I suppose if there was one way I could define last night’s Leaders’ Debate, it would be same old, same old. Canada hasn’t seemed to have changed much in the past four years and neither have the political parties.
There are, however, a few comments my politically minded self would like to point out.
First, let’s talk about the F-35s.
Stephen Harper states they are affordable. Everyone else seems to disagree. Apparently the Canadian Government does not have to start making payments on the military fighter jets until 2015. Additionally they will then have the payments spread over more than a decade.
Amanda Lang for the CBC stated during The National broadcast that the fighter planes would be able to be purchased within the existing defense budget. A budget that has however, more than doubled over the past ten years. There is a caveat, we would have had to completed the mission in Afghanistan.
Which, honestly, should happen by that time, but this is also a task that has now taken nearly ten years. Far exceeding original estimates. This also suggests that we will also not become involved in any other nation building exercises. Can we guarantee this at a time when the Middle East is continually destabilizing?
Brian Stewart, also for the CBC, claims that we will be in for quite the shock when it comes to defense spending. Everything in the Canadian Forces, especially the navy, is suffering from the creaks of old age. Are new planes the best policy? On an unproven plane model at that.
It’s up in the air and I don’t see any one “right” on this issue.
Sticking with the military theme I thought it was quite disgusting of Michael Ignatieff to suggest Jack Layton was not a “supporter” of the troops. I dealt with years of this despicable tactic while I was living in the United States. It is a distraction that play at having substance while having none. There is nothing about a particular mission, being there or not, or how successful it is that somehow signifies whether you support the men and women in our national forces.
For more despicable acts we turn back to Harper, who lied through his teeth. And then lied, and lied, and then lied some more. He continued to assert that there would be no tax rate reductions for corporations. The actual truth is that the corporate tax rate will be dropping by 1.5% for this year, and another 1.5% for 2012, bring the corporate tax rate to 15%. I assume Harper is trying to rely on the fact that these actions have already been put in motion rather then a new bill to be delivered, but really, that’s just hackery. Under his current plan, they will be going down.
Then we have Layton. I thought he made a very good point on Ignatieff’s attendance record, apparently the man has a problem showing up for work. Come on, Iggy! You can only bother to show up for class 4 out of 10 times. I know you come from academia but damn.
The problem? Layton quoted a 70% attendance failure when it was actually 59%. I don’t see the point; it’s been included in the advertisements now as well. Missing 59% is bad, and it would still bring the point across, but he softens blow by entering shifty math into the equation. He took a #winning statement into a #FAIL!
Ah the #FAIL. People seem to fall one of two ways on this one; hilarious or pandering to the youth vote. To which I say, why not? Anyone under 25 is completely ignored by the political parties. The argument is always that the youth don’t vote. Ignoring the fact that historically the younger generations vote less often (young non-voters become older voters) and that we have quite a bit of a chicken and egg problem here. Maybe the youth don’t vote because no candidates can be bothered to speak to them.
Example? Barack Obama’s campaign caused a record number of under 25 voters to hit the polls. He doubled this demographic in Iowa from the previous election in 2004. Why? Because he actually acted like they mattered. Instead of telling them they are irresponsible hooligans, he reached out to them, included them in his campaign, and hey, even attended an Usher concert. If that’s not sacrifice, I don’t know what is. When it came down to the final tally on the real election, Obama walked away with 68% of the youth vote* and the number of youth votes increased by several million for the 2008 elections over 2004.
See, when Canadian politicians attempt to appeal to students, it’s generally with exasperatingly poor policy. Take Ignatieff’s plan of debt forgiveness. If you donate 150 hours of your time, we will forgive $1,500 of school debt. Awesome! I can get paid, like, $10 an hour to volunteer!
Wait? Ten dollars? I don’t know if you’ve noticed Mr. Ignatieff but that’s below minimum wage. So, if the concern is actually debt, students would still be far better off, working for that money. Especially considering the fact that most students will see more money returned to them than anything taken off in taxes taken from their paycheque. And you don’t get the money until you successfully complete your program either. Why would someone wait four years when they could pick up an extra six hour shift every two weeks and put that extra $1530 into a savings account for four years? If they are concerned about the money.
This is a great policy if you were already planning a four week mission trip, or you already donate your time. But students concerned about money are generally already stretched to the limit trying to juggle study time and working hours. Of course, this volunteer service also has to be part of the Canadian Service Corps. that is still to be created, so we have no idea what these volunteer positions will be.
Well, I’ll stop there because I’ve now gone over that infamous 1,000 word mark, though I’m sure I could go on and on. I’m sure there will be another couple complaint posts before this election is over.
Oh and Gilles Duceppe is excellent comic relief; he’s such a pisser.
Links:
Fact checking the Leaders’ Debate
* Youth vote in this instance is 29 and under.
