping, get-togethers with the family,
Christmas and New Year's, campaigning and voting.
Campaigning
and voting? Yes - we're into a second federal election in less than
two years - and by the look of it so far, an even nastier and more negative one
than the one we went through just 20 months ago.
Almost
everyone deplores negative campaigning, yet every election features more of
it. There's a reason for that: parties
who campaign negatively may not be liked, but do win elections. There's also a reason for that: negative
campaigns keep the focus on other parties rather than one's own; and the more
that Canadians look at a party and what it stands for, the less inclined they
are to vote for it.
When they
look at Paul Martin's Liberals, they see a government that has been in power
too long; that has grown fat, complacent, and corrupt (as the Gomery report
shows). For voters with memories, that's government as usual, no
different from the Trudeau and Mulroney regimes at their ends.
When they
look at Stephen Harper and the Conservatives, they see a party that's trying to
be all things to all people: one day socially conservative (calling for a new
vote on same-sex marriage), the next centrist Liberal (promising to preserve
one-tier Medicare), the next day libertarian (declaring that "all taxes
are bad"). For voters with memories, that's just politics and
campaigning as usual; and they don't believe a word of it.
The NDP earns
grudging respect, as a party willing to fight for its principles.
However, Ontarians who've lived through the Bob Rae government want nothing to
do with those principles, thank you very much.
So,
what's left? Well, the Libertarians of course. Given the reality of this campaign, though,
most Ontarians will not have a Libertarian to vote for; and most of those who
do have one will not even notice.
Many if
not most voters simply do not trust any party any more; many will vote for one
only because they trust the alternatives even less. And an increasing number simply will not vote
at all. Last federal election, four
eligible voters out of ten did not vote at all; this time around, non-voters
could form a majority.
This is a
major change. Canadians have become
angry about federal politics before - in 1984 and 1993, for instance. But they've always received more of the same. This time they are not getting angry but
giving up entirely; rejecting not just the status quo in government and
politics, but also the hope that anyone can do anything about it.
That
gives us a window of opportunity - we are the party that rejects government as
usual, and promises a different way of doing things - but also a
challenge. When a person loses hope, it
is difficult to give it back to him For
a Libertarian Party, handicapped by a small donor and volunteer base (and no
tax funding, unlike the above parties) the task becomes daunting. Yet if we do not attempt it, who will?
Please
remember that over the season when you are hit (as I'm sure you will be) with
requests to run, volunteer, or donate.
If there were no Libertarians running, just who would there be to vote
for?
P.S. - To leave a window for the Libertarian Party of Canada, we will not be doing any special year-end fundraising. So let me take this time to remind you that the Ontario Libertarian Party needs your support too, and of the generous tax credits available which let you contribute far more than your actual cost. Remember too that in order to qualify for a 2005 tax credit, your donations must be mailed to us before December 31.
Cutting
taxes is a tempting argument for Libertarians. Flattening taxes is good!
Eliminating taxes is heaven! Voters cry for tax cuts! Ask Mike Harris...
But
seriously, taxes cannot be cut without prior government budget cuts. Spending
cuts come first, tax cuts follow. Anything else is Brian Mulroney speaking
because without adequate spending cuts, tax cuts invariably translate into more
taxes. To be effective, tax cuts require a government that cannot borrow money,
cannot print cash, cannot juggle tax names and therefore has no choice but to
cut spending.
Well,
that’s not
First, we
should remind voters that tax cuts without spending cuts are nothing else but
political shenanigans. The math just doesn’t work. Instead of supporting the
deceitful concept of tax cuts, let’s speak common sense to voters; they might
appreciate. Second, Libertarians owe their vision of limited government to
focus on the real deal: cutting government spending.
We cannot
cut taxes without cutting spending and we cannot cut spending without the
willingness of Canadians. The root problem here is that most Canadians believe
that government has a mission so large and so critical that no spending can be
cut without unacceptable sufferings. Canadians will never be willing to support
significant spending cuts if they don’t have at least some idea on how current
government functions will be phased out.
Canadians
will prefer the status quo to a leap into the unknown.
Voters
loathe chaos more than they love tax cuts. Getting the government out of education
and returning the money to the people is urgent but parents may wonder whether
their children will be able to go to school if the Libertarians win. Reversing
social engineering programs raises real concerns. We cannot cut spending
without convincing Canadians that individual responsibility and charity are
more effective.
Don’t
take me wrong; every day I dream of sending government people home, auctioning
off government assets and setting a fat flat tax of 0.5%. But we must be
credible and we must succeed. Imagine that the Libertarians take over and
quickly materialize their vision. Will government-dependent Canadians be ready
to thrive in this new environment? Are we willing to gamble that the transition
will be smooth enough not to create a backlash? It is one thing to wean an
addict off drugs; it is quite another one to wean people off government
programs.
I am
arguing that an effective local or federal political platform must be dedicated
authentic tax cuts based on sharp and precise cuts to government spending. The
State cannot go at once so what should go first? We should list possible cuts
for each government budget, prioritize them and run candidates that can explain
these cuts to voters, to make them real. Let’s explain why those specific spending
programs are morally wrong and convince Canadians they would do better without
them.
