NDP releases platform

Posted April 14, 2009 by Sacha Peter - Link
Category: Analysis, NDP Comments (4)

On April 9, 2009, the NDP released their platform. This document is available (NDP Site, Local Copy) for download. It is 1.5 megabytes and 56 pages.

The first thing that strikes you when you open the file is the large colour picture of NDP leader Carole James. Of particular note was that she is not smiling – which undoubtedly was a specific choice by the people who put together this document. One would politically infer that she is “serious” if she’s not smiling. This is an interesting choice and I wonder if any polling was done on the matter. I also think it was a correct choice, since the document is inferring that BC has “problems”, and there is no reason to be smiling if this is the case. A non-smiling photograph is much more consistent with the story the NDP is trying to weave.

Anybody picking up a paper version of this document will see the picture, and this is why the front page of the document is important.

The table of contents is also revealing – the top three topics are “Investments, Opportunity and Jobs for the Future”, “Making Life More Affordable for Everyday Families”, and “Taking back BC”. This isn’t normally the order that things would be presented in an NDP platform – health and education (although content-wise is the largest number of pages) is in the middle.

The first page in each chapter of the platform is an attack page stating the government’s policies, followed by how the NDP will proceed to make life great. The NDP also quote what they will be attempting to turn the ballot question into, which is “Who can you trust to put the needs of average families first?”. I think this is the wrong approach by the NDP – almost nobody trusts politicians to do anything anymore, so using the word “trust” is incorrect.

The “big ticket” item that the NDP have adopted with their policy platform is getting rid of the carbon tax, or what they phrase it as the “gas tax”. A search of the document for “carbon tax” only reveals quotes by other people using that phrase. I always wondered why the NDP would use the “gas tax” terminology when the federal Conservatives have already done a lot of work in the last federal election campaign by attacking the federal Liberals’ proposed “carbon tax” (via the Green Shift). I am guessing the NDP did their polling and determined that people associate the two together, but this is tough to say. The NDP might have done it to hedge their message with respect to environmentalists (that would presumably be in favour of such a tax). Will this have an electoral impact? Tough to say – instinctively it would have a greater effect in the more rural ridings.

On page 9, the NDP propose repealing “Bill 43″, but readers of the original Green platform should now know this is an ambiguous reference – it’s referring to the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2007. Unfortunately for the NDP, they refer to it as “Bill 42″ on the same page.

Most used cliche joke in the province:

BC relies heavily on the wealth generated by rural and resource communities, but Gordon Campbell can’t seem to see beyond Hope.

The residents of Hope must get really tired of hearing variations of this.

On page 11, the NDP platform discusses “Fight for longer and better EI protection”, although this is a federal jurisdiction issue. In all fairness to the NDP, the government has been caught a few times making announcements saying they will “work with” the federal government to change certain federal legislation (which rarely happens as a result of one province’s request).

Page 15 – the NDP has virtually copied the government’s actions to date with respect to First Nations (recognition and reconciliation).

Page 17 – Barack Obama’s name is used in print.

Page 19-20 on the minimum wage:

Under Gordon Campbell, BC’s minimum wage hasn’t increased in eight long years, and now ranks dead last in Canada in terms of purchasing power.

What is “in terms of purchasing power” mean? Opposed to what? The only other province that has a lower minimum wage is New Brunswick, and their minimum wage will go up to $8.00/hour on April 15, 2009. Are things in BC that much more expensive than in New Brunswick? Would love to know what statistics they are using with this.

Page 30:

Strengthening human rights protections by establishing a Human Rights Commission, and enhancing preventative actions such as community anti-racism and discrimination programs, including a provincial anti-hate hotline.

Creation of a Human Rights Commission will turn off a lot of potential swing voters.

Page 36:

Getting tough on smoking by banning cigarette sales in pharmacies, stopping the flavouring of cigarillos, and piloting programs that provide free access to nicotine replacement therapies.

Requiring clear food labeling to reduce harmful carcinogens, toxic substances and genetically engineered foods. Toxins in our environment are a growing cause of cancer.

The first promise is quite worthy of experimentation (nicotine replacement therapies), but the second promise is completely misguided. Increased life expectancy, not toxins, is the growing cause of cancer in society. The state of California has implemented ridiculous labeling requirements that virtually have everything telling you that they are a carcinogenic risk – such labeling is completely useless.

Page 49:

While economic experience does not prove that “tax cuts pay for themselves,” strategic tax cuts and capital investments that spur growth do return revenue to the government.

Loved how they engineered this sentence together. The next paragraph has the words “tax cuts focused on consumer and business spending have greater immediate impact” which I don’t believe has ever been spoken in an NDP platform before.

Pages 52 to 55 contain the numbers. The NDP project a $877M deficit in 2009-2010 if their plan is implemented, which is slightly higher than the government’s projected $495 million deficit.

Overall thoughts:

Other than removing the carbon tax and providing a one-year tax holiday for small business owners, the vast bulk of the policy mentioned in this platform was fairly “NDP routine”. Most of it is consistent with their strategy of appealing to lower income voters. I think the spending initiatives are a lot more expensive than what they present in the platform, but then again, I think the government’s projected $495 million deficit is going to turn into at least a billion, if not more, if they get re-elected again. It was a surprisingly moderate document from the NDP and a lot of the line items are difficult to pick away at. For example, their entire health care platform seemed to read very well (although it would very likely cost a lot more than they said it would to implement). It was also low on the environmental side, probably because the NDP realize that their radical environmentalist section has already moved to the Green party and they were unlikely to get them back without compromising the rest of their base.

Will this platform swing voters to vote for the NDP? I don’t think it was designed to do that, except for the pledge to get rid of the carbon tax. There will have to be other dynamics in play in order for the NDP to win this election other than their platform.