PBO head Kevin Page at loggerheads with Harper government

Kevin Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the Conservative government of Stephen Harper face a showdown. Page gave officials in 56 departments until this Wednesday to provide him with information about cuts and savings in the budget.

In March of 2008 Page was appointed Parliamentary Budget Officer. In 2006 the Conservative leader, Stephen Harper, ran on an accountability theme. For the most part, the Conservative government has failed to be accountable whenever possible. However, Harper did create the PBO or Parliamentary Budget Office as part of his promise to make government more accountable, even though he gave the office less power and independence than many advocates of the office wanted.

Kevin Page was regarded as a safe choice for head of the PBO when he was appointed in March of 2006. Page had spent 27 years as a behind-the-scenes-economist in the government. Top-level Conservatives found him acceptable. Page had even worked closely with Harper as a key economic policy assistant in 20006 and 20007. When Page started to take a combative position in opposition to the Conservative government, many were taken by surprise. Now Page has become a constant thorn in the side of the government. He takes accountability seriously!

As the appended video shows, Page does not shrink from saying exactly and succinctly what he thinks When he is asked whether he thinks that the government was trying to mislead the public about the costs of the F35 jets Canada is planning to purchase, Page simply replies: "Yes". Ordinarily, reporters would be treated to a long song and dance that evades answering the question.

Page is now threatening to take the government to court if he does not receive the information he has requested from departments by Wednesday. The Treasury Board President, Tony Clement, claims that Page is operating outside his mandate. He even says that he is quite ready to make this argument before a court. This certainly shows that the Conservative government is trying its very best to narrow the range of its accountability as much as possible. According to Clement, Page's job is restricted to looking at what the government actually spends money on, not what it doesn't.

Page, on the other hand, points out that often what money is not being spent on, is as important as what it is being spent on. The recent food beef recall associated with cuts to the Canada Food Inspection Agency's budget is a good example of Page's point. The information that Page is requesting on budget cuts is another prime example. We will see on Wednesday whether Page gets his way or if the government challenges him.

Opposition makes hundreds of amendments to "Frankentstein" Conservative budget bill

The official opposition the New Democrats, the Liberals, and the lone Green Party member submitted hundreds of amendments to the majority Conservative government's budget bill. The budget bill which the opposition has called a Frankenstein bill goes far beyond financial matters and setting forth the budget.

There is a huge revamping of environmental laws. The changers are streamlining according to the Conservatives but to the opposition they weaken environmental laws and rush through approvals to please industry. There are also changes to oversight of the security apparatus, changes to eligibility for social security and unemployment insurance and on and on.

The opposition asked that the bill be split. In particular they wanted the legislation on environmental policy changes to be separate so it could be debated and voted on separately. However the Conservatives have a majority and use it to push through whatever they want however they want to do it.

The speaker of the house Andrew Scheer grouped amendments that were similar together. He said:“I have made every effort to respect both the wishes of the House and my responsibility to organize the consideration of report stage motions in a fair and balanced manner,”

Bill C 38 the budget bill is 425 pages long. The sole Green Party member and leader Elizabeth May introduced more than 300 amendments. She is particularly concerned with changes to environmental policy.

In total the opposition made 871 motions and amendments. The bill changes more than 70 different laws many having nothing to do with the budget. By bunching the motions and amendments together Sheer has managed to reduce the votes required to a minimum of 67 and the maximum number to 159.

Originally it was predicted that voting would take days but now it can all be done it is predicted in one marathon day. For much more see this Globe and Mail article.

Parliamentary Budget Officer stymied by lack of detailed information on budget cuts

The Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page has been trying to obtain specific information on Conservative budget cuts outlined in the recent budget. He has not had much luck.

Page asked all departments about a month ago to fill out a form that would detail their plans to cut their budgets. However only a few departments have even replied and the savings detailed represent just .06 per cent of the planned budget cuts!

The budget bill projected savings of 5.2 billion a year and did list cuts for each department but with little detail. Paige has been unable to find out much more. There are many other concerns about the budget bill.

The bill contains much more than just the implementation of the budget. The bill has over a hundred pages that deal with an overhaul of environmental regulations. The opposition wants to split these off for separate consideration. I have included a video dealing with this issue. Environmentalists are up in arms over these provisions. For more see this Globe and Mail article.

CBC funding to be cut and jobs lost

The CBC funding has been declining for some time now. The broadcaster is disliked by many conservatives. It is often called the Communist Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). The company is noted for some excellent documentaries and programs but as it has had to become more dependent upon ads for funding IMHO it has declined in quality.

The CBC has both English and French services. The English services will lose 86 million from its budget including 256 full time jobs.

There will be cuts to programming including six less series. With 175 less hours one can expect repeats. Altogether the budget cuts 115 million from the budget over three years.

CBC news will lose 88 jobs and cut 10 million from its budget.There will be fewer documentaries and both South American and African bureaus will be closed. The CBC will not get a Canadian perspective on events in those areas.

The CBC has often published exposes of government as well as corporate Canada. The Harper Conservative government and many of his supporters do not like that one little bit. Many are opposed to any publicly funded media period. For more see the full article.

Things have changed as in 1932 during the establishment of the CBC Conservative Prime Minister R.B. Bennett said; "I cannot think that any government would be warranted in leaving the air to private exploitation and not reserving it for use of the people." See this article.

