horn

Saturday June 26, 1999

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday June 26, 1999

A Black day for our society

My morning paper, whose past and present principal proprietor was and is Lord Thomson of Fleet, has come to the aid of Lord-in-waiting Conrad Black whose patron, the leader of the British Tory party, has nominated him to membership in the British House of Lords. Black is, among other things, also a Canadian citizen and as such would need special dispensation from the Canadian governmentto waive a longstanding Canadian codicil which prevents its citizens accepting foreign titles.

Conrad Black Cartoon Gallery

This proves an inconvenience to Black who enjoys duel citizenship, Canadian and British, who lives in Great Britain and publishes newspapers here, there, and elsewhere, and has been awarded the Order of Canada, and been made a Privy Councillor by Brian Mulroney. The inconvenience is a trifling one; all Black need do to become a British Lord is resign his Canadian citizenship. Or he could also decl ine the honour of a Lordship and seek to be knighted, and become Sir Conrad.

It is easier to enter the House of Lords than to become a knight. Some are born to the Lords, others arrive there as failed or defeated politicians, or as retirees; like our own upper chamber, the senate, it is as much a place for the unexceptional as for the opposite. Still – an important difference – senators have to show up or risk penalty and censure; not all the Lords hope, or are expected, to sit.

In Britain, with its rigid class structure, being a lord or a lady provides added cashet, the title worn like a bauble, suggesting importance, breeding, wealth, and exclusivity. The appointments are high patronage; Lloyd George, whose understanding of the British class system was acute, sold peerages as one might trade in pork-bellies, transactions designed to pack the House of Lords for the purp ose of curbing its powers. But yet, the House of Lords remains a surviving bastion of one of the many remarkable, uniquely British creations, which is a society arbitrarily divided by class, defined as much by title as much by estate, and maintained by long-prevailing habit of deference and snobbery.

Canada was vulnerable to the same artificiality and pretension; we were, after all, first a British colony, then Dominion, and after that, part of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Until Mackenzie King, nearly all our prime ministers were knighted; the British monarch was our monarch (and still is), and not until Vincent Massey was there a Canadian Governor General at Rideau Hall. We have King to thank for the development of our own egalitarian society and for its preference for meritocracy and its contempt of aristocracy. As part of our determination not to become a forelock-tugging, bowing, scraping, watery imitation of the real British thing, we worked on our own model which maintained the Crown, but we finally sang our own anthem and flew our own flag.

It was also our determination not to consent to patronage bestowed by a foreign state that would enable a Canadian to sit and vote in the legislative chamber of that state.

My morning paper argues that this inhibition, which now provokes Conrad Black, is a relic of our past colonial mentality – “our pyschic inferiority complex.” But in this new, expanded, corporate one-world there lurk – as Lloyd George so quickly discovered almost a century ago – dozens of lusting moguls who would cheerfully support or underwrite any foreign party or power for the prize of a title for themselves (and another for the little woman). One must ask, in this small but pertinent matter, whose “inferiority complex” are we really discussing?

My morning paper reports that Black “has long cherished the idea of . . . being made a British peer.” If he has, he can easily cherish the reality, accept the gift of the British Tory party, and take his seat. But why should Canadians, or their government, allow for an exception in his case, and thus cheapen and degrade our own honours and hard-earned national values, and invite others to follow?

In the end, Toronto and Ottawa would be overrun by Canadian lords and ladies, the tables of the rich and famous would resemble those of baronial halls of old, surrounded by limousines and outriders, while peasants and social journalists stand beyond the gates to gape in awe and wonder at the new society wrought by Lord Black, in his finest hour.

The Prime Minister is being upbraided by the National Post, and the Globe and Mail, for daring to delay accommodating Mr. Black. I hope he will not cave in simply to get a better press. At the moment, Jean Chretien has more supporters among the people of Canada than the combined circulation of all the papers of all the lords of the Canadian press. – Dalton Camp (Toronto Star, 6/23/1999, A21) 

Wednesday January 17, 1999

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday January 17, 1999

Mr. Martin plays it safe

Paul Martin’s second straight balanced budget won’t thrill anyone, and that’s probably a good thing.

Once again, the finance minister and Liberal-leader-in-waiting has proven himsel f the consummate juggler by doing something for nearly everyone and not taking any risks. He and his government will be roundly criticized in days to come, but that’s to be expected. Let’s face it, government budgets are as much about spin and strategy as they are about substance. There is so much flexibility and interpretation in revenue and spending figures, the auditor general won’t even sign off on the budget. Federal finance ministers and their provincial counterparts routinely under- and
over-estimate to suit their political purposes, and Martin is no exception.

None of this is to suggest the budget isn’t important — it is. It speaks volumes about the Liberal strategy for governing. Based on what we saw from Martin yesterday, the Liberals are opting for the strategic status quo: Ultra-cautious management and very specifically-targeted new program spending.

Martin recognizes the need for tax cuts, health care reinvestment, research funding and support for the cash-strapped military, but he also recognizes that the single biggest threat to stability and prosperity is the national debt. When Martin took over as finance minister, 36 cents of every tax dollar went to pay interest on the public debt. Today, that figure has dropped to 27 cents. That’s significant progress, attributable to government spending restraint, a vibrant economy and low interest rates. However, we’re still spending more than a quarter of all public revenue to service debt. That’s about $41 billion per year, more than the feds spend on old age pensions, health care and unemployment benefits combined. This massive load will only get heavier with the passage of time, our aging population and increased demand on social services. So Martin is quite right to resist calls for drastic, across the board tax cuts and opt instead to maintain debt reduction as a priority.

He’s also right to recognize the increasing national anxiety about deteriorating health care. But here, Martin is less forthright with Canadians. Yes, the budget amounts to a considerable transfer payment increase that will go toward bolstering health care, provided provincial premiers keep their commitment made during social union negotiations. But as Martin admitted, this investment only restores health care funding to mid-’90s levels. It will relieve some pressure, but is nowhere near enough to completely restore levels of care. More importantly, this budget does nothing to accommodate the future. In the next decade, our rapidly aging population will place increasing demands on health care, and in the absence of less expensive, more effective forms of community-based care, this problem will not go away.

Martin’s critics will rail over the modest tax cuts in this budget. Their arguments have some merit. We are among the most taxed people in the developed world, a sad fact which makes our economy less competitive and Canadian families less prosperous. Could Martin have done more? Yes. Should he have done more, given other priorities like health care, debt reduction and global economic uncertainty caused by Asian and South American flu? No. There is modest tax relief in this budget, and there will be considerably more in next year’s. That’s an acceptable compromise.

We give mixed reviews to other initiatives unveiled in the budget. We welcome renewed investment in our military, but note the amount allocated is far less than what is needed to give our soldiers a decent living wage. Similarly, increases in research spending are welcome, but still leave Canadian researchers far behind their counterparts elsewhere. We wish Martin had announced spending cuts in some areas, like regional development, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and business subsidies. These are all areas better dealt with by the private sector, leaving Ottawa to direct the money saved to other more essential areas.

In the days to come, we’ll look in more detail at some of the programs announced in the budget. For now, we’ll retire to study Martin’s latest opus, and fervently hope that next time Canadians are subjected to a budget speech, it’s half the length of this one. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial, A10, 2/17/1999)