Campbell’s departure could dash NDP dreams

I've lived in Ontario for five years now but I’ve never really gotten involved in provincial politics here. I think it’s because, having come from the always entertaining and wacky world of BC politics, Ontario seems pretty dull by comparison. Certainly watching the HST drama from afar has been far more interesting than some supposed drama about Dalton McGuinty and hydro rates or something.

It’s hard to know where to start. Arguably the most electorally successful premier in BC history in Gordon Campbell, who survived a drunk-driving charge while in office, only to be felled by a caucus and taxpayer revolt. A taxpayer revolt led by Bill Vander Zalm, a former premier who presided over the destruction of the once-mighty Social Credit brand and left office in disgrace and mockery. And an opposition party in the BC NDP that, with the government at historic lows in the polls, seemed more interested in knifing its own leader, Carole James.

The latest development, Campbell’s resignation as Premier, was both inevitable and surprising. He tried to save himself with a televised infomercial a few weeks ago, offering large personal tax cuts, but the damage was done. With a caucus revolt brewing, Campbell recognized the writing was on the wall and decided to go as gracefully as possible.

Campbell’s departure triggers what should be a pretty interesting leadership race to replace him with all kinds of names being thrown out, from current minister like Kevin Falcon to past ministers like Christy Clark, as well as popular mayors and even federal Conservative cabinet ministers like James Moore.

Surprisingly, polling shows that, unlike when Rita Johnston beat-out Grace McCarthy for the Socred leadership after Vander Zalm ran the party into the ground, the BC Liberal leadership may still be a prize worth winning.

If Campbell had stubbornly decided to stay on the BC Liberal brand seemed destined to join Social Credit in the political graveyard, its support splitting between the BC Conservatives, the BC NDP and possibly a new centrist alternative. That erosion could still happen at a slower pace, but by falling on his sword Campbell has given his party a chance to live on.

New polling from Angus Reid taken after his televised infomercial but before his resignation indicates Campbell’s last-ditch hail-mary didn’t land, but he stands a good chance taking a lot of the voter animosity with him when he leaves the legislature.

The NDP still has a strong lead in the horserace, 47 per cent to 26 per cent over the BC Liberals, with the Greens and Conservatives tied at 10 per cent. And if the HST referendum goes ahead, 66 per cent will vote to abolish, 21 per cent would keep and 13 per cent are undecided.

The poll shows while they liked the policy promises in Campbell’s infomercial they’ve completely lost faith that he’ll keep his word on anything, with 66 per cent calling him unconvincing.

There is, however, a lot of underlying weakness evident in the NDP numbers. While Campbell scores an anemic 12 per cent leadership approval rating, James isn’t a whole lot better at 25 per cent.

And here’s an interesting set of numbers. While only six per cent said they’d like to see the next election return a BC Liberal government led by Campbell, remove Campbell from the equation and the NDP lead is only preferred 32 per cent to 28 per cent.

While the level of remaining resilience in the BC Liberal brand is surprising, the NDP weakness isn’t. Their numbers are very soft. For many years BC has been a two-party system, swinging back and forth between two defaults. People are pissed off with Campbell’s Liberals and James and the NDP are the default choice, but she’s still the leader and the party the electorate soundly rejected in the last election.

With a new leader at the helm of the BC Liberals and a few years to govern before the next election, that 47 to 22 NDP lead will shrink and this could be a very tight race once more. It will depend, of course, on who the new leader is and, more importantly, what they do with the HST. While the HST is the right policy, the people seem to have spoken pretty clearly and the referendum seems a formality at this point. If a new leader reverses the HST it's a new ball-game. If they try to sell it in a referendum battle, it will be closer but I don’t see them pulling it out.

Finally, even if a new leader can bring the BC Liberals off of life support, it remains clear that British Columbians remain utterly unsatisfied with their status quo options. While 32 per cent want the NDP to former the next government and 28 per cent the Campbell-less Liberals, the leader, with 34 per cent, as not sure/none of these.

