Tag Archives: economy

Learn the name Umair Haque

“The AIG bailout was the most pernicious kind of cronyism – not even crony capitalism, but crony socialism. When we zoom out, that’s exactly what the curiously lopsided payoffs hedge funds get are. ..

What was, with the AIG bailout, a mere crack in the economic firmament is now a gaping fissure. The result of the financial coup d’etat is a Great Divergence: we we have two economies running in parallel: capitalism for the poor, and socialism for the rich. The former essentially subsidizes the latter endlessly and perpetually.”

Bad news

I’m hearing the same message from many friends: it’s awful out there. With the economy going from bad to worse, we’re all focused on keeping our heads down and doing our jobs. Some of us have taken on more than one title at the same company in the hopes that it will make us less disposable. For the first time members of my generation know what it’s like to have their job security threatened en masse. We know that if we don’t do our jobs, someone else gladly will.

My current business, newspapers, is no exception. In the United States, Tribune Co. (owner of the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Baltimore Sun, and other daily newspapers) has filed for bankruptcy and the New York Times looked to mortgage their building to generate funds. Here in Canada, Sun Media cut 600 jobs in December, and in back-to-back announcements this month the Globe and Mail eliminated 90 positions and The Chronicle Herald cut 24 reporters, or almost a full quarter of their newsroom. Meanwhile Canwest, which owns daily local papers across the country as well as the National Post, has seen their stock plummet to less than a dollar a share and is desperately attempting to sell assets while having their borrowing ability curtailed. In other words, the newspaper business is in serious trouble.

John Honderich, former publisher of The Toronto Star, recently argued in said publication that the decline of newspapers “should concern us all:”

For me, it relates directly to the very quality of our democracy. In order for all of us to live meaningfully and participate in our community, we must be appropriately informed.

In this regard, the quality of public debate, if not the very quality of life in any community, is a direct function of the quality of media that serve it. Indeed, the functioning of a healthy democracy is predicated on a well-informed populace.

By that measure we must deem the news media in recent years to be a complete failure.

The “quality of public debate” has not been lower in living memory. Politicians fuel their campaigns entirety on spin, void of substance, never fearing that anyone will call them on it. Once elected, even Parliamentarians in the highest offices can be counted on to sink to the lowest levels of discourse. Members of the government recently went so far as to describe actions of the opposition as “treason” and a “coup d’état” when they were, in fact, operating well within the rules of our Parliamentary democracy.

Enter the “well-informed populace,” which, not knowing any better, believed the government’s blatant lies. A survey conducted by Ipsos Reid for the Dominion Institute shortly after the coalition debacle revealed that the majority of Canadians lack an understanding of some of the most basic elements of how their democracy functions.

And what of that “healthy, functioning” democracy? Far better than the countries that have none to be sure, but a far cry from where it should be too. We remain one of the last parliamentary democracies on Earth to use an antiquated voting system that delivers results we did not ask for. This, despite the fact that when citizens have studied the issue, they have chosen change. Of those entrenched institutions standing in the way of democratically-driven voting reform, few have been as staunch as newspapers (including Honderich’s).

By these measures, the news media is not doing its job, and that should indeed concern us all. It should also concern the media, because if you don’t do your job, someone else gladly will. And right now, even a comedian from Newfoundland with a standard definition TV and a one dollar pointer is giving you a run for your money.

Confidence

I suspect that in the eyes of the general public, our leaders are suffering from a “boy who cried wolf” syndrome when it comes to threats of an imminent election. While those of us who are directly involved in party politics have been in perpetual election mode for the last two years, those trying to get on with their daily lives have been perpetually tuned out. (While canvassing tonight, one man told me, “I don’t vote for the bastards, it only encourages them.” Sure enough, he was not on our list of registered voters.) Constant hyper partisanship (which has always existed in some form, but, it seems to me, used to be less mean and destructive, and was at least confined to election campaigns) and an enhanced state of all that’s bad about “politics as usual” have left many people not only not knowing what’s going on in Ottawa, but not caring either.

