Harper Regime May See Quebec EI Demands as Opportunity, Not Problem
When the Parti Quebecois announced that one of their strategies as a new government — if they ever form one — would be to provoke a fight with the federal government over who runs the Employment Insurance system, I don’t mind telling you, it worried me. Not because of anything related to the PQ, but more because of Stephen Harper himself. During his days as an Albertan anti-nationalist, you see, Harper also argued that federal programs like EI (and CPP, and the police, and healthcare, and income tax, etc., etc.) should be dismantled and handed off to the provinces to run as they chose:
The time has come for Albertans to take greater charge of our own future. This means remusing control of the powers that we possess… but that we have allowed the federal government to exercise… It is imperative to take the initiative, to build firewalls around Alberta, to limit the extent to which an aggressive and hostile federal government can encroach upon legitimate provincial jurisdiction.
This letter could have been lifted virtually verbatim from the pages of the PQ manifesto, just swapping out the names of the two provinces. It demonstrates why Harper is exactly the wrong Prime Minister to defend Canada against the demands of the separatist PQ — because at least on this issue, he actually agrees with them. I have warned for a long time now that electing a man who is basically an anti-nationalist would have dire consequences if there was ever another sovereignty battle with Quebec, and, if the PQ win the next election, those dire consequences will arrive.
What I’m suggesting here isn’t merely that Harper will “throw” the match, so to speak, but that he will see the PQ’s demands as an opportunity to press forward on some of the more controversial elements of his own agenda, and then “blame the separatists” to avoid taking responsibility for his own actions. This spring’s comparatively minor EI reforms provoked howls of protest, especially in Atlantic Canada. Imagine the political fallout if the federal EI system gets dismantled altogether. Politically unpopular? Absolutely! And yet the Prime Minister’s personal political beliefs are that the federal EI system should be dismantled. It’s just a question of how to convince the unwashed masses that it’s a good idea. Letting the separatists take the blame for it would be a good distraction, if he can find a way to swing it.
I’m not the only one thinking this. This week Harper’s former intellectual sage, right-wing Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan, tried to stir the pot in the Globe & Mail with a column supporting the PQ proposal to eliminate federal control over EI, too. Flanagan was the co-signer of Harper’s “firewall” letter, which I quoted from above. Flanagan’s message now: if Quebec wants to run their own EI system, let them try. And if other provinces want to do the same, he implies, let them try, too.
I’m not an expert on the economics involved, but I assume that, like other taxes, in terms of EI premiums provinces with low unemployment put proportionately more into the EI pot than provinces with high unemployment. So from a fiscal perspective it probably makes sense for Alberta to run its own EI system. I’m not sure the same holds true for Quebec, or especially for the Maritimes.
Of course, Harper may not have been being any more honest or principled about his beliefs during his “firewall” phase than he has been as Prime Minister. The fallout from the 2012 budget might have been enough to convince him not to continue playing with fire on issues like EI and OAS. Maybe.
Tweet
jrkrideau
I wonder what this would do to labour mobility?
If your unemployment benefits are from a province does that mean you forfeit any accrued hours if you move to another province? Sound dicey to me.
On the other hand, Harper was very much a “let them freeze in the dark” Westerner until he moved to 24 Sussex and, suddenly, oil pipelines are a national priority.
Giving up that much budget and power seems a bit unlikely.
Sixth Estate
Re your second question — I assume that would be a natural consequence of it, yes.
It does seem to run counter to the instincts of anyone at the top of a central government, yes. On the other hand, this government has already unofficially declared the Canada Health Act to be a dead letter. That should have been more controversial than EI reforms, but it basically passed without notice.
ck
I, too, am of the belief that Harper would be only too happy to give Quebec its’ own control of EI. I also ready Flanagan’s column, although, that article is more of a comedy than anything else. Notice how Andrew McDougall, the latest Harper spin doctor, quickly distanced his party from Flanagan’s latest remarks? I’ll buy that Flanagan hasn’t been in the loop for so long as there was a falling out between Harper and Flanagan over a book the latter wrote, “The Harper Team”. Bad blood ensued over that. However, I wonder if McDougall simply put on a show?