Campbell’s departure may slow the process, but another dramatic shake-up of the BC political landscape remains inevitable. And it’s still very much needed.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

HST Powerplay: Bill Vander Zalm vs. Carole James?

I don't mean to keep writing on the HST -- not when there's Chinese spies to identify, and early reviews of the fake lake to discuss -- but Vaughn Palmer has some interesting news about the anti-HST fight in B.C. this morning that should be shared with you.

The bulk of his piece today is about how the anti-HST forces, led by Vander Zalm, have apparently taken embattled BC Premier Gordon Campbell off their target list for a recall initiative. Could be because they couldn't pull it off in Point Grey, with it's combination of transient students and well-off yuppies, or it could be because they think Gordo will give up the leadership soon enough anyways, so why waste the effort.

Speaking of giving-up the leadership, what's interesting is the battle for control of the anti-HST crusade that may be brewing between the ex-Socred Vander Zalm (who ideologically certaintly has more in common with the conservative BC Libs than the NDP) and the BC NDP, led by Carole James.

While James has been content to let the Zalm take the lead during the referendum petition drive, as the campaign shifts into a recall strategy targeting government MLAs in a bid to pressure the government to pass legislation to kill the HST rather than hold a referendum, cracks are forming. Palmer reports while Vander Zalm favours a drip-drip strategy to pressure Campbell to act without topping the government, James and the NDP want wide-spread recall to topple the government and put themselves into power.

Reports Palmer:

I've heard predictions from New Democrats that they will recall the Liberals in numbers sufficient to deprive the government of its majority in the legislature, and force an immediate election, clearing the way for an NDP government by this time next year.

Some say that they will also move Vander Zalm aside and take control of the anti-HST movement, once the current petition campaign is over.

This is interesting, and such cracks were inevitable. He doesn't like the HST, but an old Socred war-horse like Vander Zalm sure doesn't want to help usher-in an NDP government either. And for the NDP, it's less about the HST than it is about unseating Campbell and claiming power. While their interests coincided for a time, they're beginning to diverge.

What will be interesting to see is if James can so easily push Vander Zalm aside and take control of the anti-HST crusade. Even if the Zalm were to agree to go quietly, I have my doubts. The success of the movement in BC has been, in part, because it hasn't been closely aligned to one party. There isn't much love out there for the BC NDP either, or for James. They're polling well now because the public is pissed with Campbell, and James is the default choice. For many, it's about pressuring the government to kill the HST, not changing the government.

I can see why the NDP might be in a hurry. With fixed election dates, the next election in BC isn't scheduled until May 2013. There's a risk the HST anger could have subsided by then, particularly if Campbell resigns in favour of a new leader that can turn the page on this. If they want to capitalize on this, wide-scale recall (the BC Libs have a 5-member cushion) to overturn the government may be their best bet. The risk, though, is the air coming out of the HST balloon if people are faced with the prospect of an NDP government.

P.S. Congratulations to the Nova Scotia Liberals for their decisive wins in two by-elections last night. They managed to pull off the win even without Jack Layton campaigning against the Nova Scotia NDP government's decision to raise the province's HST to the highest level in Canada. I'm sure Jack will bring his anti-HST campaign to Nova Scotia real soon, though, and not just Ontario and BC.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Ontario numbers that will make Gordon Campbell cry

I was writing yesterday about the politics of the debate around the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST). Well, interesting to see some polling numbers for Ontario drop this morning for Ipsos Reid. Here they are:

Ontario Liberal Party: 37 per cent

Progressive Conservatives: 32 per cent

Ontario NDP: 20 per cent

Greens: 11 per cent

Clearly it's going to take more than just HST anger to unseat the McGuinty Liberals. The Conservatives' "it's bad but we won't scrap it" position isn't credible, and the NDP will need more than anti-HST rhetoric to convince Ontarians it can govern. I'd like to think these numbers are a sign people accept and respect the need for governments to make hard choices, and that may be part of it, but I also don't think they're enamored with their alternatives.

