Former Harper CoS: GST cut 'worked' because it helped elect CPC

[Hank]

However, should there a fundamental conflict between the board and the CEO, the board would prevail.

Just to clear this up, both the board and the CEO have a fiduciary duty to the corporation, not the shareholders. If there's a conflict between the board and the CEO about what is the best course of action for the corporation that's one thing, but neither the board members nor the CEO are allowed to ignore the best interests of the corporation if the shareholders ask them to.

 

[kEiThZ]

I suspect that neither the GST promise nor the helicopter promise truly helped elect the LPC in 1993. The PCPC defeated itself. I think that more likely, those promises were made without due consideration of whether they were good policies, and there was pressure to fulfill those promises. The GST cut was abandoned because Ottawa would have been bankrupted by it.

The same goes for Harper getting elected though. The Liberals lost because of a 'get the bums out' mentality. Harper offering the GST cut was probably just a sweetener. The difference being that this time the party promising the cut followed through with it. I really don't see the promise of cutting the GST as having a much more significant role in the 2004 election than it did in 1993. All parties make promises and decisions that are politically expedient. This interview is unique in that Brodie has admitted to it while Harper is still in power. Imagine if Chretien's COS came out and said in 1997 that they had simply promised to get rid of the GST to get elected and that it wasn't a serious promise and they had no hope of ever actually pulling it off. That was obviously the case. It's just that the Liberals are far to disciplined to ever admit to something like that.

 

[Hydrogen]

CPC electoral strategy for the past two elections has been to create apathy and antipathy toward politicians to drive down voter turnout. They won fewer votes in 2008 than 2006, but won because they managed to drive down support for other parties more. Something is profoundly wrong with an organization that will do such a thing.

Could you elaborate on this?

There's little doubt that the CPC cut the GST in part to become more popular and to win more votes. I'm surprised that anyone would have a hard time seeing that - regardless if anyone in that party wanted spell it out at the time. It was a broad and popular "strategy" at the time because Canadians have come to perceive themselves as being over-taxed and the government accounts were still flush with cash then. The GST was an easy target because it applies to everyone - regardless of income.

The last part of your paragraph is curious. The aim of a political party in a democracy is to achieve power and form a government. If the CPC managed to drive down support for other parties as you claim they did, then they either succeeded in maintaining their support to a greater degree than the other parties, or the other parties simply failed to attract or interest prospective voters. Either way, it's hard to see how you could find things "profoundly wrong," because the CPC did not make people apathetic. Ultimately, the issue of apathy lies with voters who have the choice to vote or not vote for their own reasons.

 

[kEiThZ]

If I recall correctly voter turnout was lower across the board not just for the CPC in 2008. Notably at that point I really don't know how much of a difference the GST cut made. Most of the people I know kept grousing that all they had saved was 2 cents on coffee. From my personal experience, if anything that cut was a liability in that it showed how ineffective consumption tax cuts can be when you get them. I just don't think it contributed that much to the Conservatives getting elected.

In 2006, it was Liberal corruption that sank it for the Liberals. And in 2008 it was the Green Shift that sank it for the Liberals. I sincerely believed that the Liberals would have done better than they did at the time. However, presenting a complex plan to rejig the tax system (and one which you cannot explain to a voter in a sound bite) on the eve of a recession is probably not a good idea. That's what sank the Liberals. I doubt the GST cut did that much. I think people give the Conservatives too much credit. The Liberals are after all the natural governing party of this country. If they are ever out of power it probably has more to do with their failures than the other guy's successes.

 

[urbanfan89]

CCRAP's last election strategy was to convince natural Liberal voters to have doubts about Stephane Dion, and to consequently stay home. The lack of substance in the campaign was quite shocking.

It worked.

 

[lordmandeep]

I think people give the Conservatives too much credit. The Liberals are after all the natural governing party of this country. If they are ever out of power it probably has more to do with their failures than the other guy's successes.

lol, well they are if you have a strong liberal party they would be in power already. The next election will not be about Harper Minority or Majority...

It will be Harper minority or Igantieff Minority.


Imo Igantieff has to get back all of centrist liberals that either vote for Harper or just stay home. I think Igantieff will be successful as he is a centrist. Also, the NDP was weakened greatly over the coalition govt debacle.


Next election I see Tory and Liberals both getting around 34-37% of support, NDP around 15%, Bloc at 10% and the Green take the rest.

All I know in the next election parties like the NDP will suffer as its time to get serious.

 

[adma]

For some reason, I'm tempted to read the "CoS" in the title as "PoS"