What Message Is That?

Does it speak contempt for Parliament, and for the people of Canada that the leaders of our Parliamentary opposition parties cavalierly and with malice aforethought disdainfully flicked away the contents of the 2011 Budget presented by the Finance Minister? It certainly seems that way. There was no thoughtful consideration of what the budget contained since no one among the opposition actually read through the details of the budget.

If a non-committal response was the order of the day as often occurs, before opposition leaders made their ultimate determination to support or withhold their support for the budget in favour of voting it down, precipitating a no-confidence vote in the government, it made sense in the past to scrutinize the contents carefully, to ensure that it was fully understood what they were agreeing to, or denying.

Without knowing all the details how is it possible that it could be dismissed out of hand, other than to indicate that nothing would satisfy the hounds baying for dissolution of Parliament? It is clear enough that when Prime Minister Stephen Harper met privately with NDP Leader Jack Layton weeks ago, he took careful consideration of the demands of the NDP.

It is clear that this was done because Finance Minister Jim Flaherty took some of those issues and included them in the budget. With great deliberation, and with the hope that in serving the public the NDP demands would also be served. There was no wholesale acceptance and adoption of the entire NDP demands, not should there have been, in consideration of the country's economic recovery and deficit position.

But there were items that went a good way to satisfying some of the NDP demands. And a recognition as well of the Liberal budget demands. A reasonable attempt was made to placate the opposition, to try to stave off an election. But it was done in vain, despite good intentions. As a fairly surprised Finance Minister discovered when as soon as he presented his budget oppositional opinion flared.

"Our plan does not say 'yes' to every demand. It does not contain massive new spending, because that's not leadership", Mr. Flaherty explained reasonably enough. But he did attend to some vital issues, making GIS funds available to low-income seniors, to families with children, for family caregivers, for volunteer firefighters, for home energy retrofits, for graduating doctors and nurses willing to locate rurally.

All three opposition leaders jumped to announce their opposition to the budget, leaving no time lapsed between Finance Minister Flaherty's last words in his budget speech in the House. Jack Layton claimed the budget didn't offer enough assistance to middle-class families. There's a good one; since when has the NDP been interested in the welfare of middle-class families?

"Nothing in this budget has persuaded me that Mr. Harper has changed his ways and is prepared to work with others in Parliament to give middle-class families a break", pontificated Jack Layton. Who exactly is it that is not dedicated to working with others in Parliament? And the simple fact appears to be that a larger percentage of the voting public is not interested in governance change, nor having Mr. Harper "change his ways".

It is the mealy-mouthed hypocrisy of the opposition leaders that has demonstrated where the fault lines in Parliament lie. And with that in mind, as voters end up going to the polls, we can only hope that a definitive response will result, clearly indicating to the opposition that their fixation on opposing rather than setting aside partisan plaints to help govern this country has not been appreciated.