Meanwhile, on the left coast Gordon Campbell must be looking at the Ontario numbers and sobbing softly in a dark corner of the legislature. An Angus Reid poll from earlier this month paints a bleak picture for the BC Liberals:

BC NDP: 46 per cent
BC Liberals: 26 per cent
Greens: 14 per cent
BC Conservatives: 8 per cent

And while the NDP is poised for victory currently, it should be noted this is a continuation of the see-saw nature of BC politics. Were there a credible third-party, a centrist alternative, polling shows it would win the next election. And BC has semi-workable (more workable than I thought, actually) recall and referendum legislation.

As I hinted at yesterday, and others mentioned in the comments, there are substantial differences between Ontario and B.C. I think Ontario is more steady-she-goes by nature, while B.C. is more populist rough and tumble. The HST was also rolled-out much differently in B.C., with Campbell having denied plans to harmonize during the last election and then announcing plans days after the vote.

It's the perceived dishonesty that gives the anti-HST campaign momentum in BC, as well as years of building fatigue with the Campbell government. I still think it's good policy, and that the referendum attempt to overturn it is a mistake, but I understand the anger. I just think the place to express it is the ballot (and I'm sure they'll express it there too). But a referendum to overturn good policy because you're mad at the government is a bad idea, and will be bad for the province in the long run.

Back to Ontario though, on the topic of getting the word out, McGuinty has turned to the inter-webs with this video to help do that:

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

BC is hungry for an alternative

I haven’t been active at all in provincial politics since I moved to Ontario nearly five years ago. Naturally, I’m inclined to support the McGuinty Liberals (some issue by issue disagreements with them aside) but I’ve neither joined (except briefly before the last election) nor volunteered for the party, and haven’t blogged much on provincial issues either.

Could be that I have my hands full following the minority madness in Ottawa, but I also think it’s because I was spoiled growing-up in British Columbia, where provincial politics is more than a little crazy, and always entertaining (even if Campbell tried hard to make it boring again.)

From the craziness of the Vander Zalm Socreds with scandals such as the Fantasy Gardens affair, to Bingogate under the NDP’s Mike Harcourt and all the drama about Glen Clark’s deck and the fast cat ferry fiasco (alliteration is key to a good scandal), to Gordon Campbell’s Hawaiian DUI, the legislature raids and now the return of Vander Zalm and the HST drama – BC politics is never boring.

It has, however, become increasingly polarized over the years, and that has left many – myself included – unimpressed with our options and hungry for an alternative. I joined and volunteered for the BC Liberals in my teens in the mid-1990s, when it was led by Gordon Wilson (before his nuttiness was evident) and was the third-party in BC. And when it was also still what you and I would call liberal.

Then when the Socreds imploded, they essentially launched take-over of sorts and Campbell took the leadership. They still seemed liberal enough in 1996, when they lost the seat-count to Clark’s NDP (but won the popular vote). I then headed East for university and, when I came back around 2002, they weren’t so liberal anymore. In government they’d taken a sharp shift to the right, leaving many centrist Liberals feeling homeless. Some stuck it out with the BC Liberals, others voted NDP. I cast my ballot based on the local candidates, supporting and voting for both parties over the years but with enthusiasm for neither.

It’s a situation many in BC find themselves in. The BC Liberals are too right; the BC NDP too left (and not particularly welcoming to federal Liberals either, which doesn’t help). It leaves many on the sidelines, and many holding their noses to vote for the lesser evil. And neither party seems particularly inclined to appeal to this disenchanted centre.

It leads to a teeter-totter of voter support in the province. The province, when it had enough of the Harcourt/Clark years, reduced the NDP to two seats in 2001, handing 77 seats to the Liberals. They gave Campbell two more majorities but with decreasing enthusiasm and now, with their handling of the HST feeding underlying fatigue and disenchantment with the governing party, the polls show the BC NDP is again poised to win a mandate (although the election won’t be until 2013).

