This is from the Star. Here is another chance for the Liberals to bring down the government but of course it won't happen. Even if Dion wanted to do it his handlers Rae and Ignatieff would not allow it.
Tories raise stakes in dispute over RESPs
TheStar.com - Canada - Tories raise stakes in dispute over RESPs
Flaherty challenges opposition to fight election over plan he says would cost $900 million
March 11, 2008
Bruce Campion-Smith
Ottawa Bureau Chief
OTTAWA–If Liberals are committed to the idea of making education savings tax deductible, they'll have to fight an election to save it.
That was the word yesterday from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, as he denounced the costly scheme and said he would introduce an amendment to repeal the idea and make it a confidence issue for the minority Parliament.
"It imperils the fiscal plan of the government. It runs the risk of putting the balanced budget of our government into a Liberal deficit. We are not going to run a deficit, so we're going to kill the bill," Flaherty told reporters yesterday.
A private member's bill endorsed by the Commons last week would allow parents a $5,000-a-year tax-deductible contribution to a registered education savings plan for each child. But the Conservatives want to torpedo the motion, arguing the measure is unaffordable.
Their original strategy was to appeal to the Senate to dismiss the bill, first proposed by Liberal MP Dan McTeague. But yesterday, Flaherty said the government would simply add an amendment to budget legislation, expected this week, to kill the RESP motion.
The Conservatives have said the plan would cost the government at least $900 million in lost tax revenue, plus another $450 million in lost revenue for the provinces.
"The figures could well be higher and we're not taking that risk," Flaherty said.
While initial reports of the program have proven popular with parents, Flaherty said it's not "within our fiscal framework," rejecting any hint of a compromise.
McTeague yesterday defended his bill as an essential incentive to encourage students and their families to save for the rising costs of post-secondary education.
"At the time when Canada sees, Canadians see an opportunity to help their young people getting access to higher education to meet the knowledge-based economy, he wants to find a trick to bring it down," he told reporters.
"If Mr. Flaherty wants to go to an election or if he wants to beat his chest by beating up on ordinary families, good luck," McTeague said. "I personally would have no problems campaigning on this particular issue."
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said the RESP plan could be part of the party's election platform.
"Maybe not exactly as it is ... but certainly savings are at a record low in Canada, our citizens are in debt so there is a social problem that is affecting our competitiveness in the world if we are not able to help more students to focus on their studies," he said.
But Dion showed little enthusiasm for sparking an election to save McTeague's motion.
Showing posts with label RESP bill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RESP bill. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Conservatives confident they can kill RESP bill. or Dion rides to the rescue.
Although this at first sight appears to be a good situation for the Liberals the Liberals are already showing disunity. The Great Helmsman Dion is already making noises about not wanting the government to go into deficit. He sure knows how to make minority government work but maybe he thinks he needs more practice at it right up until the fixed election date.
Conservatives confident they can kill surprise $900 million tax cut bill
1 day ago
OTTAWA — The chances of Canadian parents getting a $5,000 tax deduction by saving for their children's education grew slimmer Friday as the government vowed to kill the private member's bill and its author offered to compromise.
The Conservative government was taken off guard Wednesday night when Liberal MP Dan McTeague's bill, estimated to cost the treasury $900 million, passed third reading and was sent to the Senate for approval.
If passed unamended in the Senate, the bill would likely get Royal assent and Canadians would be able to put up to $5,000 in a registered education savings plan for each child - and deduct the amount from their taxable income like an registered retirement savings plan..
But Conservative Ted Menzies, the parliamentary secretary for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, said Friday that he has confidence the Senate will kill the bill and, if not, the government would resort to other measures.
"There is always a plan B," Menzie said. "My assumption right now is that we have reasonable minded senators who can do the math, and they won't do that (pass the bill)."
Talking to reporters after a speech in London, Ont., Flaherty repeated the assertion: "This is the kind of thing Liberals bring forward. They want to drive us back into deficits and we're not going to go back into deficits."
But Friday afternoon, McTeague said he was willing to compromise on the limit that can be deducted, although he said he was prepared to fight for the bill in the Senate.
"Perhaps it's time that they begin to discuss with the author of the bill how they plan to see this bill implemented," he said. "I offer to Mr. Menzies and his government to pick up the phone and let's talk about how to make this thing work for the future of our kids."
The bill, which Menzies called "underhanded" and a threat to government's ability to stay in surplus, has presented the government with the unenviable position of both killing a bill that offers a tax break to parents with children, and of having to ask the Liberals they have derided in the Senate for a favour.
Although he must be enjoying the Conservatives' discomfort, Liberal leader Stephane Dion was far from wholeheartedly supportive of his colleague's private member's bill, although he called it a good idea.
"We don't want a deficit," Dion added. "The fact is that this government over the last two years destroyed the fiscal room of Canada. We don't want a deficit, it's sure."
Menzies would not say what the government would do if the Senate passed the bill, but procedural experts say several options remain, although none are foolproof.
One option is for the government to introduce legislation to undo the bill, or seek to amend the budget implementation legislation, making both a matter of confidence.
"But that might be contested because there's a rule in the House that you can't consider the same business twice in the same session, so there's no guarantee it would get through," said Ned Franks, a professor emeritus at Queen's University, who is an expert in parliamentary procedure.
Another option is for the Conservatives to try and pass a motion declaring that they would consider passage of the bill in the Senate a matter of non-confidence in the government, triggering an election.
If the Conservative amendment is considered out of order, "then they are up you know what creek," Franks added.
For now, most observers believe the best way for the government to defeat the bill is in the Senate, even if it is dominated by Liberals.
A Conservative filibuster in the upper chamber could tie up consideration for many months, noted Jerry Yanover, the Liberal expert on procedural matters.
"And I don't think the Senate is a slam dunk for the Liberal bill," he added. "As you may have noticed, the Senate doesn't do things in sync with the House of Commons."
The bill, while it could prove popular to Canadians, would bring the federal government to within a whisker of a deficit based current projections hold.
In last month's budget, Flaherty calculated the surplus at $2.3 billion this fiscal year and $1.3 billion next, meaning the government would be left with virtually no fiscal room in the 2009-2010 year.
As well, Menzies said it would cost the provinces about $450 million, noting that many provinces had already introduced budgets without accounting for the measure.
Franks said the irony is that if the government had approved the requested salary level for an independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, whose duty would be to cost private members bills, the bill might never have been approved in the House once a price tag was attached.
Conservatives confident they can kill surprise $900 million tax cut bill
1 day ago
OTTAWA — The chances of Canadian parents getting a $5,000 tax deduction by saving for their children's education grew slimmer Friday as the government vowed to kill the private member's bill and its author offered to compromise.
The Conservative government was taken off guard Wednesday night when Liberal MP Dan McTeague's bill, estimated to cost the treasury $900 million, passed third reading and was sent to the Senate for approval.
If passed unamended in the Senate, the bill would likely get Royal assent and Canadians would be able to put up to $5,000 in a registered education savings plan for each child - and deduct the amount from their taxable income like an registered retirement savings plan..
But Conservative Ted Menzies, the parliamentary secretary for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, said Friday that he has confidence the Senate will kill the bill and, if not, the government would resort to other measures.
"There is always a plan B," Menzie said. "My assumption right now is that we have reasonable minded senators who can do the math, and they won't do that (pass the bill)."
Talking to reporters after a speech in London, Ont., Flaherty repeated the assertion: "This is the kind of thing Liberals bring forward. They want to drive us back into deficits and we're not going to go back into deficits."
But Friday afternoon, McTeague said he was willing to compromise on the limit that can be deducted, although he said he was prepared to fight for the bill in the Senate.
"Perhaps it's time that they begin to discuss with the author of the bill how they plan to see this bill implemented," he said. "I offer to Mr. Menzies and his government to pick up the phone and let's talk about how to make this thing work for the future of our kids."
The bill, which Menzies called "underhanded" and a threat to government's ability to stay in surplus, has presented the government with the unenviable position of both killing a bill that offers a tax break to parents with children, and of having to ask the Liberals they have derided in the Senate for a favour.
Although he must be enjoying the Conservatives' discomfort, Liberal leader Stephane Dion was far from wholeheartedly supportive of his colleague's private member's bill, although he called it a good idea.
"We don't want a deficit," Dion added. "The fact is that this government over the last two years destroyed the fiscal room of Canada. We don't want a deficit, it's sure."
Menzies would not say what the government would do if the Senate passed the bill, but procedural experts say several options remain, although none are foolproof.
One option is for the government to introduce legislation to undo the bill, or seek to amend the budget implementation legislation, making both a matter of confidence.
"But that might be contested because there's a rule in the House that you can't consider the same business twice in the same session, so there's no guarantee it would get through," said Ned Franks, a professor emeritus at Queen's University, who is an expert in parliamentary procedure.
Another option is for the Conservatives to try and pass a motion declaring that they would consider passage of the bill in the Senate a matter of non-confidence in the government, triggering an election.
If the Conservative amendment is considered out of order, "then they are up you know what creek," Franks added.
For now, most observers believe the best way for the government to defeat the bill is in the Senate, even if it is dominated by Liberals.
A Conservative filibuster in the upper chamber could tie up consideration for many months, noted Jerry Yanover, the Liberal expert on procedural matters.
"And I don't think the Senate is a slam dunk for the Liberal bill," he added. "As you may have noticed, the Senate doesn't do things in sync with the House of Commons."
The bill, while it could prove popular to Canadians, would bring the federal government to within a whisker of a deficit based current projections hold.
In last month's budget, Flaherty calculated the surplus at $2.3 billion this fiscal year and $1.3 billion next, meaning the government would be left with virtually no fiscal room in the 2009-2010 year.
As well, Menzies said it would cost the provinces about $450 million, noting that many provinces had already introduced budgets without accounting for the measure.
Franks said the irony is that if the government had approved the requested salary level for an independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, whose duty would be to cost private members bills, the bill might never have been approved in the House once a price tag was attached.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Tories look for Senate allies to crush RESP bill
This is from the Star. Among other articles on the same issue is one in the National Post headlined: "The Liberals hit the political jackpot"! Certainly the Conservatives are put in an embarrassing position in that they are relying upon the unelected senate which they despise to try and defeat the bill! Of course the Liberals could care less if the loss of revenues puts the Conservatives in a deficit position. There is probably a considerable constituency in favor of the bill and the Conservative government will not gain any votes even if somehow it manages to sabotage it.
Tories look for Senate allies to crush RESP bill
TheStar.com - Business - Tories look for Senate allies to crush RESP bill
JACQUES BOISSINOT/THE CANADIAN PRESS FILE PHOTO
Dan McTeague, the Liberal MP for Pickering-Scarborough East, meets with reporters in Toronto on Sept. 2, 2005. March 08, 2008
Bruce campion-smith
Ottawa bureau chief
OTTAWA–Federal Conservatives opposed to a new tax break for education savings are finding themselves in an awkward situation – blocking a tax cut and relying on the Senate, which they have said should be abolished, to help them stop it.
Conservatives are trying to muster Senate opposition to a Liberal private member's bill, quietly passed on Wednesday night, that would allow parents to contribute up to $5,000 a year to a registered education savings plan for each child and deduct that amount from their income taxes.
Dan McTeague, the Liberal MP for Pickering-Scarborough East who sponsored the bill, said the program would be similar to registered retirement savings plans and help encourage parents to save more for their children's education.
McTeague said yesterday he was willing to compromise on the limit that can be deducted, although he said he was prepared to fight for the bill in the Senate.
The Tories are balking at the price tag, warning the proposal would mean up to $900 million in lost revenues for the federal government.
The proposal would cost the provinces another $450 million in lost revenue, the Tories say.
Conservative MP Ted Menzies, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance, accused McTeague of "underhandedly" introducing a measure that would cost the federal coffers – already emptied by a string of Tory tax cuts – almost $1 billion.
"I would argue it's abuse of his privilege by adding that kind of cost onto ... the government through a private member's bill," Menzies told reporters yesterday.
"My plan right now is to talk to the Senators and, there's some reasonable-minded Senators that will look at this and say this is not good use of taxpayers' dollars," said Menzies. But that strategy is raising eyebrows on Parliament Hill, since it was the Tories who slammed Liberal Senators for their delay in considering crime legislation earlier this year. At the time, Tory House Leader Peter Van Loan criticized the "Liberal Senate delay-and-obstruction grinding machine."
Last fall, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, an advocate of Senate reform, said there's "no role in a modern 21st-century democracy for an unelected legislature." But Menzies had chanced his stance yesterday.
"I've always found a use for the Senate. There's some good people there. It's a house of sober second thought," he said.
But the Conservatives, who have painted themselves as tax cutters, could pay a political price for blocking a bill bound to be popular with parents who are already saving for their kids' education and are keen to get a tax break, warned Garth Turner, the Liberal MP for Halton.
"I think this has the potential of being extremely popular. The reaction I've had so far is people are delighted," Turner said.
He said the RESP tax deductions would benefit families more than the Tory savings plan, introduced in the Feb. 26 budget, that would allow anyone 18 or older to save up to $5,000 a year without paying taxes on the earnings or investment income generated.
"This actually allows families to get a net benefit back instantly from when they contribute," Turner said of the RESP proposal.
Under current rules, RESP contributions grow tax-free, but are not tax-deductible. Investment earnings are taxed in the hands of the student on withdrawal.
With files from The Canadian Press
Tories look for Senate allies to crush RESP bill
TheStar.com - Business - Tories look for Senate allies to crush RESP bill
JACQUES BOISSINOT/THE CANADIAN PRESS FILE PHOTO
Dan McTeague, the Liberal MP for Pickering-Scarborough East, meets with reporters in Toronto on Sept. 2, 2005. March 08, 2008
Bruce campion-smith
Ottawa bureau chief
OTTAWA–Federal Conservatives opposed to a new tax break for education savings are finding themselves in an awkward situation – blocking a tax cut and relying on the Senate, which they have said should be abolished, to help them stop it.
Conservatives are trying to muster Senate opposition to a Liberal private member's bill, quietly passed on Wednesday night, that would allow parents to contribute up to $5,000 a year to a registered education savings plan for each child and deduct that amount from their income taxes.
Dan McTeague, the Liberal MP for Pickering-Scarborough East who sponsored the bill, said the program would be similar to registered retirement savings plans and help encourage parents to save more for their children's education.
McTeague said yesterday he was willing to compromise on the limit that can be deducted, although he said he was prepared to fight for the bill in the Senate.
The Tories are balking at the price tag, warning the proposal would mean up to $900 million in lost revenues for the federal government.
The proposal would cost the provinces another $450 million in lost revenue, the Tories say.
Conservative MP Ted Menzies, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance, accused McTeague of "underhandedly" introducing a measure that would cost the federal coffers – already emptied by a string of Tory tax cuts – almost $1 billion.
"I would argue it's abuse of his privilege by adding that kind of cost onto ... the government through a private member's bill," Menzies told reporters yesterday.
"My plan right now is to talk to the Senators and, there's some reasonable-minded Senators that will look at this and say this is not good use of taxpayers' dollars," said Menzies. But that strategy is raising eyebrows on Parliament Hill, since it was the Tories who slammed Liberal Senators for their delay in considering crime legislation earlier this year. At the time, Tory House Leader Peter Van Loan criticized the "Liberal Senate delay-and-obstruction grinding machine."
Last fall, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, an advocate of Senate reform, said there's "no role in a modern 21st-century democracy for an unelected legislature." But Menzies had chanced his stance yesterday.
"I've always found a use for the Senate. There's some good people there. It's a house of sober second thought," he said.
But the Conservatives, who have painted themselves as tax cutters, could pay a political price for blocking a bill bound to be popular with parents who are already saving for their kids' education and are keen to get a tax break, warned Garth Turner, the Liberal MP for Halton.
"I think this has the potential of being extremely popular. The reaction I've had so far is people are delighted," Turner said.
He said the RESP tax deductions would benefit families more than the Tory savings plan, introduced in the Feb. 26 budget, that would allow anyone 18 or older to save up to $5,000 a year without paying taxes on the earnings or investment income generated.
"This actually allows families to get a net benefit back instantly from when they contribute," Turner said of the RESP proposal.
Under current rules, RESP contributions grow tax-free, but are not tax-deductible. Investment earnings are taxed in the hands of the student on withdrawal.
With files from The Canadian Press
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)