Opposition’s complaints are no longer acceptable

Thursday’s Brandon Sun presented an interesting contrast in perspective and attitude. On the opinion page, the editorial discussed several aspects of the Carney government’s Budget 2025 and ended with this conclusion:

“It is a reasonable fiscal plan — a credible first step by a new government and new prime minister — toward addressing the challenges of Canada’s current fiscal reality. It is worthy of Canadians’ support.”

On the front page of that same paper, however, was a report that began with this headline: “Westman MPs will vote against budget.” The report revealed that Brandon-Souris MP Grant Jackson and Riding Mountain MP Dan Mazier, both members of the opposition Conservative caucus, have already decided that they would vote against the spending plan.

At first, I thought this was another interesting example of how reasonable people can consider the same facts and yet arrive at very different perspectives or conclusions. As I thought about it, though, it struck me as evidence of a flaw in our model of government.

As members of the opposition, many would argue that Jackson’s and Mazier’s role is to oppose the government and all of its policies. It’s an adversarial dynamic that we inherited from the British style of government, and is based on the assumption that the best solution to any issue or problem is arrived through spirited argument.

That may have worked in the past, but does it really work today? What point is served by Jackson and Mazier deciding to vote against the budget before they had even had the opportunity to read its 406 pages and consult with Westman residents?

And why does the media let them get away with saying they oppose the budget without having to explain what exactly they would do if they were in government?

For example, Jackson told the Sun that the budget “is the last thing that Canadians were promised, and certainly not what they were hoping to be delivered on.” In fact, it is exactly what most Canadians expected or wanted, with increased spending on the military and infrastructure that will improve our international trade.

Our rookie MP said he expected a deficit closer to the $40-billion mark, “but driving up the deficit to 78 billion (dollars) like this is not at all what he campaigned on. It’s not what voters elected me to support.”

Mazier told the Sun that the deficit is an “eye-watering” amount of debt “that’s putting a load on Canadians for generations.” He called it “just a train wreck of overspending and not really satisfying any kind of Canadian needs, as far as getting life affordable in Canada.”

Fair enough, gentlemen, but don’t stop there and don’t be vague about it. Give us the specifics of the billions in dollars in spending cuts you believe should be made.

Should we reduce the planned military spending and abandon our NATO commitments? Are you advocating that the Carney government spend less on CFB Shilo, which is a major component of the Westman economy? Do you honestly think that’s what your constituents want?

Should we forget about spending billions on economic infrastructure that will help Canada become less economically dependent on trade with the U.S.? If so, how would that strengthen the Canadian economy and create good-paying jobs in Westman?

You say that cutting 40,000 jobs from the federal service doesn’t go far enough. What would your target be nationally, and how many of those jobs do you want to be cut here in Brandon, Dauphin and other Westman communities?

Removing almost $40 billion from the federal budget would require that spending be slashed on a range of federally funded programs, including infrastructure, health-care transfers, the child benefit program, $10-per-day daycare and the new dental plan. Tell your constituents which of those programs should, in your opinion, be on your chopping block.

And while you’re at it, explain how Brandon Mayor Jeff Fawcett, a fellow Conservative, seems to have a completely different perspective on the budget. He told the Sun he “wasn’t surprised at all” by anything in the budget, and that the government’s plan to spend $115.2 billion in federal infrastructure investments over the next five years “likely still isn’t enough.”

If Jeff wasn’t surprised, why were you?

The mayor also told the Sun that the government’s $81.8-billion investment in the military is also “a positive” for the city due to the proximity of CFB Shilo, and he certainly isn’t calling for that amount to be reduced.

Years ago, a longtime Manitoba politician said that “your worst day in government is better than your best day in opposition.” Having worked in government, I have never believed that was true.

Being a member of the opposition is easy work. You sit in the cheap seats, second-guessing the people who are actually doing the heavy lifting. You lob your grievances without the pressure of having to come up with a better idea, and you are paid big money — taxpayer dollars — to do it.

Westman residents deserve better. If our MPs are so opposed to what the government is doing, they have a responsibility to tell us what exactly they would do differently, and to give us the specifics of their plan.

Times have changed, gentlemen. It’s no longer good enough for opposition members to just complain. If you honestly believe you can do better, you have a duty to tell your constituents how.