Canada has not done well under Trudeau government
I was somewhat surprised to read John A. McDonald’s latest letter to the Citizen in which he complained about the Conservative party’s recent T.V. commercials.
Mr. McDonald has the right to express his opinion of course, that is what makes Canada such a great country, and my last letter praised him for his position on our attorney general and the SNC Lavalin affair, however his letter entitled “Scheer would take Canada backwards” mystifies me.
His statements about Canada’s “good progress” are simply not true. Under this government Canada has not done well. Our dollar is down to 74 cents of the U.S. greenback. Our national debt has increased tremendously, and Justin Trudeau’s promise to pay it off like so many of his other promises, has failed to materialize.
As the Citizen recently reported, inflation is rising. Also, as reported by an independent body, our immigration system is broken. Canada ranks 18th in the developed world in terms of personal freedom and some time ago it was revealed that we have lost seven points on the international freedom scale.
Canadians are struggling. Forty-seven per cent of Canadians are $200 away from bankruptcy. Is this the “good progress” he is talking about?
We have never been more divided in Canada as evidenced by the fact that half of Albertans are now seriously considering separation. The problem of regionalism once again rears its ugly head on every issue from pipelines to provincial identity. Small wonder.
And lastly, we have never been more embarrassed as a nation than we have under this prime minister. From the India trip to SNC Lavalin, the five ethics charges against him, and continual gaffes like calling Japan “China”, Justin Trudeau is not doing us proud.
How does the Conservative Party’s objection to all this constitute a “disruption of parliament?” The old ghost of “Harperism” does not explain much of anything in this regard.
How Andrew Scheer will take us back “hundreds of years” is also mystifying. Having met Mr. Scheer and reviewed his policies it is not clear how this would be so. We need to look at these issues from a dispassionate viewpoint, and not claim things unrelated to the facts. Let’s hope that is how future letters will be written.
Perry Foster
Duncan