Throughout the 2006 election campaign, the main charge levelled at the NDP by the Libs was the complaint that the Dippers were treating the Libs and Cons differently. Never mind that the Libs and Cons were indeed in different positions (the former as a longtime government with a record which could be thoroughly assessed, the latter as an opposition party who couldn't reasonably be attacked for anything but its stands on the issues), or that the consistent "wrong on the issues" line toward the Cons surely can't be taken as a compliment in any fair analysis. The mere fact that the NDP opposed the Cons in a different way from the Libs was somehow interpreted to mean approval of the Cons, helping to fuel the Libs' irrational blame of the NDP for their own election failures.
Never ones to be bothered by consistency of thought, Lib bloggers are now starting to include just the opposite complaint within a "blame Jack" framework, claiming that the NDP is unfairly lumping together Libs who accomplished little on progressive issues with Cons who are actively avoiding accomplishing anything in a "same old story" narrative.
Contary to the position of these bloggers, there would be more than a bit of justification even if the NDP's position was generally to highlight a relatively similar lack of results from both the Libs and Cons in government. After all, wasn't it the Libs that prioritized corporate tax cuts over reinvestment in the programs which were slashed during Martin's reign as finance minister? And who was it that admittedly didn't have Canada on target to meet its Kyoto commitments, and who hemmed and hawed over daycare for over a decade before doing anything? If the Libs had cared about progressive issues in the least when they held a majority (or even early in their minority tenure), then there would be established structures in place today which the Cons could never have undercut, rather than a series of preliminary ventures which the Cons could back away from at relatively little political cost.
Instead, it took a resurgent NDP to push the Libs to finally reinvest in the health care system and move forward on child care, and an NDP budget deal (which, in case the Libloggers haven't noticed, was the only reason the NDP voted for a budget associated with Martin) to reinvest in postsecondary education and housing. And the NDP has pressed Harper in much the same manner as it pressed the Libs on all counts, calling PMS' bluff when he threatened not to fund the NDP budget and successfully pushing the Cons to fund housing programs.
So it would be fair enough to recognize some similarity between the results of Lib and Con government in any event. But then, any realistic portrayal of the NDP's position reveals that the party's actions have been far more nuanced than that: working with either the Cons or the Libs where appropriate, similarly casting blame on the Libs and/or the Cons alone where justified, and recognizing the difference between the Libs' relatively-minor failings and the major Con equivalents where matters really have gotten worse.
For those wondering just who's really been opposing Harper when it counts, though, the NDP has opposed the Cons on each issue of interest to progressives - unlike the Libs, whose ranks provided enough votes to hand Harper his desired vote on Afghanistan even when the mission was going to continue in any event, and who chose to support Rona Ambrose's continued mismanagement of the environment file when the NDP moved to hold her accountable for her failings. And now one of the leading leadership contenders is buying without question Harper's spin that Canada can't meet its Kyoto targets - even though the Libs' own platform still recognized the need to fulfill our commitments earlier this year.
About the best that can be said about the Libloggers' argument is that the NDP has indeed disappointed in the polls since the election, and presumably thus hasn't taken advantage of the opportunity created by a Lib party in disarray. But the Libs continue to be as fantasy-based as ever in trying to explain that drop - and with the Libs still aiming their fire at something which in no way resembles the NDP, the door still appears wide open for the actual NDP to be recognized as Canada's best progressive alternative.
Update: Meanwhile, there's no need for any caricature to show that at least some Libs haven't learned anything from Canadians' concerns about the party's arrogance and sense of entitlement.
No comments:
Post a Comment