Éric Duhaime repeats in all tones that the scaffolding of his proposals stems from the creative principle of his party, namely the freedom of individuals set up as a principle that would allow “to live in a prosperous society and to make choices that allow everyone to ‘accomplish. The problem is that his thoughts lead instead to social and economic inequalities. In reality, the freedom to which he refers can only be that of people who have the financial resources to be able to live in an increasingly “libertarian” and unequal society.
To fully understand its contradictions, you have to read between the lines. When launching his election campaign, he first proposed lowering taxes by about $2,000 for a worker earning $80,000. These tax cuts do not hide the fact that he wants to cut public services and cut the public service. The less fortunate in society, especially seniors who have not been able to accumulate RRSPs or a pension fund and who pay little tax, are not part of the equation. On the contrary, in a “libertarian” society where the private sector would charge fees for its services, a good part of the population could not be “fulfilled”, because “libertarian” practices would contribute to widening the chasm between rich and poor. . In fact, many workers find themselves in companies where there are no group insurance programs to contribute to the cost of private services.
By proposing more contribution from the private sector, the PCQ invites people to flourish by paying more for different services, even if they cannot afford it. The only people who can send their children to a private school and afford private health care must have good incomes and benefit from group insurance. It’s called freedom for the rich. However, the quality of health and the good level of education of an entire people constitute the basis of the fundamental wealth of a people.
Another eloquent contradiction: lower gasoline taxes to meet the cost of living. Such a proposal would only contribute to increasing the use of vehicles by giving citizens the illusion that they are freer to pollute without necessarily reducing their consumption expenditure. In the same vein, there is another fundamental proposal of the PCQ: to allow the exploration of hydrocarbons. Both proposals reveal Eric Duhaime’s true message. He says clearly: I don’t believe in global warming and I will do nothing to fight it; on the contrary, I will promote the increase in the exploitation and use of fossil fuels.
In a word, the PCQ is a prisoner of its libertarian logic and it must content itself with formulating a few proposals summed up in tragic, simplistic, attractive at first sight and above all cynical formulas: go backwards! To the strongest the pocket! And better said: apply the principles of economic neoliberalism to the maximum… and we will see the damage later when the social programs are gone because the rich will have paid less taxes. The PCQ is dancing in circles to stun and prevent seeing beyond a vague promise of freedom.
To see in video