Budget to cut public service jobs

In keeping with the ideology of the Conservative government the Treasury Board president Tony Clement said that the coming budget will represent a culture shift from "spending enablers" to "cost containers," .

Clement has the task of cutting from 4 to 8 billion from the budget. This is all part of the plan to reduce the deficit and balance the budget. Clement was speaking a Conservative gathering in Ottawa.

Clement said that the government plans will face opposition from public sector union bosses along with the New Democratic Party opposition. Of the NDP he said their only solution is to hire more, tax more, and spend more.

The NDP responded that the Conservatives were out to cut services and reduce the capacity of government to help people. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty maintained that the budget would not contain any draconian measures. This is probably true in that the Conservatives do not want create too much of a voter backlash through their cuts.

In fact some critics complain that the Conservatives are actually buying off the civil servants whose jobs are being cut by providing generous severance provisions. The Canadian Tax Federation a right wing group that used to be headed by the prime minister complains that the severance provisions are far too costly and generous and may almost balance out the savings. See this article.

A report to the government reads:"We are conscious that the Public Service is on the verge of significant changes, driven in part by the immediate requirements of deficit reduction, but also by a more fundamental need to renew public institutions for the future," . As is happening in many countries government services are to be cut and jobs lost. The report notes specifically:"One of the major tasks that senior leaders will face is the deliberate downsizing of the Public Service," For much more see the entire CBC article..

Ignatieff: Budget full of gimmicks.

I hesitate to describe what Ignatieff is full of. Perhaps of his self importance. But he also has gimmicks. For example, he goes on and on about how bad this budget is and then he uses the gimmick that Canadians do not want an election to excuse the fact he is obviously too chicken to go to an election when his polls are not that good. This is a replay of Dion without the Green Shift just the Sardonic Grin. Ignatieff's rhetoric is just for show since the Liberals will end up making sure that the budget passes. You might even say all his criticisms of the budget are just a gimmick to make it look as if he is actually doing something or has some power.

Budget full of gimmicks: Ignatieff

CBC News
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff blasted the federal budget for being a document full of "gimmicks" that ignores important issues, but reaffirmed he won't bring the government down over it.

"The throne speech and the budget let Canadians down. They expected vision and got gimmicks. They deserved ambition and got drift," Ignatieff told the House of Commons, a day after the release of the budget.

P.O.V.:

Budget 2010: How does this budget affect your family?

"This is a tired government, falling back on its laissez-faire instincts, leaving Canadians to fend for themselves."

Ignatieff accused the Tories of ignoring the pension crisis, doing nothing for child care and freezing foreign aid at a time when the mission in Afghanistan is shifting from military to humanitarian engagement.

"The Conservatives are ignoring the major issues that matter to Canada. Pensions? Nothing. Health care? Nothing. Climate change? Nothing. Culture? Nothing."

Instead of measures to create jobs, the budget has only "freezes, cuts and gimmicks," Ignatieff said.

'Canadians don't want an election'

He slammed the government over the $56-billion budget deficit, saying they cannot be trusted to get it under control.

"They inherited a $13-billion surplus. They spent at record levels in 2006-2007. They were on the edge of deficit before the recession started."

The government said it will freeze departmental spending, it won't say which programs they will cut, what services Canadians will lose and where the Conservatives will find the necessary savings.

"This isn't a plan. It’s very large empty promise."

Despite his list of grievances, Ignatieff repeated what he said on Thursday, that his party will not trigger an election over the budget.

"We will vote against the budget motion now before us — but we, unlike other parties in this House, will do so responsibly. We will not cause an election. Canadians don't want an election."

On Thursday, Ignatieff explained that they will not vote in sufficient numbers to defeat the government.

Post a comment
300Comments have been posted
Recommend t


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/05/budget-reaction.html#ixzz0hKdRDV0c

Corporate tax cuts remain in budget.

While there is not all that new for business in the budget extending the tax cuts will be of huge benefits for corporations. Keeping the corporate taxes so low may make it difficult to start bringing down the deficit any time soon since the revenue will not be there. No doubt the Conservatives are preparing to cut entitlements and attack federal workers. This is from the CBC.

Budget leaves corporate tax cuts intact

The Tories' promised corporate tax cuts escaped the scythe Thursday in the face of the $49.2-billion deficit, but there was little fresh help for companies staggered by the recession.

"We are staying on course to having the lowest corporate income tax rate in the G7 by 2012," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said in his speech.

"Some argue that we should cancel these tax reductions. Our government will follow through on our commitment. Reducing the tax burden on businesses is a key part of Canada's advantage in the global economy."

The federal general corporate tax rate is 18 per cent and set to reach 15 per cent in 2012, down from 22.12 per cent including the corporate surtax in 2007.

Flaherty did extend a hand to the country's battered manufacturing sector, pushing ahead with a plan to eliminate tariffs on machinery and equipment as well as tariffs on production inputs that was started last year.

A first phase was implemented in the budget last year, saving companies about $88 million. The government expects to fully eliminate the remaining tariffs by 2015 in a second phase that is expected to save companies $300 million a year.

Thousands of workers have lost their jobs in the manufacturing sector in recent years — especially in southern Ontario — hammered first by a rising loonie compared with the U.S. dollar and then by the recession as its key market in the United States dried up.