The opposition New Democratic Party has harnessed public anger over the harmonized sales tax to open its biggest lead since Gordon Campbell's B.C. Liberals took power in 2001, a new Angus Reid poll has found.

Conducted this week, the poll found the NDP have 47 per cent support, a commanding 18 points ahead of the governing Liberals.

The Liberals have the support of just 29 per cent of people across the province, the poll found, 17 points below their total in the election last May. The Green Party has 15 per cent support, and the B.C. Conservative Party has five per cent.

Interestingly, though, it’s not as ifBritish Columbians are suddenly enamored with Carole James and the BC NDP. It’s just that they’re really pissed at Campbell’s Liberals, and there’s no other real option.

Forty per cent of people polled described the NDP as "inefficient," and 37 per cent called it "weak."

What if there was another option, though? That’s where it gets interesting:

The poll found that a newly created centre-left party could form the government if it ran in the May 2013 election.

When asked, 34 per cent of people said they would vote for the new party, ahead of 28 per cent who said they would vote NDP. A new centre-left party would relegate the B.C. Liberals to third, the poll found.

That may sound like a surprising number, but to seasoned observers of BC politics it really shouldn’t be. There is a strong hunger for a centre-left alternative in the province, for a real Liberal party founded on core Liberal values and policies, instead of a party of conservatives usurping the Liberal name.

Could the vaunted BC Liberal coalition of right and centre (if it ever really existed other than in name) be ready to fracture? Maybe. Could we see a third party in the province, a party of the centre-left? If things get dire enough for the Campbell Liberals, it’s certainly possible we could see an exodus.

The question though is who flees though, and who do they attract. The other possibility is a strengthening of a right-wing party. Might some of the right-wing BC Liberals flee to the BC Conservative Party, or form their own alternative? The same Angus Reid poll showed a new right-wing party would guarantee an NDP majority and reduce the BC Liberals to 15% in the polls.

Even if the right fled, allowing the centre-left to reclaim the BC Liberals, the brand may be pretty tainted, sadly, at this point. A new party would seem like the better choice, with the better chance of securing voter support. It may be a question of who flees the BC Liberals first. But a centre-left party would have the best chance to form a government, drawing support from both centrist BC Liberals and BC NDP supporters who voted for the party by default. A solidly right-wing party wouldn't challenge for government.

We seem to go through these upheavals every now and again in BC. The constant, though, has been a two-party system. The BC Liberals were largely a fringe party under Wilson until the Socred takeover. We essentially traded the Socreds for the new “Liberals.”

Now we may be due for another upheaval. Whatever happens though, I hope we don’t end up with another two-party province. The ideal situation would be parties of the left, right and centre. And wherever you’d put the Greens.

BCers deserve clear choices, and they’ve been lacking for far too long.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Gordon Campbell is poised to gut B.C.'s funding for the arts

Yesterday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper visited Victoria to address the non-prorogued BC Legislative Assembly. While there, you’d think he might have pulled BC Premier Gordon Campbell aside and told him the story of how Harper’s Conservatives lost their majority, in no small part, thanks to their short-sighted decision in the last election to gut funding for the arts.

Harper has somewhat learned his lesson; the feds have restored much of the funding or increased it in other areas, and Canadian Heritage minister James Moore has found the arts religion. Sadly, though, Campbell must not read the news, as his BC “Liberal” government is poised to table massive cuts of 90 per cent to arts funding in the next provincial funding that would decimate BC’s vibrant arts community.

The cuts actually began last fall, when citing the economic downturn the province moved to slash arts funding by 90 per cent over two years. In the face of public blowback, some of the funding was restored with gaming money, but the service plan going forward still shows 90 per cent cuts so it seems the cuts will be restored in the next budget. The cuts will take core BC provincial arts funding from $19.5 million in 2008/09 all the way down to just $2.25 million in 2010/11, according to the service plan.

While $20 million may not seem like a lot of money in government terms (and BC was already one of the lowest per capita arts spenders in the country), the cuts are devastating for BC arts groups. For them, government funding is a huge multiplier that allows them to leverage private sector donations. These groups also operate on very thin margins as it is; cutting government funding can be a death knell.

