In this election, Canadians will have to ask themselves which federal leaders, political parties and candidates offer the most balanced approach to public affairs, according to Preston Manning.
recently Editorial in C2C JournalThe founder of the Reform Party of Canada said that Canadians generally choose balanced measures over extreme measures when solving public problems. He raises the question “is there a more balanced approach” than the approach offered by the Trudeau government to manage issues such as economic recovery, environmental protection and medical reform after COVID-19. Said.
For example, on the issue of economic and environmental balance, Manning needs an environmental assessment of major development projects, but to assess the economic impact of measures such as the introduction of carbon pricing schemes, “economically. “Impact assessment” needs to be done at the same time. Or join the Paris Agreement.
“We have two extremes, from the historical situation in which economic development has progressed with little consideration of environmental impacts to the current situation in which a dedicated focus on environmental protection often progresses with little consideration of the economy. They are at great risk of simply vibrating between them. The consequences and the damage this can cause to Canadians, “Manning wrote.
Manning said the federal and state governments are anticipating the design and implementation of health protection measures for COVID-19, but understand the economic implications of these measures and provide the freedom guaranteed by the Charter. He said he did not provide an assessment aimed at protecting. We provide medical care to people waiting for treatment for diseases not related to COVID-19.
The consequences of these failures have dismantled hundreds of thousands of jobs and businesses, violated the rights and freedoms of numerous charters, and killed more Canadians “waiting for an ever-increasing medical waiting line and a surge in treatment.” Number of people. “
Manning also said that unilateral and repetitive interventions by the federal government in the areas of state or joint jurisdiction caused “serious federal and state tensions and imbalances that threatened national unity.”
Canada bans federal legislation, spending, taxation, or treaties in state jurisdictions or joint jurisdictions, such as natural resources, to improve the balance of federal-state relations. He said that the desired constitutional amendment was necessary. As health or environmental protection.
Manning also proposes that the federal government avoid paying special attention to specific areas of the country, as each region has its own concerns and desires to seek federal approval.
“When the federal government officially recognizes and pays special attention to the unique concerns and aspirations of only one state, such as Quebec, this imbalance not only resents the people of other states, but also other states. It can cause serious harm to the state. It puts a heavy burden on the region, and it puts a heavy burden on federal-state relations, “he writes.
“If the peculiar concerns and aspirations of some Western provinces are consistently and systematically ignored by the federal government and other parts of Canada, this imbalance also threatens the unity of the federal itself.”
“Unified politics” rather than “identity politics”
Manning states that Canadian politics is “increasingly collapsing along the half-dozen fault lines defined and emphasized by so-called identity politics” to carry out the key policy positions introduced by the federal government. Leaders and their political parties are making it more difficult to achieve the national consensus needed for Canada.
According to Manning, state-sponsored identity politics is “a group of voters who provide political support for a political party to seek court is identified by basic personal characteristics such as ethnicity, gender, age, and sexual orientation. It will be recognized if it is.
Political parties in power often promise certain rights or interests to members of an identity group in return for political support, and withdraw those promises when members come to support other parties. increase.
“When criticizing identity politics, of course, for some characteristics, with the consent of the state, various Canadas are alienated, sacrificed, and disadvantaged by the majority of Canadians. Recognizing that there are people is essential, “Manning wrote. He added that religious beliefs are in a recently affected group, in addition to women and children, indigenous peoples and migrants.
“Justice and compassion require that such mistakes be recognized and corrected,” he wrote. “But the challenge is to do so by means and means of facilitating the acceptance of members of such groups at the most basic level: respect, not for them, regardless of their distinctive personal characteristics. And as a person who deserves fair treatment. “
Manning said the danger of state-sponsored identity politics currently being implemented by the Liberal government is to “divide population and voters into minority groups that are distinguished primarily by differences rather than by commonalities.” Said that this would only bring about a “reconciliation”. Achieving a national consensus on conflicts of interest and becoming increasingly difficult to achieve. “
To reach public consensus on key issues, Canada needs to replace identity politics with what Manning calls “unified politics.” This is by advocating policies that strengthen acceptance, freedom, security, opportunity—and Canadian ties.
follow
Andrew is a Toronto-based reporter.