|
|
|
|
Catholic S-words and the Canadian Parliament
Two s-words from Catholic social teaching are helpful for discussing Canadian politics as the new Martin cabinet begins work. One is “solidarity,” the other “subsidiarity.” Catholic social teaching calls for both solidarity and subsidiarity in human relations. Modern political parties, in contrast, tend to stress one and neglect the other. How will the new Canadian government and the next Parliament balance the two principles?
Solidarity is often neglected as individual freedoms are celebrated and social services privatized. Catholic social teaching stresses that each person is equal in dignity, and that all are interdependent. Nobody can claim to be totally self-made. To be human is to need others. Solidarity as a social principle sees a necessary place for stable families, communities and states to provide essential human services, from education to health care to public security. Canadian medicare is a good example of the principle of solidarity in action. Taxation therefore is an essential social mechanism. Environmental concerns also arise out of solidarity considerations. Even personal property should not be used without regard for the needs of others.
Subsidiarity, as a social principle, stresses that a higher authority should not do what can be done at a lower level. This suggests that the smaller the government the better, and that individuals, indeed, are best able to look after their own interests. It can easily be seen how subsidiarity, taken in isolation as a social principle, seems to support such policies as tax cuts, privatized health care, personal gun ownership, and the like. An extreme statement of subsidiarity would be Adam Smith’s vision: that when a man pursues his own interests he is “led by an invisible hand” to promote the good of society. Taken at its best, however, subsidiarity underpins individual human rights.
While it is never easy to balance them, Catholic social teaching insists that the common good requires both principles to be taken into account fully. Subsidarity should not be pushed to the point that individuals have no social supports. Solidarity should not lead to state agencies trying to run everything. Catholic social teaching does not spell out how the two principles should be balanced at any given place or time. However, the teaching does insist on both/and, and rejects either/or.
As the new cabinet gets to work and the agenda for the new Parliament emerges, it should be helpful to judge the parties and individual parliamentarians by how well each one respects both solidarity and subsidiarity as basic social principles. -- BMD 20/07/04
Back to Editorials List
|
|