Canada from C to C to C.

The longest Canadian election campaign is over. The Canadian electorate chose to elect a Liberal government after ten years of Harper’s Conservative rule. There is no doubt that Trudeau played a masterful hand and won. While many will analyze the results and arrive at different conclusions, in my view there are three particulars that can explain the result and give us a look into the future. They are change, chaos, and possible catastrophe.

Change

So Canada voted for change; but from what?  Lower taxes, less government spending and the preservation of Canadian values? For many younger Canadians it was the environment. But the facts have been ignored in every case. Lower taxes gave Canadians the choice of spending their money as they saw fit. Government programs are not the answer to many of our problems we need different ways of providing services. As for the environment, many ignore that the Oil Sands account for 8.5% of Canada’s GHG and 0.12% of annual global emissions. Signing a treaty does not automatically mean that implementing it is easy. Promising change is easy; implementing it is not and more notably based on many promises made by the Liberals. It will costs a lot and creates deficits – the only promise that will be kept. Canadians will see the disappearance of income splitting and the reduction of the TFSA annual contribution limit among many other policies. In fact the middle class will see very few real gains.

So now that we have change was the election really about policies or was it about Harper? His policies were sound but his character had been damaged by the media for so long that many Canadians viewed the election as a change in leadership style rather than the direction of the country. In the campaign he rarely connected with the people, and he never showed passion in support of his record...

Chaos

As from October 20^th 2015, Canada will have to live with a new government for at least another four years. The biggest problem will be to fulfill all the promises. Can Canada afford the costs of the promises? Or shall we be witnessing a slew of government programs that pick winners and losers. The biggest promise will be to The First Nations. Any additional spending without clear transparency and accountability will bear no fruit.

With a global economy in stagnation and the world’s security under attack virtually every day, it is not too far fetch to see chaos on the horizon. The first international foray for the new government will be the Climate Conference in Paris. How will any agreement affect Canadians now that we do not have a PM who would defend Canada’s oil industry? If we accept the proposed agenda without conditions, Canadians will see a gradual increase in the costs of goods and taxes and further restrictions on Alberta’s economy.

Catastrophe

The Middle East is on fire. How will this government react to threats from terrorism? Aligning Canada with Obama’s foreign policies will create more problems than solutions. Remember that Obama will be gone in just over a year. Furthermore going back to collaborating with a dysfunctional United Nations, especially on the refugee problem, without a clear strategy may result in an open door policy that may bring sleeper cells to our shores? These are not just issues based on paranoia; they are real considerations that this government will have to consider. For those who accuse many conservatives of intolerance, they confuse compassion with a lack of assimilation in our immigration policies. As an immigrant I appreciate the values of a Canadian society but I am not blind to the threat coming from terrorism based in a sick ideology that demands vigilance. Lest we forget what has already happened in the past.

While I am disappointed in the final results of the elections, I accept the will of the people. Conservatives must look at the future with optimism. Harper created the foundation for conservative policies. We have just lost the battle but the final days are a long way off.

The party must choose a new leader; one who is more approachable, one that can match the so-called charismatic personality of Justin Trudeau. A younger leader, possibly a woman, would be a great choice to bring the Conservative party of Canada in the 21^st century. The new leadership must attract ‘millennials’ by making sure that the message is not lost on the internet garble but through direct communication of conservative principles.Most importantly the Conservative party must compromise on process and procedures, but never compromise on principles. 

During the next four years elected Conservative members should embrace this quote by Napoleon Bonaparte: “You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war.”

The lesser of three evils.

The differences between the three parties are clear, but too often ignored by the media. How we vote is going to affect us for a long time. No matter how one views the Harper government, there is a very easy decision to make on October 19^th.

On the economy, Harper has been able to keep Canada in good shape, despite the small hiccup caused by the fall in oil prices. The short-lived recession is already in recovery; Canada has a surplus. The Liberals want to create budget deficits and tax small businesses under the guise of investments thus increasing spending by $15B and taxes by $5B. The NDP plans to increase spending by $10B and taxes by$10 annually. Both parties will also revise the tax credits implemented by the Conservatives, including reduction of the TFSA annual contribution by the NDP and revision of all Child Care benefits by the Liberals. Not much difference, but same agenda – tax and spend.

While the refugee crisis is impacting Europe, the NDP and Liberals are planning to increase the number of refugees that Canada may accept in the future. They ignore the fact that we are in a state of war with terrorists. Trudeau believes that terrorists should be treated the same way as ordinary criminals and that they should keep their Canadian citizenship: so does Mulcair. Both of them do not understand the problems that Obama has created and would rather pass the responsibility of foreign policy to the United Nations rather than the duly elected government of Canada. The former ‘honest broker’ Canadian position is no longer viable since there is nobody to broker with in a war conducted by terrorists rather than an identifiable nation.

While these two issues are at the top of the electorate’s mind, in a strategy to divert the attention from their failed proposed policies the Liberals and NDP have tried to make wedge issues as part of the debates. The debate about the Niqab is a red-herring; I would listen to Malala, the Nobel Prize winner who rejects its use, rather than listen to Trudeau.

As for the climate change debate, The Government of Canada has proposed a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 30% below 2005 levels by 2030. The NDP’s  proposal to impose a cap-and-trade policy will do nothing to cut emissions; China will continue to spew CO2 in the atmosphere, and it will only be a tax by another name, as all related costs will go up.

Whether you like or dislike Harper because he seems to be too ‘wooden’ in appearance or as the media would have you believe too controlling; the alternative is less appealing. Do you want a leader with ‘nice hair’ and a vacuous approach to foreign policy? Or a closet communist who wants to take us back to the days of Bob Rea’s economic management?

A minority government is not the answer either. Our economy, security and values are at stake. Forget strategic voting, just look at Alberta.

 Take a deep breath, pinch your nose and vote for the status quo. The alternative is too scary.

The New Crisis: Refugees, Migrants or Invasion?

Similar to the picture of the Vietnamese girl burned by napalm, the picture of the drowned three year old Syrian has brought to light the plight of thousands of refugees. However there stops the similarity. Compassion is a great human trait, but before we jump to conclusions many future consequences should not be ignored.

Amidst the call for accepting refugees from all quarters, there seems to be a complete ignorance or refusal to look at the root of the current problem. The United Nations and other organizations usually sit in their ivory towers and proclaim new solutions to problems very often created by their philosophies and policies. In the current situation they ignore the difference between refugees and migrants.

Where are the refugees from? Mainly from war torn Syria and other Middle East countries ravaged by internal conflict and terrorists run amok. Syrians have been displaced by their own leader and now are also under attack from ISIL. Afghans pushed from their country join Syrian refugees in Turkey and then move to Greece and other European countries in search of refuge.

Further west we have two waves of migrants. The first are from Africa, displaced by famine and continuous economic and war torn strife they make their way to Spain via Morocco. The second wave is from war torn Libya who battle dangerous waters to go to Italy. Most of these migrants pay enormous sums to callous operatives who on many occasions dump them in the Mediterranean without any water or food to be rescued by European authorities, who take responsibility for their rescue.

While much of this crisis is due to economic strife, the major problem rest with Western countries that have been unable to stop the rise of despots and terrorism. In my view the greatest culprit is Obama who in Syria set a ‘red line’ which turned pink and subsequently disappeared. His foreign policies around the world have been an abject failure His latest deal with Iran is going to make Iran a nuclear power that supports the dictator Assad in Syria. His refusal to recognize the true ideology of terrorists is putting many non-Muslims in danger all over the world.

European countries have fared no better. In their search for economic growth they have refused to face the terrorism threat both internally and externally. Their continued policies based on political correctness are causing many problems that will haunt them in the near future.

Germany, Austria and Italy bound by a guilt complex stemming from their behaviour in the Second World War are accepting this crisis without long term thinking. It is very noble and compassionate to accept and help refugees. However in a weak economy when there are very few jobs created, the citizens of these countries cannot find jobs and yet these countries will accept hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees, not over a number of years but immediately.

The European Union’s migration policies which allows for freedom of movement will further acerbate the crisis. Smaller nations and economically stable England will be put under pressure to accept refugees who have been allowed on European soil. I hope I am wrong, because I can foresee a backlash of enormous proportion fuelled by nationalism and perhaps the rise of another form of Nazism.

As for Canada, polls show that a majority want the Harper government to take more refugees. Those who support the policy cite the compassionate response of the European countries. Too often in a political charged environment, the media ignores to explain the facts. Canada has already promised to take refugees, but the government wants to ensure that they are legitimate. While the Western countries are doing their utmost to help, rich Middle East countries have done very little to help their own.

As for trying to compare this crisis with the migration of Vietnamese to Canada we should recognize the different circumstances. The South Vietnamese were our allies and fought on our side. Agree or disagree with the purposes of the war, those who fought on our side could not be left behind. In the long run many of these refugees have made enormous contributions to the country.

 On the other hand many of the current refugees and migrants in the current crisis come from countries that culturally have supported the extinction of Israel and the collapse of Western culture. Caution is warranted as we may be accepting potential terrorists in our midst. If they are not, they may well become home grown terrorists when the economy cannot support them and they cannot find the riches that they thought would be available to them in the West.

Compassion is great and noble. We should help those in need. However we need others to help and cannot take the burden upon ourselves for political reasons and ignore the consequences that may arise in the future. This new crisis demands well thought out solutions because migrants are not the same as refugees. Or could we be flirting with an invasion?

The Media is the Message

On the marathon road to October 19^th, it seems that the important issues of the upcoming federal elections are not being discussed in depth. The public keeps being bombarded with reports of the Duffy trial. While it is important to know what really happened with the $90,000 from Nigel Wright, more importantly we should be looking at the real issues that matter to ordinary Canadians. I may sound as an apologist for the Conservatives, but we should look at electoral consequences.

First and foremost since the media likes to report on the presumed Duffy scandal, lets us put this in its proper context. The media ignores the fact that this saga stems from the fact that un-elected senators abused their powers and used taxpayers’ money as their own. Senators of all political stripes participated in this abuse. Duffy’s case is in the spotlight because the former PMO Chief used his own money to pay for Duffy’s transgressions. Ignored is that Duffy is charged with 31 counts of possible fraud. Should the public be concerned about what the Prime Minister knew or should have known? Of course they should. Did the PM handle the situation appropriately? Maybe not, however in my view the real problem lies with the behavior of Senators not the PM.

What we should be looking at are more important issues of security and the state of the economy. Some would argue that the Conservative under Harper have tried to control the security issue with more draconian and autocratic legislation. Critics are right to a certain point, especially where oversight of agencies is concerned. I for one believe that any activities of law enforcement agencies should be undertaken by civilians and not politicians. Remember that if we are not secured there will be no need for social safety nets because we may not be alive given the increasing terrorist threats.

As for the economy, the media has completely ignored how to report the recent global downturn in context to the Canadian economy. At first they reported a recession, which technically is not happening. If it did it would be a mild one. The real reasons for a downturn are the global collapse of oil prices, the real Chinese recession and the sluggish American economy. Do we report on the surplus? What is not being said is that Canadian manufacturing is improving partly because of a lower dollar.

However the media is not analyzing the other parties’ platforms. All their promises are based on additional spending. The NDP wants to have more post office union workers in an industry that is fast disappearing due to technology. He also proposes a child care policy similar to that of Quebec – a policy that is costing more than what was projected. While the Trudeau Liberals keep telling us that he wants to spend to make the middle class better, and will cut income-splitting, the media fails to say that the Canadian middle class has done better than the neighbors in the South. Trudeau now wants to mirror the failed policies of McGuinty’s Ontario which has led the province to have debt levels twice as large as California.

There is no doubt that Harper made some mistakes regarding the Senate scandal. I believe that he may have known of the $90,000 to Duffy, but how important is that to Canadians? What is the real issue is that Senators of all stripes have abused taxpayers’ money.. As the courts adjourn until November, Mr.  Harper should say:” Mea culpa, Mea maxima culpa, I made a mistake to believe Duffy, Brazeau and Wallin were conservatives. I should have known that there is no such thing but Liberals in the media. 

The mainstream media does not and will not support Harper ever. He does not fit into their Liberal mold. The media will portray all the negatives, which he may have a few, but rarely tell the story that Canada was better off under the Conservatives after the great recession, and we are still better off despite the assault on the Oil Sands led by the left in this country and around the world. Most leftist promises will have to be supported by revenues from commodities that they despise.

The latest message is that Mulcair is more conservative than we believe. In other words he is not a socialist and his policies are more   acceptable. This is how the media will shape the elections. As for the ‘control freak ‘moniker, do we want a leader who is not in control? Pierre Trudeau was a control freak but he was a Liberal therefore acceptable.

In a world of #uninformed, #vacuous and # entitled , with today’s technology the news, and surveys can be manipulated and pundits helped by the media will do it .Report the negatives and ignore the positives.

“ The medium is the message”, is no truer today that when McLuhan said it.

Harper’s Economy

As I watched the news in recent weeks, I cannot fathom the glee on the faces of media anchors as they report a possible Canadian recession( a mild one at that). They obviously wish for the demise of the Harper government, but rarely provide explanations as to the real reasons for the economic slowdown. An uninformed Canadian electorate should really think hard before considering a change to the NDP or Liberal. Since the media is not being forthright, I will attempt to explain the real reasons behind the economic slowdown.

First, we have a collapse of the oil market as Arab producing countries strategically produce more and flood the market with cheaper oil. Their strategy is to make North American oil more expensive to extract and thus control the market. Since Canada, is a major producer we take a hit and the dollar loses value. As a result we pay more for imports, but in the long run may benefit for increase exports as our goods become cheaper. Furthermore, we may continue to see oil prices fall as Iran, thanks to Obama, will flood the market with more oil as all economic sanctions are removed.

Second, the U.S continues to see the slowest economic recovery in decades. Obama’s policies have done nothing to improve the economy. Instead unemployment although showing some improvements continues to be higher than expected. GDP is mired at around 2% -3.0% not enough to generate demand for goods and services, which could be provided by Canada. Slow growth around the world is also affecting the Chinese economy as its biggest customer Europe remains in economic doldrums..

Despite the fact that some banks have declared that Canada is bordering a ‘recession, there does not seem to be any real evidence  as stated by the  C. D. Howe Institute’s Business Cycle Council The council defines a recession as a pronounced, pervasive and persistent decline in aggregate economic activity. The fact is that Canada’s economy may have dipped but is not on the verge of a recession. This is pure politicking by Harper’s opponents who have seen an opening for their electoral campaign.

During the past years of the ‘long recession’ Canada has fared better than most of the G7 countries. We have been lucky that the Prime Minister is an economist and not an ideologue lawyer like Mulcair, or a neophyte politician like Justin Trudeau. The NDP and Liberals would love to see Canada in a recessionary state, so has to implement more Keynesian economic policies in order to  tax and spend.

Canadians should be very careful in accepting what the media portrays without real evidence. Talk of a ‘recession’ can quickly become a self-fulfilling prophecy, which both Trudeau and Mulcair will promote as Harper’s economic blunder. Supporting the NDP and/or Liberals at the next election may in fact take Canada into a real economic downturn which may continue for years to come.

 Beware of socialists bearing gifts.