"It will help our manufacturers to invest and innovate, especially small- and medium-sized manufacturers," Flaherty said. "It will help keep jobs in Canada and create new jobs for Canadians for years to come."

But Jason Safar of PricewaterhouseCoopers said the minister's decision to stick to its plan on corporate tax cuts in the face of the deficit was the most welcome.

"They are staying the course on that, which I think is huge," Safar said. "When you look at where corporate rates have come from over the past decade ... it's a big drop."

Safar said given the size of the deficit, there was a real danger the government may have delayed the cuts. "I wouldn't have been surprised if they had been pushed off," he said.

Jayson Myers, president and chief executive of Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, said the tariff reduction will help, but more targeted measures are still needed to sustain innovation, investment and growth.

"While the savings are marginal, it is a bottom-line boost to cash flow for manufacturers at a time when it is needed the most," Myers said.

However, Canadian Auto Workers president Ken Lewenza said the budget did little to help workers.

"With hundreds of thousands of Canadians facing tremendous insecurity and hardship because of inadequate Employment Insurance and pension benefits, I expected to see tangible support from this government," Lewenza said.

"After taking more than two months to recalibrate, this budget is nothing short of pathetic."

The minister also announced the government would move to reduce red tape with a commission of parliamentarians and the private sector to review federal regulations.

"Its work will be of special benefit to small businesses, the engines of job creation in Canada," Flaherty said.

Also included in the budget was an extension of the mineral exploration tax credit for one year, for those who invest in flow-through shares.

The government also committed $7.2 million over two years to improve the fish and seafood industry's access to the international market and $75 million over three years for cattle processing plants.

Ignatieff: NO election over budget.

Why Ignatieff announces his intentions in advance is puzzling. There will be no drama to the debate now. Harper can rest easy while the BQ and the NDP can now take firm opposing conditions and vote against the budget. Ignatieff is no improvement on Dion. In fact Dion at least had a clear policy on the environment that he tried to advance. Even though it failed at least Dion showed some imagination and principled policies. Ignatieff seems to be floundering around waiting for Harper to self destruct while he props him up just as Dion did.

No election over budget: Ignatieff

CBC News
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff responds to the budget on Parliament Hill on Thursday. (Blair Gable/Reuters)
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says his party will not trigger an election over the federal budget brought down Thursday.

While the Liberals oppose elements of the budget, Ignatieff said Canadians are in no mood to head to the polls. He said Liberals will vote against the budget but not in sufficient numbers to defeat the government.

"The key thing is that Canadians are saying to me and have been saying for a long time — and I get told things once, I don’t need to get told twice — give us an alternative."

Ignatieff said the budget includes nothing about green technologies, the demographic crisis facing pensions or youth unemployment. He said the Liberals are busy coming up with alternatives on these issues.

"When that alternative is ready, when Canadians can see a clear choice between cuts and freezes and gimmicks and an alternative that gets this economy going and really meets the challenge of growth, then, maybe, we’ll have an election.

"But remember where we are. We’ve had three or four elections in the last few years, and I got told clearly by Canadians last autumn, 'Don’t do that again.'"

In this year's budget, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty pledged to continue the stimulus measures rolled out in the last year while vowing to return to balanced books as soon as possible. The government said it will tackle the $54-billion deficit by spending less than previously projected on defence and foreign aid, closing tax loopholes, streamlining government departments and freezing budgets. Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe and NDP Leader Jack Layton have said they will not support the budget.
Layton said there is not enough in the document for job creation.

"It's a budget that actually leaves the unemployed and seniors and the other victims of this recession behind," Layton said.

Layton said instead of focusing on the unemployed, the Tories are giving billions of dollars to big banks. He also accused the government of making major cuts to the environment and housing.

"I think that there’s some seriously misguided choices in this budget and it’s not one that we’re going to be able to support."

Duceppe said he doubted the government will be able to balance the budget over the coming years, and that they should be taxing high income earners to help get out of the red.

"Having a tax on those making more money to have them helping more than those that can't help, that would be a reasonable measure," Duceppe said. "The same thing that to cut those fiscal advantages to the oil companies, three billion dollars a year. So this is just unacceptable."

Duceppe also slammed the government on the environment, saying they should stop giving fiscal advantages to the oil companies.

But Flaherty defended the budget saying the government needs to impose fiscal restraint to tackle the deficit.

"This is the smallest new-spending budget in over 10 years in Canada. I like it. It's what we needed to do," Flaherty told CBC News. "We have to make sure that we bring our country back to fiscal balance over the medium term otherwise we would have a structural deficit and I don't want to have one."

He denied NDP and Bloc accusations that the budget favoured corporations, saying that the government has closed some tax loopholes.

"There are going to be some unhappy people in some of those executive suites when they analyze this," he said.

Flaherty said the government has spent a lot of money on Employment Insurance and that the economic action plan has created 135,00 jobs so far, with 220,000 jobs in total created by the end of the next fiscal year.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/04/budget-political-reaction.html#ixzz0hGLDQaft

Williams decries attempt to shaft Newfoundland

Harper managed to slip in some real poison pills to shaft those who gave him a hard time. Newfoundland and Labrador's Danny Williams is one but Quebec is also angry at the changes to equalization in the budget as well. Harper is going to try to get extra seats and support in Ontario rather than bother much with Quebec it would seem. He has already written off Newfoundland and Labrador it would seem.


Williams decries attempt to ‘shaft' Newfoundland
OLIVER MOORE
Globe and Mail Update
January 28, 2009 at 4:25 PM EST
The federal budget is a deliberate attempt to “shaft” Newfoundland and Labrador, Premier Danny Williams said Wednesday as he called for the Liberals to insist on an amendment protecting the province.
His government says that equalization changes in the budget would cost his province approximately $1.5-billion over the next three years, undermining their short-term financial picture.
“We've had a very hard hit, when you do this on a per-capita basis this is huge,” Mr. Williams said Wednesday.
“It's a sizable hit and, you know, that's a hit that we can't afford to take and didn't expect to take and our projections for the next three years were certainly not based on taking that kind of hit.”
Newfoundland and Labrador has recently become a so-called “have” province, meaning it does not receive equalization. But changes to the equalization formula still affect the payments it receives under the 1985 Atlantic Accord, which sets the rules by which revenues from the province's offshore energy industry are split with Ottawa.
The province expected to receive $2.7-billion in such payments over the next three years. In fact, Mr. Williams said, they had accepted $65-million less last year to set themselves up for richer payments in the future. But under the new budget they expect to receive less than half the amount they had anticipated over the next three years.
The Premier, who has a famously combative relationship with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, had Tuesday evening urged Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to vote against the budget and assume power at the helm of the Liberal-NDP coalition.
“You can tell all along that this was a strategy,” he told a press conference Wednesday. “[The Tories] basically took the regulations, from the look of it, and said ‘how can we get the maximum shaft on Newfoundland and Labrador.' That's exactly what they did.”
Mr. Williams called the press conference within hours of Mr. Ignatieff indicating he would accept the budget, with conditions. The Premier said he took “comfort” in comments from the Liberal Leader about the budget's effect on the provinces but asked for further changes.
“If the budget is not amended or is amended in a manner that does not bring Newfoundland and Labrador back to the position it was in before this budget then I would be asking the Newfoundland and Labradorian MPs to vote solidly against it,” he said. “And I don't doubt for one minute that they would, I think that's basically why they were elected.”
There are no Conservative MPs in Newfoundland and Labrador for residents to lobby since Mr. Williams was successful in his drive last election to shut out the Tories in the province.
Mr. Williams said Wednesday that while the budget move appeared to be the result of malice toward the province on the part of the federal Tories, he had no regrets about the stand he had taken.
“You can never take principle too far. I would never regret that move,” he said. “But of course once that battle was fought and that war was won it was over. And we then attempted to move on and I showed lots of signs of doing that.”

A few thoughts on the budget.

One might call this a conservative leftish budget. Leftish that is in terms of Harper's basic ideological leanings. There is a fair amount of govt. spending even on items such as social housing, and also a considerable expenditure on infrastructure. Many right wingers will be disappointed in Harper and will cry out about the deficits and consider the bailout expenditures too large.
Critics however point out that the stimulus package is really not all that large and probably not enough to help the economy out of the depression to any great extent. However, there is enough in the budget that Ignatieff can agree with that there will be no non-confidence vote passed I would predict, even with some degree of certainty in these uncertain times. Ignatieff may groan and go through a few motions of dissent and criticism but what he will not do is to vote with the Blog and NDP to defeat the budget.
Some critics such as James Laxer on his blog call for Ignatieff to vote against the budget on the grounds it is too little and not focused enough on the best stimulus measures. However, Ignatieff would rather wait and build up the Liberal party. As things get worse for the economy they may get worse for Harper as well.

While it is understandable that Dion would not reject the Conservative budget before seeing it nevertheless he can be almost certain that it will not have too many goodies that would make it difficult to vote against. There just is not much left in the cupboard. The Conservatives are certainly not averse to an election anyway. My prediction is that the Liberals will likely let the budget pass after a period of squeals. Dion has already had a lot of practice in not standing up for anything but having the Liberal party sit on its hands.
The public memory does not last long and if the economy worsens and Harper makes a few blunders the Liberals remain in the wings as the default choice as Tweedle Ho-Hum.


NDP targets Dion over looming Tory budget vote
Last Updated: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 3:43 PM ET
CBC News
The NDP challenged Stéphane Dion's Liberals on Wednesday to oppose next week's Conservative budget, accusing the party of losing the "moral right" to call itself the official opposition while refusing to bring down Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority government.
'We'll find out next week if they'll actually do anything about Harper's agenda,' NDP finance critic Thomas Mulcair said at a news conference Wednesday in Ottawa.(Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)
NDP finance critic Thomas Mulcair said his party had written a letter to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty detailing its concerns with the "wrong track" the Conservatives have taken over the past two years and indicated the New Democrats would vote against the Feb. 26 budget.
Mulcair also ridiculed Dion for showing "incredible weakness" in giving indications earlier this week that his party might abstain from the budget vote, despite "boasting" in a Liberal pamphlet sent around the Ottawa area this week that the party was a "strong and principled alternative" to the Tories.
"That's what the Liberals say about themselves," Mulcair told reporters Wednesday in Ottawa. "We'll find out next week if they'll actually do anything about Harper's agenda."
Following an address to Quebec manufacturers and exporters on Monday, Dion told reporters he won't lean one way or the other on the budget until he has seen the document.
But he added he might allow the budget to pass if it appears "acceptable or at least not too harmful for the Canadian economy."

Dion said his party would decide when it is appropriate to trigger an election, while also noting that an election would cost around $350 million in public expenses.
Tories 'picking winners' with tax cuts: Mulcair
But Mulcair said Dion's hint of an abstention showed he had "no credibility" remaining as an effective opposition leader.
"Given their track record over the last year, the Liberals have forfeited any moral right to be considered a credible opposition and a credible political force," Mulcair said.
The Montreal-area MP accused Flaherty and the Conservatives of "picking winners" by giving petroleum companies and big banks billions in tax breaks in last fall's mini-budget, while failing to invest in or ignoring the struggling manufacturing and forestry sectors.
In October, the Tories' mini-budget vote passed 127 to 76 in the House of Commons, with the Liberals abstaining, while both the Bloc Québécois and NDP voted against it.
Mulcair also outlined his party's key budget priorities, calling for new investment in health care, manufacturing and job creation, infrastructure, and sustainable development.

Tories expect to be defeated over budget.

We don't even know what is in the budget yet. Perhaps Harper will put in a poison pill, something the Liberals would find difficult to stomach. However the Liberals have shown that they can swallow any pride or principle in the face of polls that do not favor them. Before Dion defeats the Conservatives he will have to defeat the likes of Ignatieff and Rae. Dion is busy dithering at present. In the end he will get his marching orders from Rae and Ignatief . I
expect there will be no election.
Some articles warn that the Liberals provoking an election now is dumb.
The Ottawa Citizen article on the issue is a good example. The article below is from CTV.
Tories expect to be defeated over budget
Updated Thu. Feb. 14 2008 10:18 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
The Conservative government expects that it will be defeated over the budget in early March, which means Canadians could go to the polls by early April.
The government has apparently intensified its election readiness, believing it may fall during a non-confidence vote on March 4, the day of the Liberal amendment to the Tory budget. That could set an election date for as early as April 7.
Sources told CTV News that Liberal Leader Stephane Dion has told party members he is ready to pull the election trigger over the budget bill, even though some Liberals are against the idea.
"All the senior people, including the people who run the campaign ... they don't want an election right now. They do not want an election because they do not believe the party is ready to go into an election," Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife told CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live.
He said that the Conservatives have reacted by getting their election headquarters "up and running. They're getting their planes booked. The campaign workers have been told to get ready for an election campaign."
Fife noted, however, that the divisions over calling an election call run deep in the Liberal Party. He said senior Liberals such as Ralph Goodale, Michael Ignatieff, and Bob Rae don't want an election right now.
"One senior member of parliament said to me, either we're going to get (Dion) to change his mind or maybe we're going to have to push him off the ledge," Fife said.
On Thursday, Dion wouldn't say if he has made up his mind about forcing an election.
"I want to say to the Canadian people -- I always say the same in public and in private -- two things,'' Dion said.
"The first thing is that we will choose our time. The second thing is that we need to be ready at any time."
There are reports that Dion wants to hold a private meeting with his caucus once the budget is tabled later this month.
With files from The Canadian Press

Liberals look to defeat government over budget rather than Afghanistan.

This is from the Star. Other articles note that an election might be precipitated by the Afghan motion. I think that neither main party wants an election on Afghanistan. There might be problems controlling the debate. The relationship of the mission to US hegemony might be drawn out as well as the reactionary nature of the Karzai govt. Some might even point out the illegality and immorality of the mission from the first but that is doubtful. James Laxer presents some of the reasons to hope for an election on Afghanistan at his blog.
The Liberal party is also split on Afghanistan. Just listen to the weasel words of Ignatieff that as usual undercut his leader Dion:
Earlier in the day, deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff struck a more conciliatory tone than Dion. “This is the most important thing Canada’s done in 50 years. We are anxious to work with the government to find a respectable, honourable compromise that serves the national interest.” He questioned whether it is “in the national interest for us to plunge the country into a bitter election on an issue where Canadians, I think desperately, right across the partisan divide, want us to pull together and do our jobs as politicians.” (Canada.com)

This is unconscious humor of the same sort as when various vacuous pundits describe the Manley report as independent and bipartisan..Certainly it isnt multipartisan since it doesn't even countenance pulling out. Linda McQuaig points out the nature of the Manley panel:
The Manley panel may help deliver that — by putting pressure on Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, who has vowed to end the combat mission in 2009.
The Manley team will likely recommend continuing the mission. Manley himself is a pro-American hawk who, as foreign affairs minister in the wake of 9/11, famously struck a combative tone when he stressed the country's war-fighting past, telling reporters " Canada does not have a history as a pacifist or a neutralist country."
The rest of the panel, including former Washington ambassador Derek Burney and former New York consul-general Pamela Wallin, have been involved in efforts to convince Washington that Canada isn't soft on terror, the Star's Thomas Walkom noted.


Senior party figures look at defeating government over Flaherty’s blueprint rather than Afghanistan
Feb 07, 2008 04:30 AM ALLAN WOODS LES WHITTINGTON Bruce Campion-Smith ottawa bureau
OTTAWA—The Liberals are moving closer to defeating the minority Conservative government and forcing an election over the federal budget rather than waiting until a possible showdown over the future of Canada’s Afghan mission.The federal budget is expected at the end of the month or early March — before Prime Minister Stephen Harper will ask MPs to vote on a Conservative motion, to be introduced tomorrow, extending Canada’s military mission in Kandahar.Several senior Liberals made it clear that they are more inclined to defeat the Conservative government over its budget package, prompting an election that would focus on Canada’s increasingly troubled economy and the issue of how much Ottawa should be doing to help laid-off workers and struggling manufacturers.“Nobody is keen to fight an election over the war in Afghanistan, with questions about troop morale and all that,” Liberal Senator David Smith said yesterday, echoing the thoughts of many of his caucus colleagues yesterday.“The budget, we’re told, will be first, so the decision is: Yes or no, will we support the budget?” said Liberal MP and finance critic John McCallum.“You’d rather go into an election over the budget than the war in Afghanistan,” one senior Liberal said. Both the NDP and the Bloc Québécois have indicated they would vote against the budget. If all three opposition parties vote against the budget, the government would fall. This year’s budget is expected to be largely a steady-as-she-goes document that rehashes the personal and corporate tax cuts and the GST reduction announced in the October mini-budget. With the central Canadian economy flagging, the Liberals think a stand-pat budget could leave Harper vulnerable.The Conservatives, who won a minority government on Jan. 23, 2006, now hold 126 of the 308 seats in the Commons. The Liberals have 94, the Bloc 49 and the NDP 30. There are four independent MPs and five vacancies.Following a meeting with Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion on Tuesday, Harper decided to introduce a motion extending the mission beyond February 2009. While the motion is to be introduced tomorrow, the actual vote would not be taken until the end of March, just before Harper is slated to go to a NATO meeting in Romania, where he is planning to seek more troops to help Canada’s contingent of 2,500 soldiers in Afghanistan. Debate on the motion will begin next week. “The choice is clear. We either stay and do the job with our military in Afghanistan or we leave. We believe we should get more commitments from our allies and stay,” Harper said in question period yesterday.The motion is essentially an endorsement of a recommendation made by former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley in a report to the government last month. Manley said Canada should not stay beyond February 2009 unless it gets 1,000 more NATO troops and equipment to help in Kandahar province, where 78 Canadian soldiers have been killed. Dion told reporters yesterday the Prime Minister told him the vote on Afghanistan will be a confidence issue. Since both the NDP and the Bloc are demanding a withdrawal of troops before February of next year, if the Liberals did not support the Conservatives, the government would fall.Dion said Harper seemed unwilling to budge from his position that Canada’s current role stay the same.“I suggested to him that the Liberals were ready to contemplate a non-combat role for Canada ..... and he said he wants to continue the combat mission, so on that we have a big difference,” Dion said.Dion, who wants Canada to downplay its military role in Afghanistan in favour of more efforts to train local troops and spur economic development, said he’s ready to fight an election over the war.“I’m never afraid of anything,” he said after meeting his caucus. Liberal insiders worry that, in an election precipitated by a vote over the mission, Harper would try to paint the Liberals as unpatriotic.While Liberals say they would rather have a showdown over the budget, many are also saying they are prepared for a showdown on Afghanistan, too.“We don’t want to go to an election on Afghanistan especially, but he’s taking our soldiers hostage and he’s trying to manoeuvre and to provoke an election,” said one Liberal MP, speaking on condition of anonymity. “That’s what we’re facing now and he’s playing with fire.”In their meeting Tuesday night, Harper gave Dion a draft version of the motion that reiterated the government’s hope to extend the combat mission beyond February 2009, but was silent on the many challenges facing the mission.“There was nothing in the motion about the problems we have with the opium economy, the problems we have with the border (with Pakistan), the problems we have with development ..... and detainees,” Dion complained.The definition of Canada’s “combat” role in Kandahar lies at the heart of any potential compromise between Harper and Dion. While the Liberals seek an end to offensive military operations, they are open to soldiers remaining in Kandahar to take on “security” roles.Deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said Liberals “have been clear that we think the combat role should come to an end. The issue then is how you define a military and security role because we understand that you can’t build schools, you can’t get the irrigation flowing, you can’t do the good things. . . unless you have a military and security role,” he said.Parliament takes a break in the last two weeks of March, starting on the 14th, with MPs returning to Ottawa March 31. A late March vote would also come after four federal by-elections are held on the 17th. The votes are expected to give the Liberals at least three new MPs, including foreign affairs critic Bob Rae.

Different views on the budget and equalization.

A Toronto Star editorial claims that the Tory budget offers a more than generous equalisation scheme. According to the anonymous editorialist the Atlantic provinces want to have their cake and eat it too. The article is here. I don't suppose that the Star is headquartered in Ontario has anything to do with their viewpoint!
A Halifax paper on the other hand claims that under the new equalisation formula the province of Nova Scotia will be out billions over 20 years. The article is here.
Finally Premier Calvert in Sask. is going to court to sue the government. The suit is not over broken promises but about the fairness of the equalisation formula. Calvert claims that since oil and gas belong to provinces income from them should not be counted in the equalisation formula. Apparently it is not according to the new formula or so the CBC article below claims. I guess what is unfair are the caps on equalisation. It seems to me that since oil and gas revenues will obviously make a province much richer it should count in the formula in some manner.

Sask. will sue over equalization: Calvert
Last Updated: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 | 4:42 PM CT
CBC News
Saskatchewan will launch a lawsuit against the federal government next week over equalization payments, Premier Lorne Calvert said Wednesday.

Calvert said a lawsuit isn't his preferred way to deal with the dispute over the federal program, but he tried negotiations and calling on Saskatchewan MPs to vote against the budget and nothing worked.

"This is a very poor way to run a country," Calvert said.

Equalization is the $12 billion program under which Ottawa makes payments to poorer provinces so they can afford the same services and tax rates as richer provinces.

Thanks to surging oil and gas revenues, Saskatchewan has received virtually no equalization money in the past few years.

During the election campaign, the Conservatives promised to take non-renewable resources like oil and gas out of the equalization formula — a change Calvert said would mean an extra $800 million a year for provincial coffers.



The March 19 budget did remove oil and gas from the formula, but added a cap on equalization payments. As a result, Saskatchewan is getting $226 million this year and nothing next year.

Calvert said the legal action would not be over a broken campaign promise.

If a lawsuit was filed for every broken Conservative promise, there wouldn't be enough lawyers, he said.

Instead, he said, the suit would be based on the sections of the constitution that require the equalization program to be fair and equitable.

The Saskatchewan government will also argue the constitutional principle that natural resources belong to the people of Saskatchewan and the current equalization program violates that principle.

Earlier in the day, Saskatchewan Conservative MP Gerry Ritz insisted in a CBC interview that there had been no promise broken and that his constituents are telling him the budget is an excellent one for Saskatchewan.

Saskatchewan Tory MPs vote for budget
Governments in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador have also been up in arms over the equalization program.

Nova Scotia MP Bill Casey was kicked out of the Conservative caucus after he voted against the government's budget bill last week.

Casey did the same thing again in the final budget vote Tuesday night. The budget passed a final vote in the House of Commons with all 12 Saskatchewan Conservative MPs voting in favour.

Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre MP Tom Lukiwski came out swinging, however, accusing Calvert of launching a lawsuit as a provincial election ploy.

"He's got an election coming up. He's 25 points points down in the polls," Lukiwski said. "This is grandstanding, a last-ditch effort for him to try to change the channel. I think he has no basis for his lawsuit but I welcome his challenge."

Quizzed during question period about equalization, Prime Minister Stephen Harper claimed he was baffled by developments in Saskatchewan and the Atlantic provinces.

"I don't even understand what they're saying any more," he said.

The Conservative Election-Ready Budget

The time is not for slash and burn right now. The new Common Sense is to lavish goodies on the middle class or at least pretend to. Some social programmes are to be axed and the divide between rich and poor is growing. But the budget does offer the illusion at least of relief for the hard pressed middle class. It may very well be enough to get a majority for the Conservatives. Goodye Wheat Board, hello more military spending and buy shares in the jail-industrial complex. Keep George Bush smiling!

Election-ready budget


Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he's not planning an election, but Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's new budget coming Monday is expected to have enough goodies for voters, just in case. With winning a majority government foremost in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's mind, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's budget Monday will have goodies for voters

Mar 17, 2007 04:30 AM
Les Whittington
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–The ghost of Mike Harris will be nowhere to be seen when Finance Minister Jim Flaherty rises in the Commons to deliver his second budget on Monday.

With a federal election looming, Flaherty is shelving the tight-fisted, tax-slashing ways of the Harris government he was once part of in Ontario in favour of a grab bag of economic policies meant to appeal to the widest possible array of voters.

But once the fireworks are over on March 19, Canadians will have to dig through the scores of tax and spending proposals to see what the Conservatives are actually trying to accomplish.

The budget is being rolled out at a time when, although economic growth numbers remain buoyant, most families are caught up in a long-term trend that finds them struggling harder than ever just to keep their standard of living from eroding.

And at a time when, despite years of prosperity and federal budget surpluses, Canada is still enduring high levels of poverty, widespread homelessness, decaying cities and an affordability crisis in post-secondary education.

Flaherty is not likely to dwell on these concerns in his budget message. Instead, he will focus on how well Canada's economy is performing, how quickly the national debt is being paid down and what the Conservatives see as the way ahead for the country.

And there will be much to catch the eye of the average voter on Monday.

To begin with, new spending. Lots of it. With winning a majority at the polls now outweighing all other considerations for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government, the Tories have swallowed their traditional objection to federal spending sprees and dipped into an unexpectedly huge budget surplus – perhaps in the $7 billion to $10 billion range – to dazzle Canadians with goodies.

There's fresh financial commitments for anti-global warming programs, farmers, public transit, medical wait-times, AIDS research, border safety, crime prevention, land conservation, alternative energy and victims' rights, among other things. In all, some $13 billion in spending commitments have been announced in just the past few months.

Added to that will be a huge outlay of extra cash from Ottawa to the provinces –probably about $3 billion – to quiet a long-standing dispute over revenue-sharing at the federal-provincial level. Much of the cash will be aimed at Quebec, but other provinces such as Ontario will wind up with more money for post-secondary education and similar priorities.

"In our upcoming budget, we will finally take action to restore fiscal imbalance in Canada, so the provinces and territories have the resources they need to meet their obligations to Canadians," Harper said in a Feb. 6 speech that previewed his government's plans.

Speaking of the provinces and territories, he said, "we'll respect their jurisdictions, focus on core federal responsibilities and ensure federal programs treat Canadians fairly regardless of where they live."

And, despite the billions in newly announced spending, there will still be room for tax cuts on Monday. All in all, it will be an attractive, politically attuned package.

But beyond the numbers and the high-minded rhetoric, what will it all amount to for Canadians?

At heart, Flaherty is a Harris-style Conservative who favours lower taxes, less government intrusion in the economy, and letting business get on with the job of creating wealth. But as federal finance minister, he has positioned himself as a more moderate champion of middle-class families.

His first budget contained an array of tax breaks – including a cut in the goods and services tax, and tax credits for textbooks, kids sports and public transit – that struck a chord with some Canadians.

He also introduced a $100-a-month baby bonus to replace the Liberals' $5-billion plan to work with the provinces on a national child-care system. Never mind that the baby bonus was taxable, thereby reducing its value, and that Flaherty surreptitiously raised personal income taxes to help pay for the other measures.

No one doubts that tax cuts get the public's attention. But Flaherty's critics question whether this kind of piecemeal approach is really what the country needs to ensure a vibrant economy and a strong social fabric over the long term.

"We think they're highly politically motivated, designed for some sort of electoral tactic as opposed for being designed for some kind of ultimate economic purposes," says Ellen Russell, senior economist at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), a left-leaning think-tank.

"We also think they don't make a meaningful difference, even to the people who receive them."

This year, as part of Harper's pre-election theme – building a "stronger, safer and better Canada" – the budget has been designed as a something-for-everyone package.

It's expected to bring some savings in taxes for most Canadians – both through a modest across-the-board tax cut and the Conservatives' so-called "tax-back guarantee." The latter, a commitment to return to taxpayers in the form of tax reductions any savings on interest payments achieved by reducing the $480 billion national debt, is a catchy idea. But it will only provide $30 or $40 in tax savings per person this year.

Beyond that, Flaherty will introduce a refundable tax credit designed to keep Canadians at the lowest end of the income scale from being penalized by the tax rules when they move off social assistance to take a job.

And for the rich, Flaherty is expected to fulfill the Conservative election promise to ease taxes on stock market profits and other capital gains.

But it's not clear the budget will really do much to tackle the deeply entrenched economic and social problems that lie behind the facade of today's good times.

A recent report by a national anti-poverty action group, for example, found that few of the benefits from Ontario's economic performance are trickling down to the province's most vulnerable families.

Since 1995, the percentage of children living in working poor families in Ontario has more than doubled, from 17 per cent to 38 per cent, according to Campaign 2000.

And it's not only low-income families who are struggling to stay afloat in a sea of prosperity.

A new analysis of income data shows that nearly 80 per cent of Canadian families are working more and earning a smaller chunk of national wealth than in years past. At the same time, the incomes of Canada's richest families are skyrocketing.

The widening of this so-called income gap between rich and poor families is attributable to minimum wages that haven't kept up with inflation, the disappearance of many well-paying manufacturing jobs and the trend toward temporary employment, say economists at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

On a wider scale, there are growing fears about income security if Canada's economy falls behind low-wage economic giants such as India, China and Brazil.

Tackling these problems, according to many analysts, requires concrete action led by the federal government to stimulate significant long-term investments and goals. The focus would be on such areas as post-secondary education and training, affordable housing, early learning and child care, technology-based industries, improved health care, a less restrictive federal employment program and higher minimum wages.

"It's high time for governments, led by the federal government, to get with the program and take this thing seriously, the way we have other serious challenges such as the federal deficit and, it seems now, climate change," says Laurel Rothman, national co-ordinator for Campaign 2000.

"We certainly have significant resources. We have provinces like Quebec, Newfoundland and, just recently, Nova Scotia, which are all committed to a poverty-reduction strategy, and we think it's time for the government of Canada, with the provinces, to do the same."

Opposition parties will be watching carefully to see if the budget goes beyond short-term politics.

"Canada's future success calls for a comprehensive strategy, not a sudden, last-minute attempt to get ready for an election," Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion says.

"We can be a country where opportunity is shared equally. A Canada where the federal government will be there when Canadians need help."

Oddly, the spending spree that Harper and Flaherty have begun recently has actually spurred concerns about a possible round of deep cuts to federal social programs next year.

Like the Liberals before them, the Conservatives find themselves awash in money as personal and corporate tax revenues have surpassed all expectations. The budget surplus for this fiscal year, which ends March 31, once forecast by Flaherty at $3.6 billion, is likely to come in at more than $7 billion.

But it hasn't gone unnoticed that last year, despite a federal surplus that hit $13 billion, the Harper government nonetheless laid plans to axe $1 billion in spending, including social and cultural programs and a legal project that helped minorities.

The question is: Even with such a huge surplus, can Ottawa afford the current avalanche of spending without going back into a budget deficit?

NDP finance critic Judy Wasylcis-Leis says she's wary of the Tories' strategy.

"Their whole approach," she says, "has been to minimize the role of government and to bring an attack solution to bear on every problem."