Globe and Mail reports:
In an interview with Global TV, he [Stephane Dion] said that the downturn in the economy could force him to slow down the “pace of investment we wanted to make in the first two years.”
He was careful to say, and he repeated this to reporters later in a scrum, that the Green Shift plan would not be affected.
Rather, he would look at slowing down his commitments on child care, a catastrophic drug program and getting more doctors.
Dion is quite the Maverick, usually Liberal leaders wait until after the election to ditch their progressive policies.
But seriously, if the Liberals were to form a government after Tuesday's vote (mammoth-sized 'if'), it would definitely be a minority government, in which case, it would likely not last into a third or fourth year. The much needed funding for child care and new doctors wouldn't happen.
Economic downturn or not, these are not luxury items. The long-term health of our economy requires accessible, affordable child care, not now, or two to three years from now, but more than ten years ago when the Liberals first promised it. And universal health care as we know and love it in Canada won't survive without a plan for new doctors.
Given that the Liberals won't roll back the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts and they won't pull out of Afghanistan until 2011, basically what Dion is saying with this new announcement is that a Liberal government would be just like a Conservative government but with more broken promises and a carbon tax.
Posts
19 comments:
don't worry DC, childcare, pharmacare, doctors, those cherished social programs will get stowed away carefully until the next election cycle.
Liberal red books 1993 to 2008. Except them to be trotted out again, at an election waiting for you. LOL
So it's "strange" to react to reality, when the world economy is going in the shitter at a blistering pace. If that's "strange", that would make you "out to lunch".
Maybe he found out about what Harper is leaving, money wise.
Even Jack Layton has assured Canadians he won't run a deficit. That's a very reasoned position I'm glad to see the NDP take. Assuming then, that a hypothetical NDP government would live up to that commitment, and assuming the worsening economic situation continues to constrain the fiscal capacity of the government, what elements of the NDP platform would Mr. Layton put on hold if the money was no longer there to fund them? If he is to be a serious contender for government, that's a question he would have to answer. If he's not a serious contender, he needn't bother.
Steve V, it's "strange" for a party to call themselves progressive and then put excessive corporate tax cuts ahead of child care and health care.
BCer in Toronto, Jack Layton wouldn't have to run a deficit. He would cancel the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts and have more than enough to pay for creating new childcare spaces, the NDP's proposed child benefit, and more family doctors.
Before you go screaming "job killer" like Stephane Dion has, let's be clear: canceling the $50 billion in corporate tax cuts would put taxes at the level they were at previously which is still a globally competitive level. And Layton has also promised to invest in green collar jobs. The idea is that corporations should be rewarded for creating sustainable Canadian jobs, not just for existing.
Before you go throwing around dated, cliche anti-NDP arguments, you should have a look at the platform so you have an idea of what the hell you are talking about.
Erin, please let me know what dated, cliched anti-NDP arguments I threw around? Because I don't believe I did.
I merely asked, if the fiscal capacity was no longer available to pay for the NDP platform, and given Layton's pledge not to run a deficit, what pieces of his platform he would be willing to delay.
I am aware of the NDP plan to cancel (and roll back, as some have already been implemented) the corporate tax cuts. We'll table the argument over whether or not that's a good idea. Reading the NDP platform, I see this is how the party intends to fund a good deal of its platform.
So, in essence, that money is spent already, its accounted for in the platform/budget. Just like the Liberal platform is costed. The question asked in the quoted article was what would you do if the fiscal capacity was strained further.
All the parties based their revenue estimates on the same department of finance figures. If the economy worsens, less money will be available. That's the issue we're looking at here. How would you deal with that shortfall without running a deficit.
Just saying the cancellation corporate tax cut will pay for it doesn't make sense, because those funds have already been allocated under the NDP platform to pay for your various policy initiatives. It's spent already, in essence so if the economy worsens (which is the hypothesis of the article, and not an unreasonable one) there would be a funding shortfall.
Therefore, the question remains. If the NDP won't run a deficit, how would they answer the question posed to Dion. If the economy worsens, would they a)run a deficit, or b) delay policy initiatives. The other option, of course, would be c) raise taxes.
As Layton has made clear he's running for Prime Minister, it's an entirely fair question that he should be expected to answer.
I think it is refreshing that Dion is being honest. The economy is heading into a recession, regardless of how many times Stephen says the fundamentals are strong. None of the leaders are going to be able to implement their campaign promises imediately. If they say they can, they are lying. The first priority needs to be the economy, which is why he plans do call a meeting with the provinces and financial institution within 30 days of being elected. Dion is the only leader with a plan. Economists also agree that the green shift will be good for not only the enviroment but also the economy. The Greenshift will cut income taxes, corporate taxes, and taxes on saving and investments. All of which which will stimulate the economy.
Dion is the best choice, people need to vote strategically.
BCer, it may shock you to know that I won't be the finance minister in an NDP government should Jack Layton become Prime Minister. So I can't tell you what he would do if things got seriously bad. I can say that the NDP platform has been costed based on projections that are fiscally conservative enough that it would likely not come to that.
I have faith in Jack Layton's ability to prioritize though. I know that Jack considers what is best for the long-term health of Canada's economy when he comes up with solutions. That is why he has always supported increased investment in child care, education, and health care. That is more than I can say for Dion who was part of the government that slashed funding for these programs.
And Laura, the Liberal talking points are nice and all but Dion's carbon tax is not sitting well with Canadians and Dion can not be trusted to stand up to Harper. Voting Liberal is not "strategic", it's a vote for more Conservative policies. If Harper wins Dion will continue to vote with him or abstain. If Dion wins he will pander to the Conservatives to stay in power. He's already starting to do it by ditching his progressive policies.
The only way out that I can see is by electing more NDP MPs.
jack has said since the collapse of Lehman Bros that should the economy tank the priorities of the platform would have to change. That was mid Sept. In fact, it has been Jack that has been ahead of both Harper and Dion in raising the crisis and talking about how he would start to address it.
Clearly everyone is in the dark about how this will play out. I think Erin's point however is still valid. Once again the Liberal Party will put corporate interests ahead of progressive values. That is something that Jack won't do (if only because me and a bunch o'folk would show up at his house and kneecap him if he did ;)
I suppose that progressives should at least be happy that he told us before the election so that if you prefer to fund child care over CEO perks than I guess you know who to vote for.
I
Does anyone believe Jack would be able to implement all his promises, within the timetables he's proposed, given that the federal coffers are set to dry up? Seriously. I mean, it's common sense time people, and at least Dion is recognizing simple reality. Sometimes, I almost wish the NDP had to govern, so we could dispense with all this theoretical purity.
I would argue that Dion is not breaking promises. In fact, like his entire campaign, he is being truthful and forthright about what Canadians can expect from a Liberal government. From the beginning, the Greenshift, which is a tax cut program achieved by making polluters pay rather than cutting out of other programs such as health care or post-secondary eduction, was presented to the Canadian people so Dion could seek a mandate. Unlike other leaders, he has not kept this in his back pocket so he can announce his commitment to a green economy AFTER he's elected. Unlike Harper who changed his tune on income trust, appointing Fortier to the Senate and breaking his own election law, Dion is saying up front what he will do.
Dion's new advice is based on the reality that all of us have been coming to over the last 10 days. It is very unfortunate that these programs would be delayed because you're right, child care should have been in place years ago. But Liberals did put it in place and Harper immediately cut it when he took over. I guess he took Ambrose's words to heart "that old white guy's don't need to tell women what to do". I guess that characterization does not apply to her boss though. It's sad that Ambrose would be so very disrespectful to Dryden, given his decades of advocacy for children. It's clear that when Harper cut the early learning and child care program which all the provinces finally signed on to, he was leaving thousands of families WITHOUT choice. (See Todd Babiak's piece Friday, October 10)
But back to the programs. We lived through tough times in the 1990s with the program cuts. It was unpleasant to say the least but Canadians did it because they had to. The balanced budgets and resulting surpluses allowed for Canada to prosper. So did the hard work of every man and woman. Harper has taken the $13 billion surplus left to him by the Liberals and turned it into uncertain times.
Dion understands that the economy needs to be intact. While the banks are not collapsing, important aspects of our Canadian economy are in serious trouble - credit restrictions, mortgages, massive unemployment, reduced values of pensions because of the stock market volatility. Harper's advice: "good time to buy stocks". Is he our broker or the Prime Minister?
Furthermore, Dion insisted the Liberal party have no less than 33%woman candidates because he knows that countries which have a equitable number of female represenative are more prosperous, in every sense.
I ask you this, if you were investing your own dollars whose advice would you feel most comfortable with: the guy who pats you on the head and says, "don't worry, i'm telling you the fundamentals are good so you don't have to give it a second thought" or the guy who says: "there are signs here which we need to pay attention to, and i'm going to advise that you need to be prepared to adjust if certain events occur"?
That's Dion's message. He has a plan - it's truthful and well-considered. Harper doesn't.
One last note. Harper's government has been overspending and making pre-election promises like there's no tomorrow. But don't take my word for it. Go to the Canadian Taxpayer's Federation website to learn of the $19.2 billion worth of pre-election treats. They're not included in the platform he released five days ago. See for youself.
call to progressive voters
Chantelle,
Good child care helps women stay in the workforce and out of poverty.
The government estimates that every dollar invested in childcare gives a return of $2 to society. (http://www.ccsc-cssge.ca/english/aboutcw/society.cfm)
Isn't an investment with a 2/1 return exactly what we need to have during a recession?
Interesting comments from the Libs on this blog. Only problem with their narrow view, though, is that they ignore one important fact:
Investments in child care, health care and the green economy create jobs, and increase economic output. The investments in child care mean two things:
1) Investments in the child care sector will immediately create more jobs for early childhood educators, as new spaces are creeated and existing facilities expand.
2) More parents will be able to enter the work force and contribute to the economy and the tax base.
Investments in the green economy will provide financial incentives for Canada's R&D and manufacturing sector to in turn invest in new technology and shift production to emerging sectors of the economy, which creates jobs and increases the tax base.
Investments in our health care system and providing more spaces for doctors and nurses will not only boost health outcomes in our communities (which has obvious positive economic implications), but provides an economic stimulus as more health care professionals enter the system, and take pressure off overworked staff.
The basic problem with the Lib and Con rhetoric is, that they refuse to admit that strategic investments in social programs - indeed, anything other than the military and road construction - has any positive economic impact. They only focus on the cost.
There are a number of reasons why Canada is a good place for companies to invest -- not the least of which is, that our universal health care and education systems and social safety net lower business costs, and provides an educated, healthy workforce who can afford to purchase the goods and services that the companies provide.
Let's stop this race to the bottom once and for all, and make a real investment in our future.
Dewolfmann and Krispy,
I agree wholeheartedly with both of your positions. Investing in child care and health care will create wealth in Canada, both at home and in the workforce. Unfortunately Harper did not see it that way. Cutting the program Dryden helped put in place, painstakingly with the provinces, has been a huge loss to Canada. If you understand the importance of the public education system, you understand why a national child care program is so critical. Indira Saroya, Liberal candidate in Edmonton Millwoods Beaumont is a child care centre operator. She is a strong advocate, gathering her colleagues together to meet with Liberal MPs over the last several months to tell them what they alreay know - Canadian families lost big time when Harper gave them $100 (taxable) rather than a child care space that would bring parent and child comfort and enrichment. We have demonstrated that we get it. What the program does need though is higher salaries and more workers. It is so very sad that we pay child care professionals so little to take care of our most valuable citizens.
The challenge is ensuring that the immediate economic challenges are met and none of us will know what they are unless two things happen: Dion is elected and an audit occurs. If Harper is reelected, it's going to be business as usual - no universal early learning and no child care spaces. It will not happen with Harper.
You're right about health care - immediate and long term outcomes. I guess we agree that Harper's "wait times policy" is a failure. Like his child care policy, it's about lip service and not about providing effective programming. Dion wants to get this right. If the economic supports are not in place, can a program be effective if proper funding is not available? I know this is his concern.
Both of these programs deserve more than a band-aid approach and Dion has indicated as much. Are these the programs that should be delayed I cannot say but when you have 67,000 manufacturing jobs lost in Ontario alone and more to come around the country because of the collapse in the US, that has to be addressed immediately.
Dion is interested in infrastructure because he wants to see people at work and the life of cities humming along. We know that unemployed citizens are not happy or healthy citizens. We know that it has great impact on those around them, particularly their families. These people are not figuring out how to buy stocks, they're concerned about buying bread.
I do not agree that Liberals are only interested in infrastructure. Dion, who is seeking his mandate based on the Greenshift, is interested in families, particularly low-income. He's concerned about seniors and the disabled. He's concerned about women, abused and the immigrant. He's the only leader who has linked the economy to the environment in a comprehensive policy. He wants Canadians to be responsible for their carbon footprint but of equal importance, 230 economist have said that the next prime minister must put a price on carbon. He's done it at a maximum rate of $40/tonne but will give back every dollar in tax cuts and programs. Harper has placed it at $60/tonne but with no tax cuts. Read the Liberal platform at liberal.ca. You'll see that it is thorough. It may not be everything that you want but it's an thoughtful, honest and authentic effort for a fairer, richer, greener Canada.
I also want to remind readers that it was Jack Layton, voting against Paul Martin's Liberals that caused the election in 2006. As a result of his support of the Conservatives we lost child care, Kelowna and Kyoto. I'll also remind readers that it was Paul Martin who incorporated $5 billion into a budget at the request of Layton. He has not, nor will he ever get anything like that out of Harper.
There are only two parties that can form government. If you vote anything other than Liberal you get Harper. That's it. No child care spaces, no green economy, more in-your-face "I don't have to account to anyone".
Thanks for the respectful and thoughtful debate. I hope we'll see that in Parliament, with Prime Minister Dion leading by example.
Chentelle said: There are only two parties that can form government. If you vote anything other than Liberal you get Harper. That's it. No child care spaces, no green economy, more in-your-face "I don't have to account to anyone"."
This is another unfortunate example of Liberal arrogance - a remnant of the Natural Governing Party moniker that has instilled a sense of almost empirical entitlement in this party.
Despite what Chantelle may wish, the voters will decide this election, not Liberal spin-doctors.
Let's take a quick look at the past few years in Parliament, shall we? Chantelle mentions that the Cons cut the Libs child care plan (which they initiated in the dying days of a scandal-ridden minority government). So far so good. But then, why did the Libs under Dion vote for two consecutive Conservative budgets that entrenched those cuts? Oh yes, because they weren't ready for an election. Good call.
She also talks about the 'green economy' and the so-called 'green shift' plan. But does anyone remember Kyoto? The Libs endorsed Kyoto and then did nothing on the environmental file since 1984 - resulting in an increase of some 20% in GHG over 1990 levels. And let's not forget that Dion was the environment minister for part of that time, and sat around the cabinet table the whole time.
And, let's talk about poverty for a second. In 1989, the Liberal government, of which Dion was a cabinet minister, endorsed a resolution to end child poverty in Canada. Here is a 2005 quote from the National Council on Social Development:
"Despite the strong economic growth during the 1990s, the income gap between the rich and poor, has been spreading," said Peter Bleyer, president of the Canadian Council on Social Development, "noting that despite an all-party Parliamentary resolution in 1989 to eliminate child poverty, there are still approximately one million children -- one chid in six -- living in poverty in Canada. (http://www.ccsd.ca/media/2005/cpprairies.htm) This, after 16 years of Liberal government.
Next, let's look an social housing and the stratospheric rise in homelessness. Here is a quote from a CBC National story from Dec. 1999by Susan Harada on homelessness and social housing under the previous Liberal government:
"In 1996 the Liberals announced that except for housing on reserves, the federal government would get out of social housing and hand over responsibility to the provinces. During it all as Ottawa cut-off money for new social housing units, most of the provinces did too. Add to that cuts to social spending, sky-rocketing rents across the country, stagnant wages especially among lower income Canadians and you've got a combination that means more people out on the streets." (http://action.web.ca/home/housing/resources.shtml?x=67109&AA_EX_Session=d55af870688550e3e4b8557fbbab9025)
Stephane Dion was a minister in the government that made the decision to eliiminate funding for social housing, making Canada the only country in the G-8 to have no social housing policy. The result? More than 2800 homeless in Vancouver alone.
I could go on and on. But the trend is clear. Libs always talk like New Democrats to get elected, and then govern like Conservatives after being elected. The Libs under Dion have supported the Conservatives on more than 43 occasions in Parliament, helping Harper to implement his right wing agenda in Canada.
So please, don't tell me that the Libs actually care about us 'little people'. They only care about getting elected and staying in power - at any cost.
I've been really torn between voting NDP and voting Liberal, but in the last couple days I've decided that I"m going to vote Liberal. It seems a lot more pragmatic and sensible to understand that its better to vote for a party that will govern from at the very least the center, if not the right of center, than to elect an NDP member and have a government that will govern from the right.
Its also worth noting I think, as was pointed out to me, that without the NDP the Martin government would have survived and we would have not just Kelowna but a National Childcare program.
Strategic voting should have an entirely different meaning in elections now with the new financing laws. Where each party gets annual funding from the federal government based on the number of votes cast in the last election, every vote counts.
By accumulating votes, even in ridings where there is no hope of winning, Green Party and NDP supporters can ensure the future institutional capacity of their party to launch future elections and maintain a national standing and presence.
By accumulating only 1000 votes in every riding, the party would receive funding of more than $300,000 per year. This is substantial and could mean future success.
Strategic voting for the NDP and Greens means looking to the long term ... not just this election.
Good day !.
You may , probably curious to know how one can collect a huge starting capital .
There is no need to invest much at first. You may begin to receive yields with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you thought of all the time
AimTrust represents an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
It is based in Panama with affiliates around the world.
Do you want to become a happy investor?
That`s your choice That`s what you wish in the long run!
I feel good, I began to get income with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. If it gets down to select a correct companion utilizes your funds in a right way - that`s the AimTrust!.
I earn US$2,000 per day, and what I started with was a funny sum of 500 bucks!
It`s easy to get involved , just click this link http://umetocehig.fcpages.com/amiropex.html
and go! Let`s take our chance together to get rid of nastiness of the life
Post a Comment