What’s more, government arts funding is an investment that pays dividends for the government. A report from the BC government itself showed that for every dollar invested, $1.36 comes back in taxes. And the Conference Board of Canada and City of Vancouver estimate every dollar spend on arts municipally generated $7 to $13 in economic spinoff.

These draconian cuts to arts funding by the Campbell Liberals just don’t make sense. That’s a view shared by the BC Legislature's Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, which, as part of its pre-budget consultations, in November unanimously called on the government to restore arts funding to 2008/09 levels. That committee recommendation was backed by all the Liberals on the committee including the MLA in my home riding in BC, the Comox Valley’s Don McRae.

Heck, even Conservative minister James Moore opposes these cuts:

…Moore made a forceful case that arts funding is an essential element in an economic stimulus program during difficult times. "This has to be a central component if we're going to deal with economic recovery," he said.

"There's a strong fiscally conservative argument for supporting the arts," Moore added, explaining that writers create things of social and economic value out of little more than their own knowledge and imagination. Moore said the cultural sector employs 650,000 people in Canada, twice the number employed in either forestry or agriculture, and he declared that infrastructure without the kind of activity that artists provide is "culturally and economically soulless."

The Harper government, Barrack Obama, Dalton McGuinty in Ontario, Jean Charest in Quebec – they’ve all actually increased arts funding as part of their economic stimulus packages. BC, sadly, appears to be the odd-province out unless Campbell listens to the growing chorus, including much of his caucus, and restores this arts funding in the next budget.

There is still time though to send a message to Campbell (premier@gov.bc.ca) and finance minister Colin Hansen (colin.hansen.mla@leg.bc.ca) that they should change course and restore arts funding in the upcoming provincial budget.

If you want to know how you can get involved, check out the Facebook group: BC Hearts the Arts, and you can also visit Alliance for Arts and Culture, a Vancouver-based organization helping to rally support for overturning the cuts. Also check out Creativity Counts, a blogsite following the advocacy campaign.

Today, BC is welcoming the world for the Olympics. The arts will be a big part of the opening ceremonies tonight, and the cultural olympiad will run parallel to the sporting events. It would be a shame if the Olympic legacy was tarnished by short-sighted decisions.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Will B.C. have a referendum on the HST?

They will if Bill Vander Zalm (yes, that Vander Zalm) gets his way. From Elections BC:

British Columbia’s Chief Electoral Officer, Harry Neufeld, has granted approval in principle on an initiative petition application. The petition will be issued to proponent William Vander Zalm on Tuesday, April 6, 2010. The title of the initiative is: An initiative to end the harmonized sales tax (HST).

“This is the seventh initiative petition application to be approved since the legislation came into force in 1995″, notes Neufeld.

Any registered voter can apply to have a petition issued to gather support for a legislative proposal. After the petition is issued, the proponent will have 90 days to canvass and collect signatures of at least 10% of the registered voters in each of the 85 electoral districts.

Individuals or organizations who intend to oppose the initiative, conduct initiative advertising, or canvass for signatures must be registered with Elections BC. The deadline to apply for registration as an initiative opponent is March 8, 2010.

Registered voters as of April 6, 2010 may sign the petition for the electoral district in which they are registered. Voters may only sign the petition once.

The release notes this is the seventh petition application to be attempted under the legislation since 1995. I don’t recall any of the others, so I’d guess they didn’t take off. Certainly they didn’t succeed. I know the similarly structured MLA recall ability has also regularly failed to come close to success. And that only requires voters in one district.

An HST referendum requires 10 per cent of voters in every riding to sign on, and they have to do it in 90 days. That’s a tough hill to climb. For sure, there is anger in the province over the HST and particularly, I think, around the fact it came just after an election in which Gordon Campbell made no mention of it. But does the Vander Zalm camp have the organizational moxie to pull this off? Perhaps, but I’m skeptical. It has a chance, though. It will be interesting to see if Carole James and the BC NDP sign on.

