[R-G] Coalition Government? Let's Not Give Away The Store

[Anthony Fenton]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Socialist Project e-bulletin ... No. 159 ... December 1, 2008
_________________________________________________

Coalition Government?
Let's Not Give Away The Store

John Riddell

The Harper government's economic proposals, announced November 27,  
aroused a cry of outrage from unions and social activists across the  
country: "Throw the bums out."

The Conservative plan for cutbacks, combined with and attacks on the  
rights of unions and women, showed clearly, as CLC President Ken  
Georgetti said, that the Conservative government aims "to make working  
people pay for a crisis they did not create."

Efforts by the Liberals and NDP to forge an alternative government  
have won wide of support in progressive circles, where many see a  
coalition as the only way to bring the hated government down.

Leaders of four major national unions and three influential  
progressive advocacy groups joined November 28 in an appeal to the  
Liberals and NDP to join in pursuing this goal, since "only a  
coalition government can provide the leadership Canada needs."

These calls all assume that the coalition would be Liberal-led – and  
none of them has raised any programmatic agenda for such a government.

Is the prospect of a Liberal-led government really so appealing as to  
deserve a blank cheque? Have the advocates of coalition forgotten that  
it was the last Liberal government that originated most of the hated  
"Harper" policies, including the gutting of social services, attacks  
on civil liberties dressed up as "anti-terrorism" and Canada's  
disastrous war in Afghanistan?

 From all reports, the NDP is not calling for changes in those  
policies in its negotiations with the Liberals. The Globe and Mail  
noted November 29 that "a senior NDP official said that no policy  
issues are considered deal-breakers."

The Liberals say they favour "an economic stimulus package," but its  
content is unknown. Certainly the Liberals will give government a much  
bigger role in managing the economy. Every major capitalist government  
is doing that – and Harper will do it too, once he gets his signals  
straight.

As Margaret Thatcher might say, "There Is No Alternative."  
Neoliberalism is in shambles; the economies are in utter crisis;  
government intervention is capitalism's only hope.

But there is no assurance that increased government spending will be  
associated with social reform – massive deficits were the hallmarks  
not only of Roosevelt, but also of Reagan and Bush. A Liberal  
"stimulus" package is most likely to combine massive handouts to big  
business with attacks on workers' wages and pensions.

The aim of progressive policy must not be to enhance the power of  
capitalist governments but to increase that of working people. We  
cannot expect Stephane, Iggy and Bob to do any such thing, even if the  
NDP has a few Cabinet posts.

The only force we can depend on is the pressure of independent popular  
and labour movements. In a situation of social and economic crisis,  
these movements can become an irresistible force.

And here is the fatal weakness of the coalition government scheme.  
Locked inside a Liberal-dominated coalition, the NDP would be unable  
to campaign against capitalist attacks. Accepting responsibility for  
the anti-labour measures of such a government could rapidly discredit  
the NDP and end its ability to continue as the bearer of popular hopes  
for social change.

At the same time, labour leaders' current pledges of unconditional  
support to a coalition will undermine the unions' ability to act  
independently in defence of workers' rights and needs.

Tying ourselves down in this manner is particularly dangerous in the  
midst of an economic crisis that is unprecedented, and shifting  
rapidly in unpredictable ways.

Here the Bloc Québécois sets a positive example: whatever  
parliamentary manoeuvres they wisely or unwisely engage in, they are  
determined not to enter a Liberal-led government.

The best way to resist big business attacks and win immediate and  
specific gains is to stick to the path of independence from big  
business and its parties, and rely on the potential of popular  
movements.

On such a course, and in present conditions, it is by no means  
excluded that we could prepare the ground for a Venezuelan-type  
outcome: a sweeping shift in power relationships in favour of working  
people, the poor and the oppressed, and their organizations.

To move forward in this time of crisis, we must avoid falling into the  
deadly embrace of our enemies. As Muhammed Ali said, to be free to  
fight, you need to float like a butterfly – and sting like a bee. •

John Riddell is co-editor of Socialist Voice (www.socialistvoice.ca).  
A version of this article was also published by Rabble.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Bullet is produced by the Socialist Project. Readers are
encouraged to distribute widely. Comments, criticisms and
suggestions are welcome. Write to info at socialistproject.ca

If you wish to subscribe: www.socialistproject.ca/lists/?p=subscribe

The Bullet archive is available at www.socialistproject.ca/bullet

For more analysis of contemporary politics check out
'Relay: A Socialist Project Review' at www.socialistproject.ca/relay