To the Editor:
No government can let any daylight appear between the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance.
The stability and credibility of every administration depends in large measure upon these two individuals being absolutely of one mind. They can argue policy behind closed doors, but in public they must speak with one voice.
There is no such solidarity any more among the Harper Conservatives.
In the 2011 election, Mr. Harper announced in no uncertain terms that once he could claim a balanced budget, he would implement "Income Splitting" for couples with children under age-18. He could not have been more explicit.
And since that campaign, his obsession with austerity has been entirely aimed toward that end.
That's why he's been slashing everything from food inspection, trade offices and police training to search and rescue, environmental protection and veterans. That's why there's a firesale frenzy to sell-off federal assets.
That's why he has delayed military equipment and infrastructure investments. That's why he jacked-up job-killing EI payroll taxes to excessive levels.
It was all to allow Mr. Harper to claim a balanced budget in the spring of an election year (2015), followed by the quick announcement of Income Splitting as his political campaign platform.
But it's falling apart.
In the first place, his claim of a balanced budget is artificial and unsustainable because it's not based on durable economic growth, but mostlyon a series of gimmicky one-time measures concocted to coincide conveniently in 2015 (e.g., high EI taxes, asset sales, military procurement delays and stalled infrastructure funding). So Mr. Harper's "balance" is built on quicksand.
Secondly, and just as serious, he is now being contradicted by Finance Minister Flaherty on the wisdom of that commitment to Income Splitting. Within hours of his own budget speech on Tuesday, Mr. Flaherty was dissing the Prime Minister's long-standing promise. He described it as expensive and disproportionately biased in favour of the wealthy.
Many independent analysts - from the C.D. Howe Institute on the right to the Centre for Policy Alternatives on the left - have also panned Mr. Harper's proposal as bad public policy. Only a small fraction of all Canadian families would qualify for any benefit - 85 per cent (i.e., the vast majority of the middle class) would get nothing at all.
Flaherty's surprising outburst quickly exposed some deep rifts in senior Conservative ranks. Backbenchers and Cabinet Ministers started lining up immediately to support either the Finance Minister or the promise they all campaigned on during the last election. The two cannot be reconciled. Has the Prime Minister's promise turned into a lie?
For his part, Jason Kenney came out quickly and bluntly to oppose Flaherty and support Income Splitting, claiming that "Conservatives always keep their promises". Oh yeah?
If their promises are always good, then where is the Health Care Wait-Times Guarantee the Conservatives pledged in 2006?
Why did they kill Income Trusts and cutback on Old Age Security - two things they solemnly said they would never to do?
What happened to their more recent promise to cut taxes on diesel fuel? And what about their commitment to regulations to reduce carbon emissions in the oil and gas sector?
Where is the ethanol plant the Conservatives promised near Prince Albert and what about that pasta plant they promised in Regina?
Multiple Harper promises have been broken. Jim Flaherty has just driven a stake through the heart of another. And in the process, the fiscal integrity of the government has been badly damaged. Who now has the authority on financial issues? Can either Mr. Flaherty or the Prime Minister be trusted?
Apparently not.
Ralph Goodale, MP, Wascana, SK.