I believe that the strategy of going first after government spending will help voters progressively share our vision of small government. Taxes, at least, will then have a real chance to be liquidated.
“Yes,” says my niece, “but who would you
rather see win, Harper or Martin?“
She knows
I’d far prefer Canadians to elect a majority Libertarian government and that’s
not going to happen any time soon. She really wants to know whether my fiscal
conservatism trumps my social liberalism or vice versa. The Liberals, of
course, are far less socially liberal and the Conservatives far less fiscally
conservative than ourselves but I am disinclined to say it doesn’t matter which
party wins.
The
second best outcome, short of Libertarians forming the next government, would
be a Harper-led Conservative victory on January 23. While the Conservatives’
dissention from the Liberal agenda on everything from gun control and childcare
to taxes and health care is tepid, at best, it does move in a libertarian
direction. A significant national debate will ensue the moment a Harper-led
government attempts to deliver on its election promises. All the special interests and most of the
media are sure to denounce Harper’s agenda as they did Mike Harris’ agenda when
he began implementing his Commonsense Revolution in
The
beneficiaries of tax cuts and expanded choice in child and healthcare will seek
a rationale beyond self interest to defend their support for these measures and
it will be incumbent on the Tories to provide one. It is possible that
utilitarian arguments may be advanced but it seems far more likely that
defenders will be obliged to offer libertarian ones. The child care industry,
for example, can be counted on to dispute whether putting money directly into
the hands of parents is more cost effective than funding institutional daycare
so defenders are more likely to argue that parents have a right to make these
choices while acknowledging that some will make bad choices.
Now
consider the Conservatives’ socially conservative agenda. While it is very
popular with some Canadians it is anathema to a majority of Canadians in
We really
need a debate on the Conservatives’ social conservative agenda if only to
awaken Canadians to the history and the principles underlying classical
liberalism. Far better that the Monday morning regulars at Tim Horton’s quote
John Locke and John Stuart Mill than today’s pundits. The debate on this and
related issues should remind us all that fundamental principles are at stake.
Perhaps
we will see some angry editorial from the Toronto Star denouncing the hypocrisy
of a government that considers individuals wise enough to invest their life
savings for retirement but too foolish to block adult-oriented cable channels
on their TVs.
It would
be tempting for the Tories to jettison their socially conservative agenda but
that would be very difficult. A dozen or more Conservative candidates won their
nominations largely on the basis of their credentials as social conservatives.
Their odds of winning nominations in future campaigns depend on publicly supporting
and voting for socially conservative legislation. Unless the Tories win with a
plurality of 20 seats, a near impossibility, the party cannot risk having a
dozen Conservative MPs bolting the government benches to sit as Independents.
As Madge the manicurist used to say in those Colgate Palmolive commercials
‘You’re soaking in it.”
Having
over extended my clairvoyant powers to this point there is no turning back.
Some proportion of those Conservative voters supporting the fiscally
conservative portion of the Tory agenda will be alienated by the social
conservative agenda and recognize that their interests are essentially
libertarian. Likewise, some fiscally conservative Liberal voters will see the
benefits of the Tories’ economic agenda and seek to retain and expand upon
these gains without the baggage of socially conservative moralism.
In the election campaign following this one, don’t be surprised if more Conservative and Liberal party candidates begin talking like if not acting like libertarians. And if they don’t, we’ll need to book a larger venue for the next Libertarian Party AGM.
Political junkies can indulge their habit this federal election season with visits to an array of interesting news websites and blogs.
The National Citizens Coalition, issues press releases on an almost daily basis fact checking Liberal Party announcements and offering counter-arguments. http://morefreedom.org/#
Newsbeat1 compiles election news stories from mostly conservative-leaning publications. http://newsbeat1.com/
David
Mader and brother Dan have a highly praised political
blog. David, a Canadian, is a law student at the
If you are interested in the polls, your best site is Hill and Knowlton’s Election Predictor, which not only includes all the latest polls but also shows which ridings are most likely to change hands. As an added bonus, you can type in your predictions for shifts in the popular vote and see how which seats each party loses or gains. Go to http://predictor.hillandknowlton.ca/ and scroll down.
The Fraser Institute issues commentaries on a variety of issues near and dear to libertarians and since the election is addressing policies announced by the various parties. http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/commentaries/index.asp?snav=ed
The Western Standard’s Shotgun Blog features a dozen new items daily including reports from its reporters on the campaign trail. http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/
Adam Daifallah, co-author with Tasha Kheiriddin of “Rescuing Canada’s Right: Blueprint for A Conservative Revolution,” offers some insights from a conservative point-of-view. http://www.daifallah.com/blog.htm
For proper balance, it is worth visiting Warren Kinsella’s blog. Kinsella, a former special assistant to Jean Chrétien, if fairly candid about the gaffes of the Liberal Party and its election campaign. http://www.warrenkinsella.com/musings.htm
Paul Wells, a columnist at Maclean’s Magazine is covering the election with daily reports at his very popular Inkless Wells blog. http://weblogs.macleans.ca/paulwells/
Naturally, everyone should be checking in at the Libertarian Party of Canada website for any updates on policies and candidates. http://www.libertarian.ca/