Parliament has been busy wrapping up the summer. The last major order of business was the Federal Government Economic Update report which will be voted on Friday before Parliament rises for the summer. As it is a budget it is a monetary issue it is subject to a confidence vote.
The opposition parties did not like what they saw. None of them are in a favourable position to go to the polls. The question was how to avoid an election without sacrificing any future political capital. The BQ and NDP came out against the government before reading the report. This scores points with those who don't like the government and would like to see it changed as soon as possible. The Liberals have been eroding their support so an election may change the government at the expense of their own parties.
The Liberals are climbing in the polls. Taking down the government on the economic update would force the focus of their campaign to be on the government is not spending enough money, the defecit is too high and the EI eligibility should be given to people before they have worked passed their probation period (360 hours). These are not issues to grap voters attention in the middle of the summer, when an election was not wanted in the first place. The Conservatives have very little to gain from an election. It is not likely they would get a majority government and there is a risk they could lose. The longer they wait the better their chances are as the economy recovers.
All the parties played the game of chicken threatening an election. The only logic choice was for the Liberals and Conservatives to work out an agreement to avoid an election. The parties will work together over the summer on how to improve the EI system. In case they cannot come to an agreement the Liberals have been given an opposition day in September where they can table a non-confidence vote.
This is how minority governments are supposed to work. There will be some sort of agreement on how to best help Canadians the same way an agreement was made on the budget. Aside from being unwanted an election would also have frozen some of the funds that the opposition has complained is not being distrubted fast enough. For now this is a good arrangement for all Canadians.
Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Government Pushes Procrastination Legislation Through Major Filibuster
Yesterday morning, the Israeli Government pushed through 2 pieces of legislation despite the opposition parties putting up a 21 hour filibuster in an attempt to block it. One piece of legislation extends the 45 day time period for a newly formed government to pass a budget. The second implements a budget being passed every 2 years.
Budgets are very important. They allocate funds for government services and form a benchmark for evaluating performance. In the business world budgets can be matched against revenue for a true picture of success or failure. Preparing budgets 2 years in advance is a mistake that will further restrict the government's ability to adapt and implement government policy in the future.
The motivation for these changes is based on the fact passing budgets are hard. A government that cannot pass a budget automatically collapses. Small parties use this pressure to have a level of influence on the budget to be significantly greater than the amount of constituents they have. With the government being formed so close to going into the Passover vacation period the amount of working days before the original deadline was very tight. This legislation should have made some sort of consideration for the holiday seasons. The blanket extension is going to become a major problem at some point in the future. Tzipi Livni has said she would try to bring down the government on the 2010 budget. She will not have the opportunity until 2011.
The last year has proven that governments around the world need to be able to adapt to fast changing economic climates. Having a 2 year budget may be great for stability of the department for planing upcoming years but it does not mean that they will be receiving the funding they need. Over funding and underfunding become bigger issues as things move towards the end of the new budget cycle.
The government has still not passed the 2009 budget. Departments are running on a funding formula based on what they have received in the previous two years. With a 2 year budget the same scenario could with even more serious consequences. Departments could end be running on budgets that had been past almost 3 years earlier. Governments are already short sighted enough when setting policy. They don't have a chance of having enough foresight to properly plan for 2-3 years down the road.
Budgets are very important. They allocate funds for government services and form a benchmark for evaluating performance. In the business world budgets can be matched against revenue for a true picture of success or failure. Preparing budgets 2 years in advance is a mistake that will further restrict the government's ability to adapt and implement government policy in the future.
The motivation for these changes is based on the fact passing budgets are hard. A government that cannot pass a budget automatically collapses. Small parties use this pressure to have a level of influence on the budget to be significantly greater than the amount of constituents they have. With the government being formed so close to going into the Passover vacation period the amount of working days before the original deadline was very tight. This legislation should have made some sort of consideration for the holiday seasons. The blanket extension is going to become a major problem at some point in the future. Tzipi Livni has said she would try to bring down the government on the 2010 budget. She will not have the opportunity until 2011.
The last year has proven that governments around the world need to be able to adapt to fast changing economic climates. Having a 2 year budget may be great for stability of the department for planing upcoming years but it does not mean that they will be receiving the funding they need. Over funding and underfunding become bigger issues as things move towards the end of the new budget cycle.
