To the editor,
Seeing there was no end in sight to the rain on a recent Saturday afternoon, I decided to challenge myself and openly and honestly listen to what was being proposed and discussed at the recent NDP Convention held in Vancouver. To this end, I failed miserably. Allow me a few brief comments as to why.
From what I could deduce, attendees seemed to be comprised of public sector union types, social engineers, career activists, disconnected students and the like who, to be blunt, know beans about the generation of wealth, but are all experts when it comes to how that wealth should be distributed and who should be entitled to it, each with their hands out demanding funding for whatever their cause might be, apparently clueless when it comes to considering such relevant factors as national debts and deficits, and the oppressive tax system required to support Canada's public employees, and its plethora of taxpayer-funded, I mean government-funded, social programs.
Firstly, what should clearly have been included in the NDP's hard-line stance of "protection of jobs and pensions" are the words "public sector." Many Canadians are aware that a large part of the NDP support base, indeed its very foundation, consists of Canada's public sector unions. Those of us employed outside of the public sector are aware of not only its bloated state, but the inordinate amount of political power that it can, and too often does, exercise, and of how much tax revenue is required to sustain it. Mr. Layton's flat refusal to cut the party's ties to organized labour is thus very telling, and reveals where his allegiance truly lies.
Overly generous salaries, benefits, pension plans, entitlements, employment contracts and what have you currently conferred upon our unions are carried upon the backs of those of us who operate outside of this sphere. Thus, I find it amusing that this is passed off as "good for the country." Indeed, the party's battle-cry of "strengthening pensions" and "helping Canadian families" is cause for concern; it only serves to rob people of that which they not only could, but should, be doing for themselves.
It was not surprising that the escalating costs of education was also an issue. I agree fully that further (post-secondary) education is becoming almost out of reach for many, and I do not envy those who face onerous levels of accumulated student debt. (I would like to state here, however, that furthering one's education is an individual choice; many have entered the workforce without further education and have nonetheless managed and even become very successful). What struck me was the outright indignation expressed by those who felt that education was their absolute right and entitlement, and should be provided (by the state, of course) at no cost whatsoever. (Only in NDP-Land are services perpetually offered at no charge.) It is unfortunate that we have somehow come to view not only post-secondary education, but in fact all education, as our God-given right, instead of viewing it as the privilege that it is.
Just a quick note on the never-ending complaints of the inadequacy of health care funding. Recently, Ontario, for example, announced that health care spending alone could exceed 50 per cent of its budget. Have we lost all sense here? One can quickly figure out that such disproportionate spending on one category will inevitably result in deficiencies in other areas. The concept of someone actually having to take out his wallet and pay even a nominal fee for medical consultation? Absolute heresy. Again, only in an NDP Wonderland should everybody get everything they want all of the time, paid for, of course, by "someone else."
With its perpetual criticisms of corporate tax rates and proposed cuts, the NDP just can't seem to figure out that it is private business and enterprise which creates wealth in a country, and that, in simplest terms, that wealth is what serves as the bedrock for our national standard of living. Bigger, more intrusive (and consequently more expensive) government, with massive public expenditure, is not the answer. The debacles currently playing themselves out in Greece, Spain, and France, for example, with massive public sectors and deplorable unemployment rates, not to mention at the mercy of the international lending community, are impossible to misinterpret.
On a much smaller scale, the party's goofy idea that credit companies should be significantly restricted on what they can charge for interest rates on unpaid balances is similarly founded on the "government will solve your problems for you" approach. So then, let's step in to protect those who are financially irresponsible, shall we? Apparently, it's the credit companies and banks that are the bad guys here, rather than households that rack up unmanageable levels of debt by spending money that they haven't got.
Considering the increasing disparity between the proverbial "haves" and "have-nots" in this country, and increasing strain on households to make ends meet, it did not surprise me to have witnessed the marked surge in the NDP's popularity, as evidenced by the recent federal election, and I strongly suspect this trend to continue. Moreover, I am particularly concerned by how much left-wing economic policy seems to have resonated with our youth, as today's youth will become tomorrow's leaders.
It seems that there is an increasing polarization of the electorate in this country, between those who value and defend the principles of freedom, individual responsibility and self-reliance, and those who seem to staunchly defend that the world somehow owes them a living, and that the government exists to solve their problems. One of the benefits of living in Canada is that we are free to pursue that which we believe will improve the quality of our own lives. That used to mean working hard to improve your own circumstances, and not expecting others, or governments, to provide for you or come to your rescue. It's been said that what once existed as a safety net has become a safety-hammock. And who's paying for all of this?
I tried to follow the convention. Really, I did.
Don Rachinski, St. Vincent
