A sunny disposition

I understand the appeal of Justin Trudeau. I saw it in the Maclean’s debate—the selfassuredness, the optimism and the vitality— and in every debate since.

For those hoping for more from our nation’s leader, Trudeau cuts a dashing and hopeful figure against his dour and worried opponents. We want to be hopeful and optimistic. We don’t want to be fearful and timid. I get that.

Brian Flack and others have compiled a thorough and persuasive list of reasons why we should give our vote to someone other than Stephen Harper in this election. They have done a less effective job, in my view, of explaining why Justin Trudeau should get it.

In these last few days before we vote—let us take a moment to consider what it is we are voting for.

First, I think we can safely set aside Trudeau’s more awkward moments, like when he told an Asian community audience in 2013 that he admired China’s dictatorship for its ability to turn its economy around on a dime. I doubt that Trudeau aspires to a communist dictatorship for Canada, so I think we dismiss his tendency toward the glib as merely the impetuousness of youth.

But then we surely must look at the platform he has built to run on. He wants to borrow heavily from our children to fund infrastructure renewal—roads, bridges, water treatment plants, schools and renewable energy. One doesn’t have to venture too far from home to find the problems Trudeau wants to fix.

The question is, however, whether it’s appropriate to mortgage our children’s future to repair the things our generation and previous generations neglected? There are times when it makes sense to borrow to invest in this type of renewal. It is not, I would suggest, when the nation’s current gross debt (Canada, its provinces and municipalities) is equal to about 66 per cent of our annual economic output (or gross domestic product). The cost of borrowing has been cheap for a decade. Will interest rates remain anchored at zero for another decade as we pile on more debt? Will our economy remain buoyant enough to service this debt?

Trudeau’s Liberal Party also wants to spend $200 million each and every year to fund industrial wind turbine and solar energy developers. He says he is building a green economy. In Prince Edward County, we know what that means—investors reap vast rewards, the people, land and animals pay the price. He will tax carbon emissions—meaning almost everything will cost more. What happens to the money collected is less clear.

He wants Canada to walk away from our military role in the Mideast. In the vacuum left by the departure of Western forces, Russia and Iran are taking charge. We might look at the plight of these folks as too far away—not our problem. But we know—just as we knew in the 1930s— that we can’t look away forever. Humanitarian aid is good, but not enough. Small barbarities left unchecked always become massive conflagrations that cannot be ignored—and inevitably exact a devastating toll in lives.

In 2004, Ontario rejected the ideology of the then-Conservative government, electing the fresh-faced son of a respected politician. Dalton McGuinty promised to undo the mistakes Harris had made. But a decade later, healthcare in rural Ontario is receding away from us and costs us more. McGuinty chose not to reverse the destructive amalgamations that had fundamentally altered the role of hospitals and municipalities in our communities. Instead, he sapped them their decision-making authority.

He did, however, double the province’s debt. So badly is Ontario in hock that his successor, Kathleen Wynne, is forced to sell furniture like Hydro One to fund her transit ambitions. McGuinty, too had dreams. He embarked upon a disastrous green energy adventure that has achieved little more than pit rural against urban residents and propel Ontario from one of North America’s lowest-cost electricity jurisdictions to its most expensive.

But why invoke McGuinty into the federal election? They are different people at different levels: shouldn’t they be judged on their merit?

Perhaps this criticism is unfair and premature. But it is important, I think to remember, that in 2004 McGuinty was being advised by a bright young man named Gerald Butts. Many of the ideas and ambitions we associate with McGuinty belonged to Butts first.

Currently Butts is Trudeau’s chief advisor. It is why the federal Liberal platform looks a lot like it was written by Dalton McGuinty.

If you are happy with the way Ontario has been run this past decade, this team of Trudeau and Butts is for you. If not, you might want to take another look at the Liberal platform.

For many, this election isn’t about hiring a new prime minister but firing the current one. I share many of the same frustrations. Justin Trudeau’s sunny ways make us feel a bit better about a fresh new day. But optimism and good looks only go so far. It matters what Justin Trudeau wants to do if he is elected.

We need to be sure we know what that is.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca