Is Harper really willing to go into a summer election over EI Reform? I'm not so sure.
So, the Opposition should be asking for EI reform nicely then? Maybe, maybe not. Hill seems happy with the 5 week extension that the government has already given EI beneficiaries. Anything more than that would cost taxpayers too much, approximately 1.5 billion a year, and going into more debt is not an option for this government. Or is it? Just a few days ago the PM had this to say on deficit spending during the recession:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is suggesting the federal deficit, pegged at $85 billion over the next five years, could get bigger to fight the recession.Harper told Quebec mayors Thursday that negative balance sheets will grow "as large as they have to" while the economy struggles to recover.
And again, he reiterated his belief that Canada is in the best of positions in the global recession and that we have a kind of leg up on other countries in the sense that we can afford spending now and paying debt down later.
"Our deficits will be large, but they will be temporary," Harper said. "In fact, in the short term they will be as large as they have to be, to help us weather the recession.
"As a country we can afford it. But only if these deficits are temporary and our stimulus spending ends when the recession ends."
He said Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio is the envy of developed countries, and that the country can afford a flurry of spending.
So what is the issue over another 1.5 billion to save 1.4 million jobless Canadians? It must be the Opposition's approach, which is to be sure, ballsy bordering on confrontational. But what leg does Harper have to stand on to dissolve parliament and send the public into an election over more deficit spending that he himself has been trying to justify to Canadians for the last week?
Ignatieff has played his ball well. He knows that the NDP and Bloc would not bring down the government for the hell of it and by backing EI reform, he's put the NDP and the Bloc into awkward position: they don't want an election right now but they do want to change the rules of EI. If they support the Liberals they could go into an election that they don't want, yet, keeping true to their principles. If they side with the government they avoid an unwanted election yet go back on their promises. Harper either engages in a Conservative-Socialist-Separatist alliance to avoid an election (this detante rings a bell) or sends the public to the polls with little justification beyond not liking the tone in which the Opposition request EI reform.
Furthermore, I find it rather ironic that Jay Hill has the balls to complain about the Opposition threatening an election over every piece of legislation that they put forward since this was one of Harper's favourite tactics to push Dion around in the last parliamentary session. Maybe Harper should take a page out of Dion's book and abstain from the EI vote. Wouldn't that be something.
I'm one of those election hawks that would love to see Harper go down in the summer. Speaking with Conservative voters here in Alberta and Ontario, I'm getting the sense that Stephen's iron grip on the PMO and the party has some of the grass roots and base-voters perturbed and would almost prefer to see a Liberal, rather than Conservative, minority government come out of the next election to push the party to replace Harper. Some have even admitted to me that they believe that Harper would be a terrible majority Prime Minister.
With the CPC broadcasting attack ads, being down in the polls to the LPC, sitting on their hands in parliament to reforming EI, and fighting within their caucus over Mulroney - it feels like they're the Opposition trying to claw their way into the government. Ignatieff over the last month seems more like the Prime Minister than Harper and this is exactly the image he wants to project to Canadians - and I think it's taking.
I dare Harper to send us into an election. It will be his, not Michael's, swan song.