A great opportunity for the health promotion community to
communicate with an interested columnist.
Tell him what you think at:

[log in to unmask]
--------------------------------------------------------------

Chrétien's vote call disguises Liberals' failures
Graham Fraser, Toronto Star, October 223

OTTAWA - Back in the last century, it was possible for
students at the University of Toronto who were making a
hash of their year to withdraw from the university by a
certain date -- in February, as I recall -- without penalty.

So as disastrous initial results began to accumulate, a stark
choice would become clear. Either a serious change in
approach was required, or a strategic withdrawal.

Today, Jean Chretien is expected to ask the Governor General
to dissolve Parliament. But coincidently, over the last few
weeks, the Chretien government has had a series of mid-term
assessments. None of them has looked pretty.

Dyane Adam, the Commissioner of Official Languages, presented her
first report at the beginning of the month.

"The picture...is clear: there is insufficient commitment and a
flagrant lack of leadership by the federal government with
respect to the full implementation of the Act," she wrote. "If
the deficiencies and inertia observed are so widespread and
persistent, it is because the government, at its highest level,
does not provide theleadership it should to affirm linguistic
duality. Yet this is the critical element for the success of
Canadian federalism."

A week or so later, the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations
at Queen's University published its annual collection of essays
in the series "Canada: The State of the Federation," looking at
fiscal federalism.

Harvey Lazar, the editor of the collection, concedes that
Canada's system of fiscalfederalism is "complex and arcane," and
understood by few. But he makes a compelling case that behind
that eye-glazing phrase can be found critical issues that
matter to Canadians, like fairness, opportunity and the future of
the country.

In his overview of recent trends, he found a lack of a strong
sense of purpose,"reflecting the broader uncertainty about the
role of the state itself."

According to Lazar, the distinguishing characteristic of the
federal government has been "ad hocery": zig-zagging back and
forth between deferring to the provinces and asserting federal
leadership without any clear sense of direction.

On an essay on poverty, Dalhousie University economist Lars
Osberg traces the sad record of the Chretien government over the
last six years. "The federal government has clearly been
retreating from social activism and de-emphasizing poverty
mitigation as a major goal of policy," he writes. "Although
there has been little change in the poverty intensity of senior
citizens, there have been especially large increases in poverty
intensity among very young children in Ontario and Nova
Scotia...The increase in the poverty intensity from 1994 to 1996
among children under six in Canada's largest (and richest)
province is especially notable."

Osberg's forecast for the future is equally bleak, delivered in
the calm, neutral tones ofthe professional economist.

"On balance, there would seem to be more likelihood than not that
the federal role in social policy will continue to shrink and
that poverty outcomes will continue to trend up and to diverge
across provinces," he writes.

In other words, Ottawa is going to do less, and Canada's poor
will get poorer. There was little in Paul Martin's mini-budget
last week to contradict that view. Then, of course, last week the
Auditor-General Denis Desautels came out with his report. The
language was stinging.

"It was more than just sloppy paperwork," Desautels said about
Human Resources Development Canada. "We found that controls had
broken down, putting public funds at risk. We found a widespread
lack of due regard to probity in spending public funds."

Liberal disdain for criticism was only confirmed when Liberal MPs
boycotted Desautels' appearance before committee on Thursday.

Jean Chretien has already claimed that this campaign will be
about values: a bilingual Canada, not a unilingual one; a strong
federal government, and not a decentralized one; generosity and
respect for human rights as compared to greed and intolerance;
and responsible management of the state.

While Chretien may sound plausible in defending those values
against Stockwell Day and the Canadian Alliance, he has a
problem. This fall, in every one of those categories, independent
observers have evaluated the Chretien government's performance,
and given it failing marks.

As a result, the Prime Minister's visit to Rideau Hall looks more
and more like a student, albeit a popular one, going to the
registrar's office and asking to withdraw early -- so this year's
dismal results won't count, and he can try again next year.

It is a sad admission of wasted opportunities, a recognition that
it is impossible to do any better before spring, and proof of
electoral opportunism.

The fact it may work does not reflect any better on the Chretien
record.


Graham Fraser is a national affairs writer. He can be reached at
[log in to unmask]