The government has still not passed the 2009 budget. Departments are running on a funding formula based on what they have received in the previous two years. With a 2 year budget the same scenario could with even more serious consequences. Departments could end be running on budgets that had been past almost 3 years earlier. Governments are already short sighted enough when setting policy. They don't have a chance of having enough foresight to properly plan for 2-3 years down the road.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Federal Budget Passes
The federal budget has been passed, officially putting an end to the attempted coalition takeover of the government and putting the government on track to attempt to try to spend it's way out of the economic turn down. There are a few interesting side stories with this budget.
The Newfoundland Liberal MPs were given permission to vote against the budget. Under Dion an MP would be booted from the party for even suggesting the budget would be beneficial to their constituents. Ignatieff is acknowledging that from his perspective it is not perfect it is in the best interest of the country to pass. MPs are free to acknowledge that it does not universally benefit everyone. This tolerance of free expression bodes well for rebuilding the Liberal party.
This also marks the 4th budget past by the Conservative minority government. Despite the vocal opposition from anti-Harper advocates, he has managed to offer enough to stay in power. Like him or hate him he has proven to be a master politician in getting legislation through parliament. If Ignatieff can continue to demonstrate he is an equally skilled politician Canada will return to the days of prosperity as quickly as possible.
The Newfoundland Liberal MPs were given permission to vote against the budget. Under Dion an MP would be booted from the party for even suggesting the budget would be beneficial to their constituents. Ignatieff is acknowledging that from his perspective it is not perfect it is in the best interest of the country to pass. MPs are free to acknowledge that it does not universally benefit everyone. This tolerance of free expression bodes well for rebuilding the Liberal party.
This also marks the 4th budget past by the Conservative minority government. Despite the vocal opposition from anti-Harper advocates, he has managed to offer enough to stay in power. Like him or hate him he has proven to be a master politician in getting legislation through parliament. If Ignatieff can continue to demonstrate he is an equally skilled politician Canada will return to the days of prosperity as quickly as possible.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
An Upside Down Budget for a Backwards World
Classic economic theory was that governments should have small operating surpluses during the good times and small deficits during the tough times. This would help balance out the extremes of the business cycle without a massive raid on the treasury. During the 1970s and 1980s this theory was abandoned as governments racked up massive deficits and massive amounts of debt. Towards the end of the 1980s early 1990s there were warnings that if this pattern was not corrected Canada would be in severe economic trouble. The Brian Mulroney Conservative Government introduced the GST. In 1993 the Liberals and Jean Chretien with Finance Minister Paul Martin brought down the $40 billion+ deficit. Eventually they reached a point of year after year of double digit surpluses. Canada was the only country in the G8 that was consistently producing budget surpluses.
When the Conservatives took power in 2006 they considered the massive surpluses as over taxation. Through cutting the GST by 2% and other tax reductions they acted to minimize the size of budget surpluses without going into deficit. The Liberals consistently accused them of taking the country back into deficit.
In October the Canadians went back to the polls. The economic collapse had already begun in the US and was an important consideration during the elections. The Liberals promised a massive spending program to be paid for by a massive tax increase. The Conservatives offered fiscal responsibility and staying the course. They had to change gears when the opposition parties rejected their economic update.
Parliament returned this week with a new budget and a massive economic stimulus package. Many people are referring to this as 'Liberal' budget. This is a very interesting term considering their years of condemning the Conservatives for what they believed was the road to deficit. The good news is it looks like it is a big enough compromise to prevent Canadians from going back to the polls once again.
Economic theory seems to have been turned on it's head. Hopefully this will be the right kind of economic stimulation to help a disastrous economic situation. Hopefully once this passes people will remember that in the long run the government is better off with small surpluses rather then massive deficits.
When the Conservatives took power in 2006 they considered the massive surpluses as over taxation. Through cutting the GST by 2% and other tax reductions they acted to minimize the size of budget surpluses without going into deficit. The Liberals consistently accused them of taking the country back into deficit.
In October the Canadians went back to the polls. The economic collapse had already begun in the US and was an important consideration during the elections. The Liberals promised a massive spending program to be paid for by a massive tax increase. The Conservatives offered fiscal responsibility and staying the course. They had to change gears when the opposition parties rejected their economic update.
Parliament returned this week with a new budget and a massive economic stimulus package. Many people are referring to this as 'Liberal' budget. This is a very interesting term considering their years of condemning the Conservatives for what they believed was the road to deficit. The good news is it looks like it is a big enough compromise to prevent Canadians from going back to the polls once again.
Economic theory seems to have been turned on it's head. Hopefully this will be the right kind of economic stimulation to help a disastrous economic situation. Hopefully once this passes people will remember that in the long run the government is better off with small surpluses rather then massive deficits.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Shifting the Green Shift
Stephane Dion has announced changes to the Green Shift in order to make it more palatable for voters. Being able to listen to voters and make policy changes is a charcheristic of good leadership. On the other hand, as is with the case with Dalton McGuinty, you may end up voting for someone because he supports a particular issue then find that he has changed his mind and does the opposite. The Green Shift is now being advertised as a statement of principles rather than a concrete plan. Voters must now be aware that if they vote Liberal for a specific aspect of the Green Shift that it may be changed or removed before implementation.
The second problem with the announcement is it will add another $900 million to the cost of the plan over the first 4 years. As the plan has been gaurenteed to be revenue neutral it would require cuts to other benefits promissed in the plan. A second option would be to place the additional funding on the books outside of the Green Shift. With a razor thin budget surplus there is no extra money for new spending innitiatives without making cuts or increasing taxes. Where are the Liberals going to find the money?
The second problem with the announcement is it will add another $900 million to the cost of the plan over the first 4 years. As the plan has been gaurenteed to be revenue neutral it would require cuts to other benefits promissed in the plan. A second option would be to place the additional funding on the books outside of the Green Shift. With a razor thin budget surplus there is no extra money for new spending innitiatives without making cuts or increasing taxes. Where are the Liberals going to find the money?
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Ghosts & Fiscal Responsibility
A report came out this week that predicted that government revenues may be less than estimated and could result in a deficit. The Liberals have seized the opportunity to blame the government for fiscal mismanagement. The fact they missed an opportunity to stop this budget for their own political gain will be glossed over if the doom and gloom ever comes to pass.
Newly elected Associate Finance critic Martha Hall Findlay decided to take her own shots by claiming all Conservative Prime Ministers since 1918 have run deficit budgets. This statement demonstrates a lack of understanding of Canadian history both economic and political.
Counter cyclical financing was adopted by the government with support from the economic community. The government would run small surpluses when times are good and deficits when the economy needed stimulation. While the consequences of such decisions can be judged by history it is unfair to blame governments for following the advise of experts at the time. In our more developed economy the Bank of Canada uses interest rates and other available fiscal and monetary tools to help control the rate of growth of the economy. There are still those who subscribe to the old philosophy, that the government should be running a small deficit to help counter the economic downturn resulting from the problems with the American economy.
The accounting processes used now are far more complex than they used to be. Statistics Canada has revised all the budget data since confederation through 1975 to better reflect today's accounting rules. This involved adding both revenue and expenditures from what were once considered non-budgetary accounts into their proper spaces. The conclusions from these revisions are that Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are the only two Prime Ministers in Canadian history to not have run a deficit while serving as PM. The trends also indicate that surpluses were a result of the economic times rather than which party was in charge. There were large deficits through WWI & WWII followed by the larger deficits under Diefenbaker and Trudeau as they helped advance the welfare state. Major surpluses were during the post war boom of the 1920s and 1950s.
One of the problems the Liberals have had slinging mud at the Conservatives is that they reach too far into the past. Placing blame on the current government for events that happened 15 -20 years ago does not change voter's perception on government performance. Bob Rae now sits on the Liberal front bench. People still remember the deficit he ran up in Ontario. In the debate in the last provincial election Premier Dalton McGuinty still blamed him for some of the problems his government is dealing with.
Martha Hall Findlay, enjoy your stay in Ottawa. There are plenty of valid points of reasonable discourse for criticising the government. Stirring up ghosts will not help bring the Liberals to power.
Newly elected Associate Finance critic Martha Hall Findlay decided to take her own shots by claiming all Conservative Prime Ministers since 1918 have run deficit budgets. This statement demonstrates a lack of understanding of Canadian history both economic and political.
Counter cyclical financing was adopted by the government with support from the economic community. The government would run small surpluses when times are good and deficits when the economy needed stimulation. While the consequences of such decisions can be judged by history it is unfair to blame governments for following the advise of experts at the time. In our more developed economy the Bank of Canada uses interest rates and other available fiscal and monetary tools to help control the rate of growth of the economy. There are still those who subscribe to the old philosophy, that the government should be running a small deficit to help counter the economic downturn resulting from the problems with the American economy.
The accounting processes used now are far more complex than they used to be. Statistics Canada has revised all the budget data since confederation through 1975 to better reflect today's accounting rules. This involved adding both revenue and expenditures from what were once considered non-budgetary accounts into their proper spaces. The conclusions from these revisions are that Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are the only two Prime Ministers in Canadian history to not have run a deficit while serving as PM. The trends also indicate that surpluses were a result of the economic times rather than which party was in charge. There were large deficits through WWI & WWII followed by the larger deficits under Diefenbaker and Trudeau as they helped advance the welfare state. Major surpluses were during the post war boom of the 1920s and 1950s.
One of the problems the Liberals have had slinging mud at the Conservatives is that they reach too far into the past. Placing blame on the current government for events that happened 15 -20 years ago does not change voter's perception on government performance. Bob Rae now sits on the Liberal front bench. People still remember the deficit he ran up in Ontario. In the debate in the last provincial election Premier Dalton McGuinty still blamed him for some of the problems his government is dealing with.
Martha Hall Findlay, enjoy your stay in Ottawa. There are plenty of valid points of reasonable discourse for criticising the government. Stirring up ghosts will not help bring the Liberals to power.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Playing in the Political Sandbox
Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty held a press conference in Toronto today to try and 'convince' the Ontario Government to reduce the corporate tax rate in tomorrow's budget. Flaherty is well aware that budget's are extremely complex calculations that take months of planning. Such a drastic change in policy could not be adopted and ready to implement in a single night. His provincial counterpart Dwight Duncan was quick to call Flaherty on his political grandstanding and pointed out that citizens rejected the tax cut philosophy "in 03 and 07". Technically the Liberal mandate endorsed tax hikes that occurred in the Liberal's first mandate and status quo on taxes for now. Nobody will argue that the Liberals got reelected on their tax policy.
With election fever peeking in early spring the feud between Ontario & Ottawa over how to structure their counterparts budget has grown. People have a tendency to place blame for the feud based on which philosophy they happen to agree with. This ignores key elements of the feud.
When McGuinty was elected in 2003 he argued as a Liberal he was the best person to work with a federal Liberal government to best serve Ontario's needs. In the end it made very little difference. During the last federal election Martin did not want to be scene anywhere near the unpopular Premier.
McGuinty has long complained about the feds not giving enough money to the country's economic engine. There was the $26 billion in taxes that we not coming back to Ontario. He joined in on 1% GST and gas tax going to municipalities. McGuinty wants the Harper to cut GHG without in any negative results for the Ontario manufacturing sector. When Toronto, the economic engine of Ontario asked the province for money, McGuinty gave them new taxing powers and told them to deal with their own problems.
This game between Queen's Park and Ottawa has gotten old fast. They each have their own responsibilities and tax payers expect them to do them. When kids can't play together nicely in a sandbox the parents need to have them removed. McGuinty already has his mandate to stay and play until 2011. Sometime in the next year and a half Harper/Flaherty will have to answer to voters. If everyone can play together nicely, we can have an effective strategy for dealing with the consequences of the United States tanking their own economy.
If only it could be that easy.
With election fever peeking in early spring the feud between Ontario & Ottawa over how to structure their counterparts budget has grown. People have a tendency to place blame for the feud based on which philosophy they happen to agree with. This ignores key elements of the feud.
When McGuinty was elected in 2003 he argued as a Liberal he was the best person to work with a federal Liberal government to best serve Ontario's needs. In the end it made very little difference. During the last federal election Martin did not want to be scene anywhere near the unpopular Premier.
McGuinty has long complained about the feds not giving enough money to the country's economic engine. There was the $26 billion in taxes that we not coming back to Ontario. He joined in on 1% GST and gas tax going to municipalities. McGuinty wants the Harper to cut GHG without in any negative results for the Ontario manufacturing sector. When Toronto, the economic engine of Ontario asked the province for money, McGuinty gave them new taxing powers and told them to deal with their own problems.
This game between Queen's Park and Ottawa has gotten old fast. They each have their own responsibilities and tax payers expect them to do them. When kids can't play together nicely in a sandbox the parents need to have them removed. McGuinty already has his mandate to stay and play until 2011. Sometime in the next year and a half Harper/Flaherty will have to answer to voters. If everyone can play together nicely, we can have an effective strategy for dealing with the consequences of the United States tanking their own economy.
If only it could be that easy.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Preparing the whips
The position of whip plays a very important role in government. They are responsible for making sure enough politicians show up to vote. A simple miscount can lead to a piece of legislation being defeated or amended. Such embarrassments have happened from time to time like in the Ontario legislature when the NDP stuck in an amendment to the city of Toronto amalgamation legislation. (3) Conservatives MPPs had become so bored with the opposition filibuster that they didn't realize it was time to vote.
These days the job is particularly difficult for Karen Redman (Liberal Whip) and Marcel Proulx (Liberal Deputy Whip). Normally in a minority government, one of the opposition parties will support the government or they will topple. The Liberals are in a situation where they want to oppose government legislation while allowing it to pass.
Today's vote on amending the budget was carefully crafted to insure that the NDP and Bloc would vote against the amendment. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 202- 7. For good measure only the seven most relevant Liberals showed up for the vote: Dion (Leader), Ignatieff (Deputy Leader), Goodale (House Leader), Jennings (Deputy Leader), McCallum (Finance Critic), Redman (Whip), Prolux (Deputy Whip)
The vote on the actual budget will be much more difficult. The Bloc and the NDP will be voting to bring down the government. The Liberals will be taken more seriously by the electorate if more than 7 MPs show up to vote. Adding more opposition votes will require careful counting from Redman and Prolux. Accidentally toppling the government would be more embarrassing than this sessions Liberal practise of showing up in order not to vote.
These days the job is particularly difficult for Karen Redman (Liberal Whip) and Marcel Proulx (Liberal Deputy Whip). Normally in a minority government, one of the opposition parties will support the government or they will topple. The Liberals are in a situation where they want to oppose government legislation while allowing it to pass.
Today's vote on amending the budget was carefully crafted to insure that the NDP and Bloc would vote against the amendment. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 202- 7. For good measure only the seven most relevant Liberals showed up for the vote: Dion (Leader), Ignatieff (Deputy Leader), Goodale (House Leader), Jennings (Deputy Leader), McCallum (Finance Critic), Redman (Whip), Prolux (Deputy Whip)
The vote on the actual budget will be much more difficult. The Bloc and the NDP will be voting to bring down the government. The Liberals will be taken more seriously by the electorate if more than 7 MPs show up to vote. Adding more opposition votes will require careful counting from Redman and Prolux. Accidentally toppling the government would be more embarrassing than this sessions Liberal practise of showing up in order not to vote.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Federal Budget Day
The Conservative government tabled their 3rd budget today. As the economy is started to sour and previous budgets have lowered the budget surplus there was not a lot of room for new big commitments. Their was a sprinkle of money for infrastructure, mass transit, manufacturing sector, middle income earners, green projects.
The government has introduced a tax free saving account of up to $5000. This account provides a type of tax shelter for people who want to invest their savings but cannot wait until retirement before they may need to cash out. This will also help encourage some people to invest in savings, which are important for future economic growth. Keeping the contribution value low will prevent high end income earners from being able to take advantage of the program. This is a small way to try to repay the middle class that shares a disporportional amount of the tax burden.
The most disappointing aspect of the budget is the end to the rebate of fuel efficient cars. The goal of the program was to make the purchase of green cars more affordable. The Canadian car makers were against this plan because they did not have vehicles available on the market to meet the rebates. Hopefully the help being offered to the auto sector will allow for the development of more affordable green technology vehicles.
The Liberals have declared this to be a watered down Liberal budget. They don't love it but it is not worth having an election over. With the economy heading towards a down turn and the days of double digit budget surpluses in the past, it may be hard for the Liberals to put their vision of Canada in place without new sources of government revenue or reversal of 3 years of Conservative programs.
The government has introduced a tax free saving account of up to $5000. This account provides a type of tax shelter for people who want to invest their savings but cannot wait until retirement before they may need to cash out. This will also help encourage some people to invest in savings, which are important for future economic growth. Keeping the contribution value low will prevent high end income earners from being able to take advantage of the program. This is a small way to try to repay the middle class that shares a disporportional amount of the tax burden.
The most disappointing aspect of the budget is the end to the rebate of fuel efficient cars. The goal of the program was to make the purchase of green cars more affordable. The Canadian car makers were against this plan because they did not have vehicles available on the market to meet the rebates. Hopefully the help being offered to the auto sector will allow for the development of more affordable green technology vehicles.
The Liberals have declared this to be a watered down Liberal budget. They don't love it but it is not worth having an election over. With the economy heading towards a down turn and the days of double digit budget surpluses in the past, it may be hard for the Liberals to put their vision of Canada in place without new sources of government revenue or reversal of 3 years of Conservative programs.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
The Budget Magic Show
A month ago a rumour began to circulate that their would be huge user fee increases for rent of recreational facilities, especially hockey rinks. Councillor Joe Mihevc was sent out to reassure the public. He promised that hockey rinks in particular would be subjected at most to a cost increase directly related to inflation.
Last week it was uncovered that the budget included a 21.5% fee increase across the board for recreational activities including hockey arenas. This fee was on top of the built in 3% increase due to inflation. Mayor Miller claimed he did not know about the hike and promised to come to the rescue. The city has settled for a 5% increase on top of the 3% inflationary rate hike. It is unclear how many more user fee hikes have been buried deep into the budget.
This move left the city with a challenge of finding the $2 million they would have made from the fee hike. They have suspended the program of raising user fees to help subsidize those that are less fortunate. They have also reduced the projected number of welfare recipients per month from 79,000 to 77,000. Even with fears of a recession looming they have managed to reduce the poverty rate by 2.6% by simply declaring it so. If only the rest of the cities problems could be solved so easily.
Last week it was uncovered that the budget included a 21.5% fee increase across the board for recreational activities including hockey arenas. This fee was on top of the built in 3% increase due to inflation. Mayor Miller claimed he did not know about the hike and promised to come to the rescue. The city has settled for a 5% increase on top of the 3% inflationary rate hike. It is unclear how many more user fee hikes have been buried deep into the budget.
This move left the city with a challenge of finding the $2 million they would have made from the fee hike. They have suspended the program of raising user fees to help subsidize those that are less fortunate. They have also reduced the projected number of welfare recipients per month from 79,000 to 77,000. Even with fears of a recession looming they have managed to reduce the poverty rate by 2.6% by simply declaring it so. If only the rest of the cities problems could be solved so easily.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Swimming, Swimming, who will pay for the swimming pool?
Once upon a time conventional wisdom was that swimming pools should be built in schools. This trend has stopped as pools are now part of the new trend towards multi purpose community centres. There are currently 78 swimming pools in schools in Toronto run by TDSB. The pools carry an annual operation budget of $45 million. The city currently pitches in $5 million and TDSB has been skimming money off of the funding formula that is supposed to be directed to ESL students to help keep the pools open.
With TDSB facing another cash crunch they are once again threatening to close down the pools. Education Minister Kathleen Wynn has said it is not her departments problem because Toronto is the only jurisdiction where schools operate swimming pools. The city is proposing increasing the budget for the swimming pools by a mere $300, 000. They don't want to take over the responsibility for operating cost of a TDSB (Provincial) asset.
The bottom line is that swimming pools provide a valuable service to the city. Child obesity and lack of physical activity is a big concern. They also provide a place for people to cool off during heat alerts without the high costs of air conditioning.
The fact the pools happen to be located in schools does not reduce their importance. Building new pools when perfectly good ones are already in use, is a waste of taxpayers money. Someone, anyone needs to step to the plate and recognize that these are valuable assets for the city and must remain open. Failure to do so, would be just another example of how out of touch our politicians are.
With TDSB facing another cash crunch they are once again threatening to close down the pools. Education Minister Kathleen Wynn has said it is not her departments problem because Toronto is the only jurisdiction where schools operate swimming pools. The city is proposing increasing the budget for the swimming pools by a mere $300, 000. They don't want to take over the responsibility for operating cost of a TDSB (Provincial) asset.
The bottom line is that swimming pools provide a valuable service to the city. Child obesity and lack of physical activity is a big concern. They also provide a place for people to cool off during heat alerts without the high costs of air conditioning.
The fact the pools happen to be located in schools does not reduce their importance. Building new pools when perfectly good ones are already in use, is a waste of taxpayers money. Someone, anyone needs to step to the plate and recognize that these are valuable assets for the city and must remain open. Failure to do so, would be just another example of how out of touch our politicians are.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Conservatives set-up election triggers
The Conservative Government spent the past week laying out election triggers for the Liberals. They moved ahead with confidence motion designed to embarrass the Liberals, to put pressure on the senate to pass the government crime bill. They put forth a proposal for extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan. This is a defining issue that the Liberals would rather not be the centre of an election campaign. The budget will also be released at the end of the month. The Liberals have been waiting for this opportunity to topple the government.
Polls are still showing that Canadians would prefer not to have an election. They are also showing lots of electoral volatility without any party having a clear shot at a majority government. There are also (4) by elections in March that could be insightful to how election ready the Liberals really are.
The Conservatives may feel that this is their best shot so they need to go for it despite the risk. They may also feel that their is going to be an election anyway so they might as well set-up Dion with as many stumbling blocks as possible form which to choose to topple the government. There is a very fine line drawn in the sand between the two parties positions in Afghanistan. The Conservatives will probably make the next budget difficult for the Liberals to object to.
The political games of the next few weeks will be desigened to focus an election on Afghanistan, being tough on crime & the goodies offered in the budget. Dion could have a tough time establishing his own set of priorities as the important election issues.
Polls are still showing that Canadians would prefer not to have an election. They are also showing lots of electoral volatility without any party having a clear shot at a majority government. There are also (4) by elections in March that could be insightful to how election ready the Liberals really are.
The Conservatives may feel that this is their best shot so they need to go for it despite the risk. They may also feel that their is going to be an election anyway so they might as well set-up Dion with as many stumbling blocks as possible form which to choose to topple the government. There is a very fine line drawn in the sand between the two parties positions in Afghanistan. The Conservatives will probably make the next budget difficult for the Liberals to object to.
The political games of the next few weeks will be desigened to focus an election on Afghanistan, being tough on crime & the goodies offered in the budget. Dion could have a tough time establishing his own set of priorities as the important election issues.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
City of Toronto Balances Budget
Yesterday, Mayor Miller announced that for the first time since amalgamation in 1998 the City of Toronto has a balanced budget for the 2008 year. The budget still needs to go to council for approval and amendments. No extra money can be added to the budget.
This is a landmark accomplishment. After last year's tax revolt the city managed to find $116 million inefficiencies. They also received some handout money from the Provincial government for transportation and some social programming costs were uploaded. Miller has been ignoring the significant contribution of the average tax payer.
Miller announced that they there will be 'modest' property tax increase of 3.75%. He claims that he has kept his promise to keep property tax increases in line with the rate of inflation. Stats Can reports that the current rate of inflation is 2.2%. Plus the same tax payers are on the hook for the vehicle registration tax and land transfer tax. The city has also upped the fees for various services, including the recent TTC fare hike.
The freeze on market value assessment for real estate has been lifted. Over the next 4 years the property value used to determine property taxes will rise until it reaches true market value. With a booming real estate market, residents who have lived in their homes for decades may no longer afford to keep them. If the city uses the balanced budget to reduce property taxes in the future they can offset some of the hardship from MVA. If the city continues on their previous path and decides to spend the extra money the city will once again create their own financial crisis.
This is a landmark accomplishment. After last year's tax revolt the city managed to find $116 million inefficiencies. They also received some handout money from the Provincial government for transportation and some social programming costs were uploaded. Miller has been ignoring the significant contribution of the average tax payer.
Miller announced that they there will be 'modest' property tax increase of 3.75%. He claims that he has kept his promise to keep property tax increases in line with the rate of inflation. Stats Can reports that the current rate of inflation is 2.2%. Plus the same tax payers are on the hook for the vehicle registration tax and land transfer tax. The city has also upped the fees for various services, including the recent TTC fare hike.
The freeze on market value assessment for real estate has been lifted. Over the next 4 years the property value used to determine property taxes will rise until it reaches true market value. With a booming real estate market, residents who have lived in their homes for decades may no longer afford to keep them. If the city uses the balanced budget to reduce property taxes in the future they can offset some of the hardship from MVA. If the city continues on their previous path and decides to spend the extra money the city will once again create their own financial crisis.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Federal Election must wait until 2008
The thrown speech is set to be passed tomorrow. There are many people who believe Stephan Dion should vote against the speech he disagrees with and topple the government. Others agree with his decision to wait until the Liberals are ready for an election before forcing one to be called.
With the Conservatives making legislation matters of confidence there is another factor to consider before anyone decides to topple the government. Canadians are tired of the instability and petty partisanship of the current government. It is likely they will try to give a majority mandate to either the Liberals or the Conservatives at the expense of the NDP, Green, BQ. Dion and Harper will make sure that this is the most likely outcome before pulling the plug and going to the polls.
If a federal election were to be held before December 31st of this year the next federal election would be scheduled for October 18, 2011. The next Ontario election is scheduled to take place on October 6, 2011. Holding the election 12 days apart in vote rich Ontario will cause problems for all parties. There are less resources in terms of people, finances and a captive audience. In Ontario the faith based funding issue which affected less than 1% of eligible voters completely overshadowed every other election issue. The risk of this happening is even greater when two election campaigns are being run at the same time.
The most likely scenario is that the current government will be toppled on the Spring budget. It gives the Liberals time to prepare and a clear platform for the Liberals and Conservatives to carve out their election platforms.
Canada Elections Act
56.1 (1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Governor General, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General’s discretion.
Election dates
(2) Subject to subsection (1), each general election must be held on the third Monday of October in the fourth calendar year following polling day for the last general election, with the first general election after this section comes into force being held on Monday, October 19, 2009.
S.C. 2007, c. 10, s. 1.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Stupid Politicians Part 1 City Council
This week is quickly becoming a week for politicians to be extra stupid (even by government standards)
City counsellors under investigation
Since 2000 the City of Toronto has spent over 1 Billion dollars from various contingency funds to help make ends meet. At one point they even sold the hydro poles to the province to help get some extra cash. The city has almost no reserve funds left. Council has even approved a plan to sue the Ontario Government to try to balance this years budget. In the recent election Mayor Miller got reelected with a campaign that the Provincial and Federal Governments should be kicking in more money to help the city. He would campaign to make this happen and hold property tax increases to the rate of inflation. He was unsuccessful as this years Provincial and Federal budget's did not do very much to help the city. A 3.8% property tax hike has been approved which is higher than the rate of inflation. Council also failed to remove a single one of their many perks that come with the job.
The city's executive committee has asked the integrity commissioner to investigate two councillor for not spending enough money, Rob Ford is known for spending his own personal money on office expenses instead of dipping into the public purse. "You're not supposed to accept gifts, even from yourself," Giorgio Mammoliti said. The investigation will need approval from council next month before it can proceed.
How stupid of a statement is this? I understand that we want to make sure that bribes are not being used to influence city councillors judgement. How do you bribe yourself? It would be one thing if these councillors had maxed out there budget and were using private or 3rd party funds to make up the shortfall. In these cases they are coming in way under budget and could have had the city cover these costs.
If only these politicians spent more time worrying about how to balance the books, we could have a city that wasn't falling apart.
City counsellors under investigation
Since 2000 the City of Toronto has spent over 1 Billion dollars from various contingency funds to help make ends meet. At one point they even sold the hydro poles to the province to help get some extra cash. The city has almost no reserve funds left. Council has even approved a plan to sue the Ontario Government to try to balance this years budget. In the recent election Mayor Miller got reelected with a campaign that the Provincial and Federal Governments should be kicking in more money to help the city. He would campaign to make this happen and hold property tax increases to the rate of inflation. He was unsuccessful as this years Provincial and Federal budget's did not do very much to help the city. A 3.8% property tax hike has been approved which is higher than the rate of inflation. Council also failed to remove a single one of their many perks that come with the job.
The city's executive committee has asked the integrity commissioner to investigate two councillor for not spending enough money, Rob Ford is known for spending his own personal money on office expenses instead of dipping into the public purse. "You're not supposed to accept gifts, even from yourself," Giorgio Mammoliti said. The investigation will need approval from council next month before it can proceed.
How stupid of a statement is this? I understand that we want to make sure that bribes are not being used to influence city councillors judgement. How do you bribe yourself? It would be one thing if these councillors had maxed out there budget and were using private or 3rd party funds to make up the shortfall. In these cases they are coming in way under budget and could have had the city cover these costs.
If only these politicians spent more time worrying about how to balance the books, we could have a city that wasn't falling apart.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)