As the election campaign enters its final days, things are beginning to heat up with Liberal attack ads starting to appear in the media. By focusing on two small excerpts from the Conservative’s Blue Book and creatively interpreting their implications, the Liberals have apparently descended to scare-mongering in a desperate attempt to frighten voters away from the Tories.

The Liberals evidently realized that the ordinary voter has limited sympathy for civil servants and wouldn’t be particularly concerned about the possibility of a smaller bureaucracy. The Liberals’ recurring attacks on the Tories’ purported 25 percent reduction in the size of the civil service had, in the words of a friend of mine, “no traction.”

Services over jobs

Voters, however, are acutely sensitive to threats of cuts in services. By appealing to public concerns about fewer teachers, nurses, snowplow operators, and police officers, and longer waiting lists at hospitals, the new Liberal ads are potentially damaging to the Tory campaign.

To offset this damage, Tory leader Danny Williams has repeatedly stated that there will be no cuts to services despite an unspecified reduction in the size of the civil service. How will this be achieved? Presumably through costs savings in all the other measures listed in the Blue Book.

By such initiatives as eliminating ineffective and efficient programs, stopping spending flurries at the end of the budget year, reducing long-term interest costs, reviewing the government vehicle fleet, reducing travel costs, stepping up collection of monies owed to the government, increasing financial accountability, reviewing office space costs, and strengthening the public tendering process, the Tories are counting on finding enough funds to pay for much-needed improvements in health care, education, transportation, and other areas of government involvement.

Who will voters believe?

So who is the voter to believe? Leaving aside the question of whether the province’s finances are in great shape or facing serious problems, will a Tory government cut services as Roger Grimes claims, or selectively review and expand some services as Danny Williams argues?

In a campaign in which no really salient issues have emerged, the Liberals have tried to create an issue by focusing on a small part of the Conservative’s platform. By doing this, the Liberals have, perhaps unwittingly, turned the voters’ attention to the underlying issue of leadership. Who do you believe? Who do you trust? Who would be the better manager? Who has the better plan for the future?

While the central question may be for voters to decide who to believe, there are many other issues which have emerged during the campaign. Issues, such as education, healthcare, fisheries, jobs, and regional economic development, have been raised during campaign stops and on open-line shows, but none have emerged as the defining issue in the election.

Issues move to the sidelines

Interestingly, some issues on which the parties clearly differ have received only limited discussion. Consider hydroelectric energy, for example. The NDP has proposed a comprehensive public energy corporation which would see Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Newfoundland Power amalgamated; the Liberals propose an expanded role for Hydro and will continue to study the integration of Newfoundland Power with Hydro; while the Conservative’s effectively propose continuing the status quo in terms of structure.

Another issue which has received surprisingly little attention is auto insurance. While the both the Liberals and Tories propose further regulation of the insurance industry in their campaign platforms, the NDP proposes a completely public non-profit auto insurance system. Given the flurry of discussion on this matter immediately preceding the election call, and considering the high profile auto insurance costs have had in other recent provincial elections, it is quite astonishing that it has had such a low profile during this campaign.

Taxation takes back seat

Taxation is another issue that has received curiously little discussion for a province whose citizens pay some of the highest taxes in Canada. The Tories have promised a multi-year business tax reduction program, tax reductions for low-income earners, and a study to bring personal and income taxes into line with other Atlantic provinces.

The Liberals have promised tax relief for post-secondary graduates who remain in the province, elimination of the payroll tax for small businesses, and tax incentives for the hiring of apprentices. The NDP only mentions taxes in reference to eliminating the HST from home heating fuel and electricity.

Municipal restructuring has also received scant attention. Despite having funded and subsequently ignored a study on municipal regionalization in 1997, the Liberals provide only a vague promise to assist municipalities in terms of self-reliance, competency, and regional cooperation. Although the Conservatives promise to give attention to municipal infrastructure and services, there is no commitment to review the serious structural and financial problems outlined recently by outgoing Federation of Municipalities President Randy Simms in his call for a new royal commission on municipal government.

Ignored issue

Finally, there is no mention in any of the party documents on banning mandatory retirement. Although the Liberals mention the effect retirement is having in creating skill shortages in many industries, there is no promise to ban mandatory retirement as has already been done in several provinces and all territories. Given the Tories’ plan to fund some of their campaign promises through money saved by no longer having to pay retiring civil servants, it is hardly unexpected that banning mandatory retirement is not mentioned in their policy platform. Surprisingly, though, the NDP with its professed concern for human rights, also make no promises to push for an end to mandatory retirement.

While policy promises, or lack of them, are only one factor in voter choice, the deliberate distortion of other parties’ policies is a staple tactic of desperate politicians. Will rational policy debate or desperate policy distortion be the norm in the last few days of this election?

Comment on this commentary

to top