Canadian (Federal) Politics
Paul Martin has been chosen leader of the Liberal Party, which holds a majority of seats in the House of Commons? Has he become Prime Minister? No. The Party chose a system to allow participation of many party members--one vote by internet in September, then another, if needed, during a traditional convention in November. Martin won the first vote by such a wide margin, it is all over. The convention will be a formality (and will be very poor TV, I'm guessing). Even more remarkable, the outgoing Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, announced a long time ago that he isn't stepping down until February.
This seems to be Chretien's last petty act of revenge against Martin. Chretien beat Martin for the leadership in 1990. Even though he made Martin Minister of Finance, and kept him in that role until last year, he always seems to have regarded him as a second-rater. They are both more wealthy than the average by now. Martin made sure to make excellent money in the private sector before he entered public life. Chretien has had very little career outside of public life, but he had a best-selling book about the first half or so of his career, and he practised law for a few years while John Turner was leader of the party.
What will change with Martin as leader? On economic issues, he will be somewhat more to the right than Chretien. He has just announced that one of his first actions will be a major spending cut, and this goes with a determination to keep down both taxes and spending, build up a surplus, and pay off debt. On the other hand, he wants to spend money to reduce waiting lists for critical medical procedures, and on "a bold attempt to eradicate native poverty." He has promised to dedicate part of the national gasoline tax to "cities"--primarily, I guess, Montreal and Toronto.
Chretien gave a major speech a few weeks ago urging that the next federal government launch major spending programs on both infrastructure and social programs. (He was endorsing recommendations that focussed, once again, on cities). He said major tax cuts will be impossible if his advice is followed on spending, and he came close to saying: don't worry about deficits. Chretien said this agenda is still different from "promising all things to all people," and some Martin supporters actually had a spin suggesting that the spending proposals endorsed by Chretien won't actually cost all that much. So they might not be so far apart, but they are still read as "Chretien to the left" (at least in his heart, or when he is campaigning), "Martin to the right."
Besides his "fiscally conservative" position, and his commitments on health care and the cities, Martin has made some promises on the sympbolic or instititututional front: democratization of Parliament (especially relaxed party discipline), and friendlier relations with the Bush Administration.
A bit earlier, in August, Chretien spoke to his caucus on what he sees as his major recent accomplishments. Highlights: world events: involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Africa. "We said we would double development assistance by the year 2010. And we have allocated the resources to do it. We promised to eliminate tariffs and quotas on products from least developed countries. We have done it. We promised to strengthen our military. And we did it with an increase in the budget of almost a billion dollars a year."
Others: a new agreement with First Ministers (mainly provincial premiers) on health care (with more dollars); expansion of the National Child Benefit; action on Kyoto/climate change; spending on research and cities, and action on corporate governance. The new bill he emphasized for Fall 2003 was on de-criminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Then Chretien spoke on "same sex marriage":
"Circumstances demand that we deal with the issue now because of very recent court decisions based on the Charter of Rights. The Canadian Alliance has attacked the courts for years. They attack so-called judicial activism. It is code for their profound opposition to the Charter of Rights. A Charter that was passed by Parliament and that Liberals and all Canadians respect and cherish. So let us not fall into their trap on this issue. This is not about weakening Parliament. It is not about weakening traditional religion. It is not about weakening the Canadian social fabric. In fact, it is about giving Parliament its rightful voice. It is about protecting religious traditions and rites. It is about giving force and effect to Canadian values. Values of mutual respect, justice and equality."
Chretien has told the media that he has found this issue personally difficultl--he is in some ways, I guess, an old-fashioned Catholic. Martin has said something similar; I doubt that his actions will be any different.
As an aside: there is a tendency not only for Canadian Prime Ministers to be Catholics (who are not known for "socially conservative" policies), but for all the individuals who have any real chance of becoming PM to be Catholic, as well. People used to say Canada's population was about 40% Catholic. This would count a lot of Quebeckers, who actually stopped going to church about 40 years ago. (What do they say in New York and Chicago? Cultural Catholics?) No matter how you slice it, however, Canada is demographically more Catholic than the U.S. What difference does this make? Does it help explain the stronger presence of European-style social democracy here?
Chretien and Martin are both Catholics of some kind. Chretien ran twice for the leadership against John Turner, a Catholic, losing once and winning once. Joe Clark is a Catholic who has been leader of the Progressive Conservative party twice--in the 70s and 80s, and again very recently. Brian Mulroney, Prime Minister from 1984 to 1993, is a Catholic, and so is Jean Charest, who was Tory leader from 1993 until 1998.
It's as if Mario Cuomo in 1992 was a shoo-in for his party's nomination, if not for the presidency, instead of being characterized as so clearly a Northeastern liberal as to be unelectable.
The two small-c conservative party leaders, who will be featured, in the next blog, are not Catholics. Neither appears to have any hope of becoming Prime Minister.
|