We know what Harper thinks of Employment insurance. There was a quote from him awhile back saying how no one should feel bad about unemployed Canadians as they simply sit on their duffs enjoying those “generous” benefits.
However, there is a flip side to this. Contrary to what the propoganda machine has been shouting that it’s another “entitlement”, folks tend to forget that the EI fund is financed solely by Canadian workers and their respective employers. It is directly deducted off of our pay checques and no one has a say about this. No one can opt out (except for perhaps those working in a family owned and operated business). Already, after the Liberals changed the laws to EI, it had gotten much harder for an unemployed Canadian to claim the benefit, despite having paid into it. In some regions, it appears tthat making a claim is near impossible. Following the Harper changes to EI and closures of many SErvice Canada Centers and public servants who saw to the administration of these benefits getting laid off, I am prepared to say there is no more EI. Scary. It has become much more dangerous to be unemployed. Still, all of us (workers and employers) still contribute to this fund with no say in the matter. My conclusion is that the EI fund is just another tax and it has and is becoming a cash cow for the treasury as the GST has been. Would Harper be prepared to loosen his grip on at least Quebec’s portion of that fund? I don’t think so.
However, assuming the PQ gets in this Tuesday, and if French language media is smart (Anglo media supports Harper and are his biggest cheerleaders), if Harper were to say no to Marois regarding Quebec taking control of its’ own EI, they could and MUST throw Harper’s hypocrisy in his face — what? It’s ok for Alberta, but not for Quebec??
Sixth Estate
ck — I don’t deny there’s some logic to that position. Consider the following, though.
First of all, I kind of doubt that the first time Marois (in the hypothetical case of a PQ government) demands that EI be transferred to Quebec, Harper immediately throws in the towel and agrees. If nothing else, his base won’t like him kowtowing to “the separatists.” My point is simply that in this case, Harper’s own ideological instinct will be to agree with the demand rather than to fight it, and that in turn creates the likelihood that if they see an opportunity to download federal programs to the provinces and then blame the Quebecois for it, they will seize that opportunity. Whether the PQ will actually present a suitable opportunity is not yet certain.
Second, and again I’m not an expert on the finances involved, but my assumption is that provinces with high unemployment put proportionately less into the EI system than provinces with low unemployment. So on the one hand it does mean giving up a revenue source, but on the other hand, if you kick out a province that you think is going to be a huge drag on the system in future years, then you lose their pay-ins, but better yet you also eliminate their pay-outs.
Obviously this element mainly only applies if the finances work out in Canada’s favour in the Quebec case, and I’m not sure they do, but beyond that, the sort of “provincial rights” perspective is one that we know the Harper government is firmly committed to. For instance, they had no trouble basically declaring the Canada Health Act a dead letter last year and then choking off further federal funding increases for healthcare, even though the immediate consequence of that will be a loss of the federla government’s ability to safeguard universal healthcare.
Also bear in mind that right now the EI fund is actually running a deficit, not a surplus, so it isn’t a revenue generator for government. The EI system will only move back into surplus again if the Harper regime raises premiums or if it raises overall employment. Don’t hold your breath.
Gloria
Yesteryear, we would have been upset by Quebec leaving Canada. No-one seems to mind these days. This country is no longer Canada anyway.
I think many Canadians knew, with Harper winning or cheating a majority, We would be kissing Canada good-bye. We were warned often enough. CSIS warned us regarding, Communist China. We were warned, Canada would become a dictatorship. Another Common Wealth country’s media said, how badly Harper is destroying Democracy in Canada.
This Nation is rotten to the core with corruption. Our pride in being Canadian, has been destroyed by Harper. Perhaps, there may be other provinces besides Quebec, that want to get away from Harper and Ottawa. Harper is not worthy, of Canadians loyalty. Provinces that don’t feel safe from Harper, should leave him and Ottawa.
Sixth Estate
I think some people probably would mind. There’s just a great deal of complacency about it on the one hand, and resentment of the constant low-level bickering on the other. A lot of people are kind of just in denial that separation is even a possibility. That at least would explain the sentiment coming from parts of Atlantic Canada who would be completely screwed if Quebec actually separated.