A Conferate Atlantic Government

After taking some time off I come to you today with two posts. This is a response to a post found here:

http://thecanadiansentinel.blogspot.com/2006/03/atlantic-canadian-amalgamation-one.html

in which the author argues that Canada would be better off if Atlantic Canada only had one central administration. I clearly disagree.

One way of making sure no-one offers a rebuttal for your argument is by stating, "the reasonable person would have a difficult time arguing the opposite." I consider myself a reasonable person, and I disagree.

First of all, let me say, with all due respect, that your argument does not point to any empirical evidence that supports a more centralized governing structure. I fail to see anything beyond "it doesn't make sense to have separate provincial administrations for such a relatively small geographical area." My question is, why doesn't it?

(1) A confederation between the Atlantic provinces would not necessarily bring an end to the red tape which businesses complain gets in their way. In fact, It is quite possible that a confederate government would impose just as many regulations that you call red-tape as any other provincial government. From a hypothetical standpoint, there is nothing inherent in a confederate government that would make it more efficient.

2.) We, in New Brunswick, are quite happy to have our own provincial government for many reasons, one being that we can guarantee official bilingualism in all of our jurisdictions. Within a confederate government of all Atlantic Canada I can't imagine being able to deliver the same assurances over language rights, and I don't imagine the politician from Cornerbrook would be too happy about speaking French to placate the fisherman from Tracadie. (for more information please see Alberta v. Quebec).

3.) A more centralized government run probably out of Halifax would be the equivalent of creating an Ottawa Jr in terms of waste. There is no lack of evidence to prove how inefficient the federal government can be at administering programs that are supposed to run from coast to coast to coast. This is because local administration brings local accountability. When our provincial governments cut back on health care, they have to deal with the fallout from people loosing hospital beds. Ottawa, however, rarely has to deal with the real consequences of its spending fluctuations. By moving all of our administrative power to a place like Halifax, those of us outside that region would loose our local accountability.

All of this said, I think the problem with the idea is that it is taking us in the wrong direction from where it is we actually should be going. The federal government should be lowering taxes so that provincial governments can raise them and start making headway with our health and education systems, which the provinces are ultimately responsible for delivering. 80% of our country's population lives in urban areas, and cities are coming under increasing pressures to supply necessary services yet they don't have the taxing capabilities to raise revenues. Paul Martin talked about a "new deal" for cities, but unless we get a true, renewable funding mechanism, power is going to continue to stay in Ottawa.

Now is not a time, at least in my opinion, to start talking about increased centralization. If anything we need to start thinking of new methods of devolution so that people's tax dollars are put to use more effectively, and our governing structures become more accountable.

Those are my two cents. And yes, reasonable people are free to disagree.

MCA