It's perhaps not surprising that much of the Libs' current attempt to rebuild their image is based on trying to recreate the dynamics which swept them to power in 1993. But as Michael Ignatieff tries to connect the current situation to what happened then, it's worth pointing out that plenty of the points of comparison are less than flattering to the Libs.
In 1993, the Libs campaigned against a highly unpopular tax pushed by the federal government. But of course, they did absolutely nothing to change it once they took power.
In 1993, the Libs promised not to cut social transfers to the provinces in their effort to balance the budget. Two years later, the provinces found out just what the Libs' word was worth.
In 1993, the Libs tried to paint themselves as green by promising a 20% cut in greenhouse gas emissions. When they lost power over twelve years and three majority governments later, they still hadn't developed a plan to get that done - or even to meet the less ambitious targets they committed to by signing on to the Kyoto Protocol.
In 1993, the Libs promised a national child care program. When they lost the 2006 election, they managed to convince themselves that they'd have pulled it off if only they'd had two more months to work with, rather than taking any responsibility for breaking their promise during the decade-plus in between.
Of course, even now the Libs have made it clear that they're happy to go years at a time doing something other than what they were elected to do. So the real message to be taken from the Libs' belief that it's 1993 all over again is that their campaign promises don't figure to be worth the paper they're printed on.
Fortunately, there are plenty of other key differences which make it highly unlikely that a repeat of 1993 is in the works (which I'll deal with in a later post). But there shouldn't be any doubt that the Libs' effort to draw parallels between then and the present day ultimately represents reason to be skeptical about what they have to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment