How we really beat the deficit: or, revisionism revisited

Andrew Coyne on why spending cuts played a bigger role than economic growth


Do nothing, say nothing politics rule Ottawa

Once, says Andrew Coyne, our politics was about big ideas and sharp differences. Not anymore.


And now, to antagonize any readers still speaking to me after this week’s Blackberry Roundtable . . .

I actually agree with the government’s decision to appeal the Teitelbaum ruling, which found “a reasonable apprehension of bias” on the part of Justice John Gomery — although it really should have happened immediately following the ruling, not three months later  — and definitely not in the middle of an election campaign. I said so at the time — to a card-carrying Conservative, no less — the very day the ruling came out. “You have to appeal this thing” were my exact words, I believe. There may even have been a thumping of the table for emphasis.


All Soap, No Box

There is probably a connection between the utter fatuousness of the campaign so far and the absence of any substantial policy platforms from any of the parties. Which invites the question: where are the platforms? After all, Jean Chretien with the Red Book, and Mike Harris with the Common Sense Revolution, both swept to power with convincing majority governments, buoyed (one presumes) in part by a clear and detailed agenda. In Chretien’s case it was policy-based, Harris was more ideological, but in both cases voters were given a clear statement of intent from the party at the start of the campaign.


He Haunts Them Still

Elections Canada released its quarterly fundraising figures today, and it is pretty grim for the Libs. Following the established pattern, the Tories raised about $3.5 million from almost 34 000 donors, while the Liberals raised just over $900k from 9500 (!!!) donors. In short, the Liberals have still not figured out how to raise money since Jean Chretien introduced the “dumb as a bag of hammers” financing reforms.