And yet, we’re once again facing the possibility of a general election triggered by a vote of non-confidence in the government. And while that word—confidence—gets thrown around a lot, it has a real, weighty meaning that we should be cognizant of. While most political parties seem to decide whether or not to force an election based on if it is of political benefit to them, it’s much too important for that kind of cynicism. The real, important, honest question is: should the House have confidence in the government of Stephen Harper?

I should start be declaring that I have a strong personal interest in there not being a general election right now. We’ve already invested in and planned for a by-election. If the government falls before March 17th, then we have to file a return for an election that never happened and then re-register (100 more signatures, another $1000 deposit, a new bank account, etc) for the general election. It would also mean that what is already possibly the longest election campaign in the history of our country would be made even longer, disrupting the personal and professional lives of myself and all of my campaign volunteers.

But this is obviously bigger and more important than me. So while Harper plays games (one of his confidence motions appears to be at odds with a little thing called the constitution) and the other parties posture (the NDP just sent out a testosterone-charged email that amounts to Jack Layton challenging Stephen Harper to a fist fight) or try to make a decision based on what will get them the most votes (an unfortunately frequent preoccupation of Liberal bloggers), we should seriously consider if we can have any confidence in this government.

Let us therefore review this government’s two years in office. They were first elected primarily on issues of accountability and transparency. On both counts, their record is abysmal. For example, The Toronto Sun’s Greg Weston has illustrated how the Conservative “Accountability Act” could actually prevent another sponsorship scandal from being discovered. Speaking of which, Judge Gomery recently complained that Stephen Harper has “abandoned any commitment he once had to transparent government in favour of centralizing power in his own hands” and has “ignored [the Gomery Report's] key recommendations.” Last week, scientists who work for Environment Canada were “muzzled,” told not to speak the truth to the media lest John Baird be greeted with any “surprises” when he reads his morning paper. A news report explains that this action was taken because “Environment Canada has been one of most open and accessible departments in the federal government,” and that in the government’s determination, that represents “a problem that needs to be remedied.” The list of unbelievable attacks on good government goes on and on (and on).

Going down a list of other issues produces similar conclusions. On the environment, this government has embarrassed us on the international stage, turning opportunities for diplomacy and leadership into wanton displays of childish partisanship and sabotage. They played a key role in preventing as much progress as possible from taking place in Bali and, domestically, have moved us backwards by creating ineffective “policy chaos,” which has also begun to damage our economy. On the topic of the economy, we have a Minister of Finance who appears to not understand basic finance, who tabled a budget that increased our vulnerability to the unfolding economic downturn, and pushed the wrong tax cuts (GST rather than income) at the worst time. When it comes to foreign policy, this government has demonstrated it is either intentionally misleading or incompetent. With regards to social justice, this government tried to rollback human rights by outlawing equal marriage and abandoning the goal of women’s equality.

Today Canada sits on the cusp of great opportunity, created by great challenges. We can take an international leadership position on combating climate change. We can diversify and strengthen our economy. We can resuscitate an independent foreign policy that makes us proud of our role in the world. We can rebuild our cities’ crumbling infrastructure and create the world-class communities we know are possible.

But can we do that with Stephen Harper as prime minister? Do I have confidence in this government? Should Parliament? Should Canadians? Absolutely not.

Democracy is not a game. It is both a gift and a responsibility. And it’s time to exercise it.

Shell Of An Economy

From Rick Salutin, in a thought-provoking column titled A nation consumed by retail:

What will an all-retail economy look like, when that day arrives? My stretch of College Street in Toronto is pretty much restaurants and cafés, rarely broken by even a futon store or 7-Eleven. Can a society survive by serving each other lattes? People rise in the morning, go to their posts and start feeding the customers. But everyone does it, so they’re all running in and out, serving and being served. I have to finish this croissant so I can rush back and make you a falafel. I extend the metaphor to those who serve information or entertainment. That’s the shell of an economy left when you produce almost nothing for basic need. Not to mention the small matter of dignity involved in making things you need and use each day.