Please Who Exactly?

Each of the political parties running for election in Canada's 2008 general election has its critics. Interesting to read the bitter criticism coming from former Reform members with respect to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's performance thus far, and his agenda as revealed both through his minority administration and that which holds promise should he be re-elected. Nothing to rock the boat of most Canadians' embrace of moderation in all things.

With a dollop of what was once radical left-wing initiatives. Simply because this is how Canadian life and custom has evolved, and it's what we're most comfortable with. One might think, wrongly, as it turns out, that Western Canadians whose orientation is conservative in outlook would take comfort from the fact that they've a prime minister at long last who expresses their values, in large part. Economic, if not quite social in nature.

But no, they're unhappy, with the realization that to acquire the votes of sufficient numbers of the electorate, any party's platform must be seen as agreeable to the social status quo. Which is to say, forget about abortion and same-gender alliances, they're here to stay. We'll have to focus instead of making that huge effort to honour our treaties with our aboriginal communities.

And come to a reasonable and workable conclusion with how this country can successfully manage its carbon (dioxide) atmospheric pollutants, given our haste to further develop the Alberta tar sands for crude, really nastily crude oil. And increase Canadians' ability to access safe and reliable and timely health services. And give aid and assistance to those in our communities who require it. Including help to university students.

Yes, encourage business and investment in the country, as well. Without the balanced furtherance that comes with investment and support for manufacturing and technology industries in the country how can prosperity result? Yet, out west Mr. Harper's old cronies despair over his abandonment of "principled conservatism". While nothing could be further from the truth; he's demonstrated both principle and conservatism.

Simply not to the degree that will meet with their satisfaction, but which would most certainly alienate him from the larger electorate. We don't want free-market health care, nor to muzzle free speech, or make access to abortion more difficult, and deny same-sex unions. There are, certainly, some items we'd like more of, such as 0.7% of gross national income dedicated to international development assistance.

More affordable housing, as swiftly as it can be accomplished; an increase in the number of food inspectors to ensure the safety of the Canadian public in the food we eat; that kind of social welfare detailing. On the other hand, we don't really buy in to Jack Layton's free for all, since nothing is free, and we're not prepared to give him a free hand in yanking prosperity out from under the country's financial underpinnings.

Stephane Dion was right on, for a change, when he characterized Jack Layton's newest stated initiative to produce a balanced budget despite massive social spending by cancelling scheduled corporate tax cuts to encourage investment and a healthy economy, as "old fashioned, job-killing" socialism. Mind, his election platform doesn't strike as particularly responsible, in its grand sweep of spending and taxation, either.

Who ever thought that so many of us would have to pinch our nostrils and consider voting Conservative possibly for the first time in our voting lives? Since it would appear that a majority of Canadians, despite their caution about the Conservatives, seem to believe that the current governing body is more likely to administer our affairs of state with moderation than the Liberals, the NDP, the Greens.