The buildup to the April 21^st federal budget may have been annoying, but the final product should really have been no surprise. In the aftermath of the long-delayed tabling of the budget, Canadians have been called upon to respond with heartfelt gratitude for the strenuous and disciplined management of Mr. Harper’s ruling Conservatives who have—at long last and in keeping with past promises—“balanced the budget.” There is supposed to be some kind of mystic aura around a government which has once again promised to live within its means and to spend no more than it can extract from taxpayers.

All well and good. Governments should keep their promises and governments should avoid deficits. That’s why the various triumphant announcements about this particular budget on the eve of a federal election ring so hollow. All this government has promised to do—and the actual results still need to be achieved; they are not a fait accompli—is to stop using its credit card to rack up even more debt. There is no promise to repay the borrowed money, which has pushed our national debt to its highest level in history.

In order to put a “balanced budget” in perspective, the following questions should be asked…and more importantly, answered:

• Who put us into deficit? Are the Conservatives coming on the scene, like a knight on a white horse, to rescue us from the spending profligacy of a previous incompetent regime? No, they themselves plunged into an irresponsible spending spree that has meant seven years of deficit budgets. Since 2008, the Conservative government of Mr. Harper has borrowed an additional $155 billion to pay for its programs, bringing the national debt to over $614 billion. As of last fall, interest on the national debt (at today’s microscopically low rates) was costing Canadians more than $76 million every single day! Did Canadians elect a “Conservative” government to increase spending and to expand our federal bureaucracy? Some estimate that government has grown—in size and cost—by approximately 42% since Mr. Harper has been in office.

• How many years will it take—if government projections are believed—to pay back the $155 billion (not to mention the rest of the federal debt accumulated under years of mismanagement by both the Liberals and the Conservatives)? This budget projects a surplus of $4.8 billion by 2019-2020. If that were to become an annual surplus starting in 2015-2016 and were to continue indefinitely (unlikely under this government), it would take us 32 years just to pay back the money Mr. Harper has borrowed since 2008. In other words, by the year 2048, Canada could be back where we were in 2008: $457 billion in debt! Is that really something to crow about?

• How reliable are the promises being made on the eve of this election? We’ve heard this story before and the track record is not good. In 2008, on the campaign trail, Mr. Harper vowed that “We will never go back into deficit” (Oct 14, 2008, Toronto Star), “We will not go into deficit” (Speech in Welland, Sept 17, 2008), “No reason why the government…can’t maintain a balanced budget this year” (October 17, 2008, remarks to reporters in Quebec City), “We will not be running a deficit this year” (October 7, 2008 interview with CBC). As Tom Korski of the Ottawa Hill Times summed it up: “Then he ran a deficit, the biggest in Canadian history.” So that was 2008, the fateful year of the recession; but the problems didn’t start there. In 2007 already, Mr. Harper’s government spent more money than any previous Canadian government. Because times were good, they still managed to balance the budget that year but they could have done so much more…like using more of it to pay off existing debt. How about the most recent federal election in 2011? Once again, Mr. Harper told us (during the campaign) that the budget would be balanced by 2014-2015…so he missed it by a year. By the time we found out, the election was long past. Oh well, maybe next time.

Well, we mustn’t be all doom and gloom. This budget contains some good points and we need to show our support for the concepts even if we would advocate different implementation:

• Income splitting is long overdue but should apply to all married couples, not just those with children. When “two become one” the government should treat them as such. (Of course I refer to the traditional marriage, not today’s experiments in social constructs.)

• More money for parents caring for their children. We reject the silly complaints of the leftist opposition that parents are getting money who “don’t pay for childcare.” Of course, they pay for it. Looking after their own children in their own home not only requires an expenditure of money and time (remember, “time is money”) but provides a service to their children and the future of our society that “professional” daycare just can’t match. Cost savings down the road in stability and behaviours will certainly offset the costs of this program. The CHP would go farther: we would direct more family care dollars to those parents who intentionally spend their time at home with school-age children to provide nurture and care.

• Tax cuts for families and tax cuts for small businesses are good but more Canadians would be helped if the government cut spending and focused on repaying the debt. Then the $76 million (or so) we spend on daily interest costs could be applied to lowering taxes and providing necessary services.

I’ll have to leave it there for now. A budget is a plan and it’s good to have one. The implementation and results of the plan are more important than forecasts and promises. Breaking the stranglehold of deficit spending is still an achievement. Canadians need to ensure that promises are not forgotten. The CHP also makes a commitment: our policy is not only to run balanced budgets but to pay off the national debt like a household mortgage. We need to do that while interest rates are low. If (or when) they skyrocket, balancing the budget will become more difficult, if not impossible.

This year, let’s choose a party that promises smaller government and responsible management of our resources. Government does not exist to do for us what we should do for ourselves; government is there to defend the innocent, to create a level playing field for businesses and families, and to create an environment where human creativity, ingenuity and hard work are rewarded. Government exists not to sustain artists and writers and spiritual leaders and thinkers but to protect, by the rule of law, a free-thinking society where artists can create and writers can share their thoughts and where families can earn a satisfying living. The state is there to provide just weights and balances and the freedom to think and dream. Let’s hope the next budget includes those goals.

As citizens, we should demand more of our government—not more goodies but more integrity It’s one thing to say that the budget will balance and it’s another thing to carry it through. With an election this fall, will there be “goodies” rolled out that are not included in the budget? If so, where will the money come from to pay for them?

The Christian Heritage Party has not strayed from the principles that we laid out in 1988: sound, affordable, responsible, moral government, limited in size and allowing the greatest possible freedom to its citizens. If you’re not already a member, join us today! We have Better Solutions!

Comment on this Communiqué