Democracy: a danger to economic growth?
Liberals appear to claim that real democracy isn't the way to go

 
     
 

Alexandra Samuel
August 7, 2002

 
     
 

For years, the Canadian economy has suffered from a pervasive economic blight that no one has been brave enough to challenge.
What is the economic peril that dare not speak its name? Democracy.

Thankfully, the federal Liberals have a plan to overcome it. The last piece of the puzzle fell into place this week, with a controversial ad in The Sun.

"There has never been a better opportunity for you to get involved in the future of our country," the ad read. "By joining the Liberal Party of Canada in British Columbia, you can make a difference."

Chretien supporters tried to throw us off the scent by claiming that the ad was a premature leadership campaign move by Paul Martin, seeking supporters.

But the ad's real message was clear: Canadians! Don't waste your time with those other parties. If you want to affect the future of Canada, join the Liberals. The era of meaningful electoral competition is over.

If Martin was behind the ad, he was only fulfilling his role as chief architect of the Liberal economic plan. Being ousted from cabinet, it seems, is no reason to give up the dream of steering Canada towards economic prosperity.

And the key to that plan is to curtail the excesses of Canadian democracy.

In the past ten years, economists have finally shed light on the complicated relationship between democracy and economic growth. It turns out that a little democracy goes a long way.

That's right: Economists have concluded that, if democracy has any effect on economic growth, it's a negative one. Once you've given citizens a few basic rights, like the right to vote, enhancing democratic freedom just undermines economic performance.

If you want to see strong economic performance, look to quasi-democratic countries with as little internal debate, and as little government turnover, as possible. Benevolent dictatorships do pretty well.

But vigorous democracies pay a price for internal dissent. Inter-party competition leads to debates over awkward questions like income distribution. Eliminate the competition, and those awkward questions go away.

Clearly, the federal Liberals have studied this literature. They've come up with a three-point plan that calibrates Canadian democracy to the levels that are optimal for our economy.

1. Limit political protest. Schedule major government functions (like the G8 meeting) at out-of-the-way locations and curtail access. And outlaw any baked good that could be used as a form of political expression.

2. Seize the day. Where some world leaders saw 9/11 as bad news for the economy, the Chretien government recognized it as a golden economic opportunity: a chance to curtail civil rights in the name of security and safeguarding our economy from the dangers of too much damn freedom.

3. Discourage electoral competition. Sure, some sensitive types may be offended by the suggestion that Canada is better off as a one-party state. But once they reflect on this week's advertisement, they'll recognize that the Liberals are simply being honest about the inevitability of their long future in government. And remember: Political inevitability means economic stability.

There's only one hitch in this plan. While democracy may be bad for growth, growth is good for democracy: as incomes rise, people demand more and more democratic rights.

It's nothing another ad can't address. "Join the Liberal Party of British Columbia," it might read. "And fight Canada's biggest job-killer: democracy."