To the Editor, Peterborough This Week, January 18, 2017
While being billed as an opportunity for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to reconnect with the people, last Friday’s town hall used the ideas of the 10 or so people who spoke, to spin us into his world view.
Other than when I was on the same ski hill in Ottawa with his father, I have been in the presence of only two prime ministers in my life, with Friday being the second occasion.
The first was at a John Diefenbaker rally at the CNE in the 1950s when I was a boy. Subsequently, I followed the controversy between Diefenbaker and James Coyne, the governor of the Bank of Canada (BoC). Diefenbaker wanted the BoC to lower the value of the dollar from $1.05 US to par or lower. Coyne objected. He was forced to resign and legislation was passed by the House of Commons that the Governor of the BoC must follow the written directive of the Finance Minister, effectively declaring that the BoC was not independent of the government.
In the ’70s, Pierre Trudeau allowed it to become independent again subject to the whims of the Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland.
I would have asked Justin Trudeau why we needed a new infrastructure bank when we already have the BoC with a proven track record. I would have appealed to the teacher within him by asking him to examine the evidence about the success of the BoC.
If the BoC worked before 1974, why not again?
When I shouted out “Use your central bank” to fund the transition from fossil fuels to an environmentally-sustainable economy, he responded with: “that doesn’t work.” That’s despite the evidence from 1935 until 1975 that it does work.
The second issue, Proportional Representation (PR), is more pressing. Some of us demonstrated about that.
In response to one questioner and the protest, Trudeau claimed Canadians had a variety of ideas despite the evidence that most presenters at the hearings conducted by Peterborough-Kawartha MP Maryam Monsef were in favour of PR.
In this regard, I would have pointed out that during my lifetime, the country has had one election campaign after another to stop a prime minister or a political party by voting strategically. We stopped Diefenbaker, then after Pearson, Justin’s father. Then we stopped the Mulroney/Kim Campbell Conservatives by electing Chrétien. Then, mad at Chrétien, we dumped Paul Martin for Harper. And, in the last election we had to stop Harper. When will the people of Canada vote for the candidates we want instead of against the political party we don’t want?
Justin Trudeau has an opportunity to ensure his legacy as a potentially great prime minister by keeping his promise to bring in PR. I hope that he does not miss this opportunity by becoming the next prime minister that we campaign to stop.
Herb Wiseman, Peterborough
Our Comment
That Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should extol the virtues of the EU when commenting on his NAFTA chat with Donald Trump, suggests another possible issue that could, conceivably, contribute to his being “the next Prime Minister to stop.”
Just how far, one wonders, would he be willing to compromise Canadian sovereignty to satisfy the demands of our closest trading “partner”?
Élan
