It is an indication of how desperate the Liberals are to cling to power that they are even considering a deal with Yves-François Blanchet, the Errol Flynn of Canadian politics.
As was said of the hell-raising movie star by his friend David Niven: “You always knew precisely where you stood with Errol because he always let you down.”
The Bloc Québécois leader will leave the Liberals in the lurch as soon as they refuse his extortionate demands, so best to tell him from the outset to go forth and multiply.
Blanchet has imposed an Oct. 29 deadline before his party pulls support for the government on future House of Commons confidence motions.
The Liberals must back two Bloc private member’s bills, Blanchet said, or the mood will become impossible. “And as soon as it becomes impossible, we will know what to do,” he added, ominously.
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said conversations are ongoing, though Blanchet said he has had no discussions with the Trudeau government.
Good, because both Bloc bills are policy madness.
Blanchet has presented them as “good for everybody,” but the truth is they benefit very narrow sections of society — older voters and some farmers — and are bad news for everyone else.
One of the bills, Bill C-319, calls on the government to extend the 10-per-cent increase in Old Age Security payments the Liberals made in 2022 for those over 75 to include the 65–74-year-old age group. The bill is at third reading in the House of Commons but requires the government’s blessing to pass because it commits Freeland to spend money. Lots of money.
The other, Bill C-282, requires the government to exempt the supply-managed farm sector (i.e., eggs, chicken and dairy) from future trade negotiations. It is mired in the Senate’s foreign affairs and international trade committee, where one hopes it will be amended beyond recognition.
Taking them in turn, the very idea that the 65-to-74-year-old cohort — many of whom are relatively healthy and rich — should see their benefits increased, without any kind of means-testing, is bonkers.
As economist Trevor Tombe has demonstrated, seniors’ benefits are the fiscal elephant in the room when looking at government finances.
Partly because the population is aging, but particularly because this government has ratcheted up how much it pays, and lowered the retirement age back to 65, Ottawa now spends nearly $80 billion a year on seniors.
Tombe noted that policy decisions made by the Trudeau government, such as the 10-per-cent increase in OAS for the over-75s, will cost an additional $50 billion over the next five years.
If the Liberals were to oblige the Bloc by adding an extra 10-per-cent payment for 65-to-74-year-olds, it would cost an additional $3 billion a year, according to the parliamentary budget officer, Yves Giroux.
For a government looking to reduce the deficit and the debt-to-GDP ratio, that is clearly going in the wrong direction.
We should instead be cutting benefits to higher-income seniors. Tombe estimated that $6 billion in OAS and Guaranteed Income Supplement payments are flowing annually to seniors with combined incomes over $150,000 a year — a number that could rise to $10 billion annually by 2028.
He suggested that by cutting benefits to those people and eliminating the 10-per-cent bump for seniors over 75, Ottawa would save around $13 billion a year by 2028. “Balancing the budget doesn’t require much else,” he said.
Admittedly, it is unlikely that any party will pledge to take money from seniors, on the principle that governments that rob Peter to pay Paul can depend on Paul’s support.
But it would be an act of gross irresponsibility for the Liberals to compound the electoral bribes to which they are already committed, by further subsidizing Paul’s sprightly younger siblings.
Bill C-282 is, conceptually, just as iniquitous. All parties in the House have tried to outcompete one another in their slavish devotion to supply management, which in reality constrains the supply of eggs, chicken and dairy products, strangles competition with tariffs, and keeps food prices high.
The bill proposes to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act so that trade ministers cannot increase the quantity of supply-managed products allowed into Canada tariff-free, or lower those tariffs.
Unbelievably, Trade Minister Mary Ng voted for the bill, as it sailed through the House, even though by taking eggs, poultry and dairy off the table in future negotiations, Canada will have to make concessions in other sectors like beef, pork or canola.
Senator Peter Boehm, a former senior diplomat, chairs the committee studying Bill C-282, which he has called a “deeply flawed bill.”
“Binding the hands of our negotiators is a dubious strategy,” he said.
No kidding.
The Liberals may be desperate, but they know that the Bloc’s next demands will be even more exorbitant.
The arithmetic in the House still works for the government, as long as it keeps the NDP onside.
And the early evidence since Parliament returned is that the prettiest romance in Canadian political history is still going strong between the Liberals and the NDP. With any luck, that means Blanchet’s dance card will stay dusty.
Twitter.com/IvisonJ