Here’s something to consider.
On the same day that Canadian opposition parties declared that they can’t support the government’s budget, thus forcing an election, opposition parties in Portugal, a world away, were making the exact same decision.
In Canada, opposition parties forced an election for a very clear set of reasons. The Liberals, under Michael Ignatieff, spelled out these reasons in the weeks leading up to today’s final nail in the coffin, the vote of non-confidence. The Conservatives, they alleged, were hiding information from Canadians; they were refusing to release to Parliament the true cost of some of their major initiatives (expensive fighter jets and American-style mega-jails). The Liberals alleged that the Conservatives were playing fast and loose with their obligations and responsibilities and that Canadians were fed up. The NDP joined the fray when Jack Layton declared his own non-support for the budget as well. The New Democrats alleged that Stephen Harper’s Conservatives don’t understand or support the needs of ordinary, middle-class Canadians and since they refuse to work to make things right, they must go.
At the end of the day both parties agree that the Conservatives have abused their power. As the campaigning begins to ramp up it’s clear that regardless of the nuances in their platforms and strategies their messages, at the core, will be the same: Stephen Harper has taken this country in a direction that Canadians didn’t want it to go.
Mr. Harper has derailed Canada’s national census agency, pulled us out of and stalled support for international environmental agreements, mucked up our foreign aid to developing countries, controlled his government with sealed lips and an iron fist, and tarnished Canada’s image internationally.
That, in my opinion, is the narrative we will see begin to take shape.
In Portugal, on the very same day, important austerity measures were being voted on in that country’s parliament.
Stricken by debt—comparable to the situation in Ireland—Portuguese President Jose Socrates and his governing party felt they had no choice but to push through painful economic measures to try and bring the country back onto its feet. But in a rare show of unity, the country’s opposition parties united to vote against the proposed reforms. Beaten, President Socrates resigned, handing symbolic power to the country’s Prime Minister and effectively ending his government’s rule. An election must now be called.
Two elections, triggered by the very same mechanism, but with two very different catalysts.
The “Aha!” moment?
Remember, it was Portugal, back in the fall, that Canada lost it’s coveted (and traditionally held) seat on the UN Security Council to. It was Portugal who, despite struggling publicly with its national debt even back then, managed to garner enough support to win out in votes against one of the most buoyant and financially stable G8 nations, Canada. It was Portugal who embarrassed us on the international stage when they took a seat that we assumed was all but ours.
Well, not entirely.
Canada’s opposition parties would argue that it’s because of the Conservative track record that we lost out to the Portuguese. Opposition parties would argue that it’s because of Canada’s lackluster foreign aid portfolio or our lack of economic cooperation or, heck, our country’s seemingly complete lack of interest in international matters. Portugal’s debt crisis was a very public affair, even in October, and those that supported the Portuguese over Canada made an intentional choice. It wasn’t Portugal that embarrassed us, it was us that embarrassed ourselves.
Canada did not get that Security Council seat. Instead, we’ve had a fairly successful economic recovery. We’ve had stability. Our government has done an arguably good job—with the support of its opposition parties—to put Canada back on its feet and well on the way towards continued growth and development and prosperity but it has come at a cost. It’s been at the cost of social programs and institutions (despite citizen protest); government accountability, transparency and trust; and the kind of tarnishing of our international reputation that I’ve already mentioned. In this way, it hasn’t been cheap.
Meanwhile, Portugal got their seat on the UN Security Council but it came at a cost, too. Portugal is a nation struggling under a huge financial burden, a burden with implications for the larger European Union and markets across that continent. There are big red flags and the country is in turmoil, their seat on the prestigious and all-important Security Council hardly seems to matter now.
My point, it’s a lot easier to climb out from underneath some bad Public Relations than it is to climb out from underneath an economy-crippling debt.
At this kind of crossroads I feel like both countries have a choice to make. For the Portuguese this choice is whether to pursue these tough economic measures—to stick with what they’ve got and give it a go—or to try the unknown and see whether or not another political party could draft a better plan for recovery. For us, for Canadians, our choice is equally clear and in the coming weeks and months we’ll have it presented to us, ad nauseum. The choice, I think, is do we continue to support a governing party that managed to lose a traditionally-held, internationally important political post to a debt-burdened, financially unstable country — or do we try something new?
The comparison, at least to me, is poignant. Our two countries are linked by a loss, and a gain. We’re to remain linked, I think, as we go forward. As Canadians, we must decide whether to choose the choice that got us lost in the first place, or something else.
Leave a Reply