There is an odd thing going on these days in Canada. Our perpetual national debate over the future of our country has taken on a new dimension. Provincial Premiers of all political stripes are joining hands with the federal government to advocate a ‘social union’. Surprisingly, many groups usually known for more progressive views are joining them.

Now, I don’t know about you, but any time I see a New Democrat Premier like Roy Romanow allied to a conservative-reform Premier like Ralph Klein, my skin begins to crawl. How can politicians whose main constituencies and political ideologies are supposed to be diametrically opposed be allied with each other on any issue? I’d say one of the two has been conned.

Yes, I know that politics makes strange bedfellows – but this goes beyond the merely strange and borders on the perverse. Talk about the return of the son of Meech Lake (the last time the New Democrats made common cause with conservatives and liberals).

The Threat of Balkanization
The Meech Lake comparison is actually quite appropriate, once you examine the real issue in the social union negotiations. There is an underlying theme of devolution of power from the federal government to the provinces that is exactly what the majority of Canadians opposed in the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords.

The real problem with passing authority over federal programs to the provinces is the very real likelihood that each province will run slightly (or hugely) different programs. What difference does that make? Actually, it makes quite a lot of difference.

Consider Medicare. Ralph Klein already tried to opt out of the Canada Health Act provisions against double billing (fees for service) for health care procedures covered under Medicare. It was only the withholding of millions of dollars in federal health transfers that made him back down.

What happens when the federal government no longer has sole authority over interpretation of guidelines – when its some vaguely worded federal provincial health accord that is being interpreted instead of the Canada Health Act?

What happens is that the Ralph Klein’s and Mike Harris's get to follow their agenda of turning over public services and public programs and public employment to big business (and mostly American big business at that) with no effective mechanism for the federal government to reel them back into line.

This will effect, eventually, all federal programs and services – from health care to advanced education to social assistance and even immigration and old age security.

Now some people will say that this social union will make it easier for good, or well-intentioned governments (like BC) to create better social programs. On the surface this may appear to be true – but isn’t it far more likely that this will actually create immense downward pressure on provincial social programs and public spending?

What happens when one or more of the ten provinces uses the federal money to replace current provincial expenditures and then cuts corporate taxes? It’s simple. Every province will become embroiled in a competition that transfers public and social service money to business – not to attract new investment, but simply to keep what you already have.

The social union, in this scenario, would simply provide the starting blocks in a race to the bottom.

Brian Mulroney would be thrilled
Just as Meech Lake and free trade with the United States were two sides of the same coin – so is this social union and NAFTA.

This is all about transferring power –not to the provinces – but to the corporate sector. Consider what happens if a province – say Alberta – decides to set up a for-profit privately owned hospital or Workers’ Compensation system. Then some giant American corporation buys out the ‘enterprise’ and uses it to demand the right, under NAFTA, to openly compete by providing the same service in other provinces?

Further, this devolution of power is always a one-way street. What do you suppose the chances are that all ten premiers would ever agree to pass power from the provinces to the federal government? That’s right, there isn’t the chance of a snowball in hell of that happening.

What is a Canadian?
This question isn’t as easy as it looks. The most important ingredients to national identity are shared rights and shared experiences.

The things we all hold in common are what bind us together as a nation. So, the existence of national enterprises and crown corporations that serve all Canadians the same way – like Canada Post and Air Canada and the CBC and Petro Canada - are important parts of what makes us Canadian. Conversely, the destruction or sale of crown corporations – like Air Canada and Petro Canada - makes us weaker a nation (as does the closing of rural post offices and the privatization of postal services).

Our shared rights to Medicare and advanced education and Employment Insurance and welfare and Canada Pension are critical to our national identity. What happens when a citizen’s quality of health care and education and retirement depend upon which province they reside in? They become Albertans first and Canadians second. If you think this is far-fetched, consider that there are already provinces charging ‘out-of-province’ students higher tuition fees.

We need and deserve common programs and equality of rights across provinces. The social union negotiations will only create greater disparity in this critical area. We need to oppose the social union negotiations and the whole concept of a social union in exactly the way we opposed the Meech Lake Accord.

Don’t be misled by people who claim that we can use the social union to create progressive reforms. This process was started by the corporate sector and by its political friends. It is being pursued on their behalf. Participation by peoples’ organizations will only add a false veneer of democratic appearance to a rigged shell-game. It will never meet our needs.

We need to expose the process for the gross disservice to Canadians that it is – and we need to convince all of our friends and allies to mobilize opposition to it.