Last week I provided a kind of Politics 101 to explain a bit about ideology.
My plan for this week is to apply the ideas to the policies that the parties are putting forward in their platforms.
Parties are either on the left or the right side of the ideological spectrum based mostly on their ideas about equality: equality of right (equal under law with the state interfering as little as possible in the market and giving people the individual freedom to make their own choices); equality of opportunity (the recognition that the state can provide opportunity for citizens to better participate in the market by providing some services that can level the playing field like universal education and health care); and equality of result (the belief that society can be built to support better outcomes for all by stronger state involvement in the market and a greater assurance of assistance by the state to level the inequalities inherent in capitalism).
In contemporary politics, people tend to align these three views with conservatism, liberalism and socialism respectively.
However, in order to be accurate we should note first that socialists, in the true sense, believe that capitalism and socialism are stages in the process towards communism. In Canada, we really need to use the term social democracy to describe the type of socialism found here among mainstream parties. Social democrats believe that capitalism is the accepted economic base but they argue that the playing field can be levelled to ensure that there is not a huge range of inequalities in the state.
So let me take one policy from the parties to demonstrate how these ideas are articulated in their platforms. It is important to remember that I am only taking one policy as a snapshot and I can't do justice to the entirety of the platforms.
Housing is a good policy to start with because it really covers a core belief in a post 1950s world in which the last two generations have grown up.
We have come to accept the notion that home ownership, property ownership, is an achievable goal, perhaps even a right.
Here are three statements from the three mainstream parties: "Today's BC Liberals know that affordable housing is a critical issue for many middle-class families. Whether you were born in British Columbia or have come from another province or country, our plan is designed to help you realize the dream of home ownership" (page 73 of the Liberal Platform).
"For John Horgan and the BC NDP, a better BC means that decent housing is available and affordable. It means that renters have security where they live and that young families have real prospects of affording their first home" (page 3 of the B.C. NDP platform).
"Government has a social responsibility to ensure that everyone has access to reasonable, affordable accommodation. The BC Green housing strategy is part of a multi-faceted approach to improve the health and wellbeing of British Columbians by ensuring that everyone has access to habitable, affordable housing."
The Liberal statement picks up on their key constituents, "the middle-class."
I am not suggesting that they do not care about other socio-economic groups but a strong stable middle class is critical to conservatives and contemporary liberals because the middle-class creates a stable tax base and tend to be strong consumers. The Liberals try to balance the equality of right with the equality of opportunity providing measures that help individuals to get into the market. They use market mechanisms to provide a way for individuals to access housing.
The NDP statement and the Green party statement both demonstrate elements of social democracy. On page five of their platform, the NDP say that "(as) property prices have skyrocketed out of reach for young British Columbians and low and middle-income families, speculators have been making millions..." NDP constituents tend to see the state's role as regulating this gap in the inequalities between socio-economic groups. The NDP say they "... will make housing more affordable by ending loopholes that help speculators drive up prices and by ensuring speculators pay their fair share of taxes."
The Green Party weaves together the issues of employment and housing costs but also takes on the challenge of arguing that market mechanisms are not enough to fix the problem.
For example, they suggest that the Liberal Home Ownership and Equity Partnership program that "facilitates property purchase by those who are only marginally capable of servicing a mortgage" (page 22).
In other words, "equality of opportunity" does not ensure that individuals will reach the finish line in an economy that remains vulnerable to market forces. Liberals and conservatives generally agree that the final decision should be made by the individual.
As I said earlier, in a short column I am only able to take a snapshot of the platforms. A careful reading will show you that, in the case of housing, all the parties have plans for ensuring more affordable housing. The issue is how the parties see the state's role, the role of the market, and individual responsibility.
