Why PM fights for banks

Share

It's not all that often that a Canadian Prime Minister decides to invest some of his time and political capital crusading against higher taxes on banks. It's one thing to be opposed to such taxes, but campaigning for bank protection is usually not in the Popularity 101 playbook.

Mr. Harper's effort in this regard therefore is interesting. His articulation of his position yesterday was quite effective. Among other things, he talked about the fact that Canadian banks, unlike others, were prevented from/avoided engaging in the risky activity that brought the world's financial system to the brink of collapse. He argued that taxing all banks, even those who were not part of the problem, was inherently poor policy and unfair. He also argued you can't rely on this tax proposal to alter the behaviour that needs changing. He took a barbed, complex issue, and made a pretty cogent plea.

The case he made had three useful elements, from a political/public opinion standpoint. First, it allowed the Prime Minister another opportunity to paint a contrast with Michael Ignatieff's Liberals: Mr. Ignatieff would freeze rather than allow corporate taxes to decline according to the Harper plan, while the Conservatives believe lower corporate taxes elevate all boats. This is a useful divide for the Conservatives, because many mainstream Canadians have become less antagonistic over the years toward business, more "bought in" to the notion that healthy profits mean job growth and rising incomes.

Second, the argument has a not-so-subtle nationalist hue to it. Canadians can hear in it, if they choose to, the feeling that our more prudent culture created a better economic outcome than that more gung-ho extroverted capitalist society south of the border. The Canadian turtle looking backward at the American hare. If you don't like the idea of cutting banks some slack, you probably like the idea that Canada should be singled out for its prudence.

Finally, the bank tax argument presents another opportunity to divert attention from less appealing narratives. In addition to the dispiriting Guerges-Jaffer-Gillani-Snowdy drama, the last week brought a couple of other moments the Conservatives would have preferred to live without.

First, was the remarkable loss of message control on Canada's naval capacity. For a government that has invested so much of its political capital in rebuilding the Canadian Forces, the statement from the navy that as many as half of our ships would be idled for lack of funds was startling. The reversal of that directive was fairly quick, but somewhat ungainly, and the overall impression left was one of disarray, in a place where you least expect or can tolerate it.

And then on the weekend, the Roman Catholic Primate of Canada declared his affection for Mr. Harper's position on abortion and maternal health, using language and analogies so provocative, they warranted a quick and firm rebuke from one of Mr. Harper's ministers. The maternal-health initiative has become so troubled for the government that it prompted Mr. Harper to become a self-described champion for what he terms "less controversial ideas." This may have prompted the odd smile and eyebrow raise among long time Harper watchers.