by Peter McGuigan It should be no surprise if Canada’s New Democratic Party leader Thomas Mulcair’s prediction, that “the Harper government is planning to cut $36 billion in healthcare transfers to the provinces” [Peak, March 4] happens. If this is true, it’s certainly evident that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is consistent in his ideological vision for Canada.
It was Harper’s speech in 1987, at the founding convention of Preston Manning’s Reform Party of Canada, that got him appointed as chief policy officer for the new party. In this speech he reportedly referred to Canada as a welfare state and that we were being unnecessarily taxed as a result. Early Reform policy, under Harper’s scrutiny, made it clear what he thought of Canada’s universal public system of health care—our “welfare state” as the resulting policies called it.
Reform’s, in other words Harper’s, policy said that the “universality” of our system of health care “has been elevated to a sacred concept.” Its policy said that it was opposed to “the full subsidization [of health care] of those able to pay all or part of the costs themselves.” For example, its policy clearly stated that it, in other words Harper, was opposed to “the view” that universal social programs “are the best and only way to care for the sick, the old and the young.”
The main slant of this early policy was that the federal government was using transfer payments for health care, in conjunction with the Canada Health Act, to force provinces to adhere to the concept of national universality of health care. This policy said health care was constitutionally a provincial responsibility. The proposal was to revise the act and give the provinces more control over how health care was delivered.
Not convinced? Well, check out Harper’s master’s thesis. Apparently, we Canadians have come to think of our “safety nets”—medicare and other social programs—as “entitlements” and “rights” and that this, and other things, “restrict(s) fiscal latitude;” in other words, makes it harder to balance the budget.
So, sure, this writer thinks that Harper would cut healthcare transfer payments, if he can get away with it. As to Canada being a “welfare state,” nonsense. I see Canada as having evolved, over time, into a nation that cares for its people; a nation that assists individuals, in a responsible manner, to realize their full potential and become equal participants in our society. But, I believe that this vision is under threat by Harper, who is clearly not a “Progressive Conservative.”
So, if Harper is not a classic Canadian progressively-minded Conservative, the electorate should be asking itself: what is his ideology? The answer is in the same book that former Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher, packed around to meetings. It’s called The Constitution of Liberty. It was written by Austrian-born economist Friedrich Hayek and promotes a mean-spirited social vision that, among other things, says that health care should not be provided by our governments, but by “the market place.” This is Harper’s ideological reference book.
Peter McGuigan is a retired entrepreneurial businessman living on Texada Island.