Here are the specifics of the Vander Zalm initiative:

The purpose of the initiative draft Bill is to declare that the agreement between the federal government and the British Columbia government to establish a harmonized sales tax (HST) is not in effect. The draft Bill would reinstate the 7% provincial sales tax (PST) with the same exemptions as were in effect as of June 30, 2010 and establish the provincial sales tax as the only sales tax in British Columbia for the purposes of raising provincial revenue. The draft Bill proposes that it be effective retroactively to June 30, 2010. The Bill also proposes that the provincial share of HST revenues received between June 30, 2010 and the date of Royal Assent of the Bill that exceeds what would be collected under the PST rules as of June 30, 2010 would be reimbursed to British Columbians on a per capita basis.

What happens if they get the necessary signatures? A quick perusal of the Elections BC guidelines outlines the process:

The Select Standing Committee on Legislative Initiatives must meet within 30 days of receipt of the initiative petition and draft Bill. The Select Standing Committee has 90 days to consider the legislative proposal. The Committee must either table a report recommending introduction of the draft Bill or refer the initiative petition and draft Bill to the Chief Electoral Officer for an initiative vote.

If an initiative vote is required, a vote will be held on September 24, 2011, and on the last Saturday of September in every third year after that date. If more than 50% of the total number of registered voters in the province vote in favour of an initiative, and more than 50% of the total number of registered voters in each of at least 2/3 of the electoral districts in the province vote in favour of an initiative, the Chief Electoral Officer must declare the initiative vote to be successful and the government must introduce the Bill at the earliest practicable opportunity.

After a Bill is introduced into the legislature, the requirements of the Recall and Initiative Act have been satisfied, and any subsequent reading, amendment, or passage of the Bill will proceed as with any other Bill, with no guarantee of passage.

So, by my read, the committee (on which I’d imagine the governing Campbell Liberals would have a majority) could either decide to introduce (and presumably support) the bill, ending the process with its passage (unlikely they’d flip-flop on the HST) or let it go to a referendum in a year-and-a-half. If it did get that far, the latter scenario would seem more likely. Even if the referendum succeeds, in theory in seems the government could still use its majority to kill the legislation, but with a clear verdict in a referendum that scenario seems highly unlikely.

It would be an interesting campaign and, as much as the anti-HST folks would like to think they’re on the side of the angels as anti-tax crusaders, the reality is far different and a referendum could allow some of those nuances to be examined. Still, the pro-HST campaign would be a challenging one to wage.

My question for Vander Zalm though, and it’s not a small one: would he give all that harmonization money ($1.6 billion) the Harper Conservatives gave the province back to the feds? That would leave a huge hole in the province’s budget. What cuts would he make to compensate for it? The fact is, as much as some opponents may wish, I don’t think the HST genie can be stuffed back into the bottle. I suspect the smarter among the opponents know this – they’re just playing the politics.

And while such practical considerations will likely pale next to the populism of this thing, I really fail to see how the HST genie can be gotten back into the bottle. Despite the obvious difficulties in selling it, and the expected difficulties in implementation, not to mention the poor timing of doing this during a downturn, the fact remains that the idea of harmonizing federal and provincial sales taxes is good policy. Tough politics, yes, but good policy. We can take issue with the nuts and bolts, and demand tinkering to reduce negative effects, but the overarching policy is sound. It will save businesses money and create jobs for citizens. It did in Atlantic Canada, and it will in Ontario and B.C.

While I’ll take issue with Campbell conveniently finding religion on this mere days after an election, and with the Conservatives running away from it despite actively encouraging it and writing huge cheques to grease the wheels, it is still the right policy and I think more people should give credit to politicians like Campbell and Dalton McGuinty that pursue the right policy, even if the politics are horrible. Certainly it makes me think less of those that know the policy is right, but oppose it solely for partisan advantage.

I’m doubtful this will ever come to a referendum vote. But I hope this doesn’t mark a move towards the ballot initiative craziness we see in the U.S. political system, a trend that has led in large part to California’s fiscal crisis. It may be easy to rally populist anger against a government decision. But governing isn’t black and white. Governing is a series of interlocking decisions and tough choices. Every decision has rippling consequences. Pull one string and the whole tapestry unravels pretty quickly. Kill the HST, what happens then? What other taxes change to compensate? What does it mean for businesses? What about the federal compensation money? What budget cuts need to be made to give that back?

It’s not as easy as voting on one item in isolation. That’s why I’m not supportive of this sort of initiative campaign. We elect our political leaders to govern on our behalf, using their best judgment to consider all the factors and make the best decisions they can. We trust in their judgment.

And if they don’t live up to that trust, if we disagree with their calls on these tough choices, the place to make our displeasure known is by voting them out on election day.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Knowing when to break a promise

In a political world where the agenda is often driven by the 24-hour news cycle, and where political parties have opposition research, war rooms and rapid response down to an art, politicians are ever more reluctant to go back on a promise, even a bad one. But the world would be so much better off if they did.

I’m thinking of the news today that Quebec Premier Jean Charest fully intends to go ahead with his campaign desperation promise of a tax cut. It was panned by people outside Quebec since Charest plans to fund it with increased money from the Feds intended to go to health and education, and by opponents within Quebec as crass political opportunism. Undeterred, Charest plans to keep his promise:

The income-tax cut will highlight the budget to be tabled today, with Mr. Charest arguing that the Liberal Party is the only one standing up for middle-class Quebeckers.

"As of tomorrow the real question will be: 'Who speaks for the middle class? Who defends the middle class in Quebec? Who will defend the tax cuts?' The Quebec Liberal Party will do it," Mr. Charest shot back as the PQ demanded that the money received from Ottawa in the last federal budget be invested in health and education.

Now, this tax cut just doesn’t make sense economically, and it certainly didn’t seem to help him much last election. So, why is he forging ahead with the cut, rather than making needed investments in health and education? I’d wager because he views the political cost of breaking his promise as higher than the political cost of making the cut and short-changing social investment.

It’s a common enough scenario in politics these days, with a number of examples springing to mind.

Out in BC in 2001 a then opposition leader Gordon Campbell campaigned on a large income tax cut, a la Mike Harris. When he got into office he found the fiscal picture wasn’t near as rosy as the outgoing NDP had led everyone to belief. He could have explained we couldn’t actually afford the tax cut, so sorry. Temporary hit, but points for maning-up and putting policy before politics. But, afraid of getting hit with the broken-promise refrain, he cut income tax anyway, a bit later jacking-up user fees, medical premiums and the sales tax to compensate for the lost revenue. It slowed down the province’s economic recovery but hey, he kept his election promise.

A tale that went the other way would be Dalton McGuinty in Ontario. He campaigned in 2003 on no new taxes, but found the books in worse shape once in office than the outgoing Tories had led people to believe. With a shortfall in the health budget to make up he could have slashed other needed social programs to make up the difference. Bad policy, but he could say he kept his promise. Instead, he opted to introduce a health premium, explaining to Ontarians why it was necessary to go back on his no new taxes promise. And while it was a story at the time, and still a favourite Tory talking-point, I think Ontarians by and large understood the necessity and have moved on, and perhaps even came to respect him a bit for making the right decision rather than the politically expedient one.

And the onus is really on us, as an electorate, to demand the kind of behaviour we want from out political leaders. If we recognize that breaking a promise isn’t necessarily bad then we’ll get politicians that make good, fact-based decisions. If we demonize any broken promise, no matter the circumstances, then we get rigid, conformist politicians that are afraid to make decisions they know are right.

So, I guess the point is it’s hard to blame Charest for wanting to push this tax cut through, but he still needs to man-up and do the right thing. And if he does cancel the cut everyone needs to resist draging-out the tired flip-flop, broken promise card, but rather give Jean kudos for making the right call.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers