Greg Quinn: Trudeau's 'vibe bribe' will get the wrong kind of attention abroad
Oh, so Canada actually has some money to spend, just not on defence? How interesting.
By: Greg Quinn
In my years in the British diplomatic service, I had a chance to experience politics in many countries, including, of course, Canada. Along the way I’ve drawn some conclusions. One of them is that elections are funny things — they tend to make political leaders forget inhibitions about policies they’d previously opposed while suddenly finding money that had presumably fallen down the back of the sofa.
Which is exactly what appears to have happened in Canada recently with the prime minister’s announcement of the temporary removal of GST/HST, from 14 December this year until 15 February next year, plus a $250 per person give away.
The cost to the federal government of the GST/HST holiday will be some $1.6 billion. If Parliament ultimately agrees to issue $250 cheques to eligible persons that will cost another $4.7 billion (although it is important to note these have yet to be approved). Needless to say the Parliamentary debate on the removal of GST/HST was predictably acrimonious with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre saying: “This isn’t a tax cut … This is an inflationary two-month temporary tax trick that will drive up the cost of living.”
The Liberal Government House leader Karina Gould fired back strongly saying: “As members of Parliament, we now have an opportunity to come together to provide much needed relief and support to people right across this country … The fact that the Conservative leader would rather play politics than support Canadians, I think, is very indicative of who he is and what he really stands for.”
Anyone still doubt Canada is in a pre-election phase?
Personally, I think giveaways such as these are bad economic policy, but Canada isn’t the first (and won’t be the last) country to do such a thing.
I’m not here to debate the merits of these give aways one way or the other. What I would like to talk about is how they give the lie to any suggestion that Canada is unable to provide the funding it should to meet its international obligations — specifically with regards to meeting the two per cent of GDP expenditure on defence. This is, to remind readers, not some unreasonable demand from afar, but what Canada and this prime minister have repeatedly and publicly pledged to do.
Affordability has often been used when the Canadian government has explained why it is not able to put more money into defence — money to build up capabilities, buy ships and planes or even provide basic equipment (such as effective winter sleeping bags — quite useful in a country like Canada) or working personal firearms to its servicemen and women.
But yet suddenly the prime minister has found a significant amount of cash to help Canadians at what some might suggest is a somewhat politically expedient moment.
No doubt Canada’s NATO partners, especially those facing the biggest potential threat from Putin’s Russia, will also have noticed this sudden ability to fund a major project, after many claims of problems with finances and vague promises of future spending. Future spending which, incidentally, even the Canadian Parliamentary Budget Office questions. Though I’ve now left the foreign service of my own country, I can tell The Line’s readers that Canada’s sudden cash giveaways have been noticed, and talked about, by many in all the NATO capitals.
Fundamentally, Canada and its leaders are going to have to make some difficult choices about tradeoffs and what they can afford — financially and politically. As I said in my piece for The Line on 09 August: “The bottom line is simple — what does Canada (and the Canadian people) want its role in the world to be? … Canadians owe themselves, and frankly owe their allies, an honest discussion about [the] kind of role Canada actually wants to play in the world … and whether they’re willing to actually pay the bills required to play that role.”
That really is still the nub of the issue. Be honest about what Canada’s priorities are. Be honest about how much of a role Canada wants to play in the world. Don’t pretend to be something Canada isn’t. Just fess up and tell people the truth — they will respect Canada more for doing so. As opposed to constantly hearing the platitudes and disregarding these as vague promises. That doesn’t gain Canada any credit or influence, it just causes exasperation and a lack of trust.
Admitting Canada doesn’t want to prioritize its international defence obligations would be a sad day. Canada was a founding member of NATO. It stood side-by-side with its allies all through the Cold War — just as it did in the First and Second World Wars. It has a justifiably proud military history, and one which can easily be seen in the many museums across Canada.
NATO allies, including my own U.K., want Canada to still be that reliable ally. We want it to be a country we know we can rely upon when we face struggles and threats — as we do now.
And then we have president-elect Trump and what that might mean for the defence of Canada. For many in the U.S., Canada has been getting a free-ride on defence and they want that to change. So being seen to splash cash on what many see as little more that attempts to curry favour in advance of an election — as opposed to spending money on defending Canada and its allies — will not have gone unnoticed.
Canada should be a reliable military ally. That is what its servicemen and women want. That is what its allies want. But we need a demonstrable commitment to that, instead of the usual claims of financial hardship, which clearly don’t apply when an unpopular PM needs to bribe his voters.
Greg Quinn OBE is a former British diplomat who has served in Estonia, Ghana, Belarus, Iraq, Washington D.C., Kazakhstan, Guyana, Suriname, The Bahamas, Canada, and Antigua and Barbuda in addition to stints in London. He now runs his own government relations, business development and crisis management consultancy, Aodhan Consultancy Ltd.
The Line is entirely reader and advertiser funded — no federal subsidy for us! If you value our work, have already subscribed, and still worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something: lineeditor@protonmail.com
Hi! my name is Leslie Nobodyinparticular. I live in the 905 where I work as a mid-level administrator for a place that doesn't have to turn a profit.
Did you know that war and military type things are very bad? I don't like the idea of tax dollars going to things like ships and outfitting soldiers. Taxes should only go into education and supporting non-profits which many of my neighbours work for. That's nicer.
I believe in a thing call a 'Rules Based International Order' which, if I remember some classes from POL101 class in first year university (totally dropped it, sooo borrrringg). It works because people talk alot about how they feel and they consult, always consult. Just like my workplace!
We sometimes get things done at work because everyone really agrees that process is the most important thing. Being busy shows we care! It's not that hard as long as you only talk to people who agree with you. And if some people don't? You gather up your friends and you shame them into agreeing, otherwise you file an official complaint. One time, we had to forward it to a non-elected tribunal. That showed them! See how easy it is when you know you're right? Would you like a self-eating donut? I made them today!
I think we as a country need to fairly quickly realize that a) the world (most notably for us, the US) is changing and b) we are no longer a rich country (and I don’t think that’s going to change any time soon). We very much need to start prioritizing where we spend our limited funds and where we don’t. Being able to defend ourselves and meeting our defense obligations comes to mind; $250 cheques which will have zero long term impact don’t.