Quote:
Originally Posted by First Lady
I see the PC's as very left on fiscal things and conservative on social issues (see any of the restrictions they've implemented). Whereas Wildrose is fiscally conservative and socially moderate (some might say libertarian). From what I've seen most Albertans fall into the latter.
There could be some truth to that; we believe our policies have been pretty solid for some time now. We don't bend with the wind or flavour of the day. Our caucus has done a good job articulating our position and its not always easy to stand your ground on what you believe to be right.
|
This is where we have the point of departure though. The Wildrose isn't fiscally conservative. (Its a poor label to begin with, as every party would say that they are). Instead the plan is to cut spending and delivery of services along with infrastructure. This is purely to keep taxes low, which is an ideological bent, but not a sensible policy for the future. The shocking thing though is that none of this is costed. I've asked the party (as you know) when we can see a line by line breakdown and had no response. Some of us refer to that line-by-line breakdown more commonly as a "budget".
To me its pretty simple fiscally; either the Wildrose has some magicians in their midst whereby the cutting of "inefficiencies" that none of us will even notice perfectly balances with new spending in areas like health, education and infrastructure, or we can expect cuts. I'm not prepared to cast a ballot in favour of magic just yet!
As for the socially moderate that has to be a joke. In a party where candidates have written articles saying that the church should decide who should be allowed to be married I fail to see how you can make that claim. That is a large concern for me; rather see a separation of chruch and state you have candidates who actually want the church to make societal decisions for us. I'm not sure how that jives with the libertarians in the party, but it has to be an uneasy coaltion.