Quote du jour: He said what?

From the Shouldn't this guy have been fired already? department:

Senior officials from the Prime Minister's Office have already said the stimulus package would plunge the country into a $64-billion deficit over the next two years.

The massive deficit estimates are a far cry from the slim $800 million surplus predicted by Flaherty for the next fiscal year in his economic update in November.

Memo to Cons: Blame Steve

The (self) righteous indignation of Conservative party supporters is palpable. Heads are exploding all over western Canada. Beware grey matter splatter. Dress appropriately.

Fueled by right-wing radio talk show hosts on stations like Corus Entertainment's QR77 in Calgary, the angry mobs on the airwaves have their virtual torches and pitchforks ready to go while they rail against what they characterize as an attempted "coup d'etat" by the federal opposition parties who've threatened to form a coalition government to bring down the Harper regime.

The funny thing is that radio hosts blowhards like Charles Adler and Roy Green (I'll get to him later) both admit that Steve's decision to gut federal financing of political parties was a mistake - a "weapon", as Adler put it, simply handed to the opposition at a very bad time. Steve seems to have received that message since he announced on Saturday that he's running away from that decision. Typical bully - taunt and taunt and when someone calls you on it, run as fast as you can in the other direction.

As for Green, I'm not a regular listener (thankfully) but I sure let him know that I was listening to his show today after he was absolutely rude, petulant, and childish in the way he treated MP Libby Davies, whom he had invited onto his show as a guest. He battered her with his non-stop anger and refused to give her a chance to answer. When she did manage to get a few words in though, she stayed calm and chided him for his ridiculously emotional behaviour and then went on to try to explain the NDP's viewpoint. Kudos to her.

Green was nowhere as rude to Bob Rae or John Baird (who came onto the show 2 hours late - yes, I listened to his show for 2 hours - the horror). Green was appalled - appalled I tell ya! - at the idea that the Liberals and NDP would get support from the Bloc to bring this coalition to fruition. He continually denied the fact that the Conservative party has repeatedly used the Bloc's support while it's attempted to lead a minority government because it had to. Rae was quick to point that out (as was I in an e-mail to Green). Hypocrisy might be entertaining but it's no substitute for the truth.

So much misdirected anger. Conservative supporters need to take a good, long look at the fact that their party failed to step up to the plate at a moment in time when the economic situation needs immediate action and active solutions. "Wait until Flaherty announces his new budget next year" is not acceptable. If your house was burning down, would you appreciate being put on hold by a 911 operator? No, I didn't think so. And if that 911 operator didn't effectively deal with your situation, wouldn't you want him or her fired? No doubt. Well, guess what? Canada's economy is on fire. And not in a good way. We're dialing 911 and being put on hold.

We know what "taking responsibility" looks like after watching years of Harper in office. It's simple: blame the Liberals. Blame anyone else you can. That's why there's so much right-wing anger out there today. It's so much easier to spew misplaced, red-faced rage than it is to look at your own role in your impending demise. So, be angry. The rest of us will be responsible and rational. Somebody has to be. Maybe we'll even save your house while we're at it.

Related:

G-G would have little choice but to accept coalition, experts say
Harper scrambles to retain power
Flaherty's instinct to cut out of step with world
 

Flaherty Meets Reality

Flaherty - March 1, 2008:

"If you're going to make a new business investment in Canada, and you're concerned about taxes, the last place you will go is the province of Ontario."

Flaherty - today:

MISSISSAUGA — Ontario will for the first time collect from a federal program designed to shift wealth to Canada's poorest regions next year, an unpleasant reminder of the grim economic prospects facing the country's most populous province.

Premier Dalton McGuinty's government will receive $347-million in the fiscal year starting in March, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced at a meeting Monday with his provincial and territorial counterparts.

“It's sort of an odd feeling to see Ontario in such difficult straits,” Mr. Flaherty, a finance minister under former Ontario Premier Mike Harris, told reporters. “Regrettably, I expect Ontario will be in the equalization program for some time to come.”

Maybe if he'd actually listened to all of the opposition parties pounding on him day after day the last couple of years about the sorry state of the manufacturing sector in Canada, he wouldn't be experiencing whatever this "odd feeling" is today. (I suspect that feeling is actually indigestion from having to eat crow.)
 

Canadian Election Watch - Day 32

Stephen Harper is confused. Following a quick little speech on Wednesday in BC, the press gave him more than one opportunity to explain the comments he made about the bargains to be had in the stock market in the midst of this crash. His response?

Harper defended his comments, saying it was obvious to anyone who saw the interview that he was "specifically talking about the fact that many Canadians have seen big losses in their portfolios in the last couple of weeks."

"I know that because, as I say, my mother is one of those people, and I hear about it every single day. And we know that people are worried ,and they have a right to be worried about what's going on in financial markets," Harper said in a campaign appearance in Victoria.

He then repeated it wasn't appropriate for a prime minister to "join in a wave of stock market panic and pessimism around the world," but rather to ensure the government prepares in advance and make long-term investments to protect Canadians' interests.

"We had a plan," he said. "We do not get caught up in market panic."

See, here's the deal, Steve. If you don't want people to panic, you tell them not to panic. You don't tell them, with a wink and a nudge, that now's the time to buy low so you can sell high later. First of all, that does absolutely nothing for seniors like your mother who don't have much later left and who can't afford to wait for the economic sun to start shining again (not to mention that it's doubly insulting to seniors who lost out because of the Cons' income trust flip flop).

Secondly, you are not the Prime Stockbroker. You are (for now, anyway) the Prime Minister. And, as one reporter pointed out during the Q&A period in BC, you are not the chair of the Bank of Canada. It's not your job to hint about possible rate cuts any more than it is your job to offer investment advice.

Who would vote for this guy considering that he doesn't even know what his job description entails?

Here in Alberta:

Alberta's Progressive Conservative premier wants to meet with his provincial counterparts to discuss the state of the Canadian economy, even though Stephen Harper called the same proposal by Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion "panicking."

This is how this is all rolling out: anything not proposed by Steve and his federal Cons is "panicking". Maybe he shouldn't send Flaherty to the G7 meeting in Washington on Friday. Surely that's "panicking" as well?

What's ironic about this stance is that Steve is fearmongering by claiming everyone else is panicking and that is causing more panic because, at the same time, the Cons aren't providing anything resembling a long-term, stable vision that makes sense. Instead, their platform is a piecemeal offering that isn't cohesive. There is no grand picture besides stay the course.

And, speaking of Flaherty, he disclosed on Wednesday that his department had warned "a couple" of Canadian banks last year "that their capitalization levels were on the brink of falling below accepted standards". He wouldn't reveal which banks were on the receving end though and we have no way of finding out so how can we even know 1) if that's true or 2) what happened?

Meanwhile, no word so far from Flaherty on the settlement reached between RBC Capital and the SEC.

RBC Capital Markets, the investment banking arm of Royal Bank of Canada, also neither admitted or denied wrongdoing. It said the buyback would cut into its fourth-quarter earnings by about $30 million on a pretax basis. That estimated loss includes the $9.8 million civil penalty the company agreed to pay to Cuomo's office and the North American Securities Administrators Association, which represents securities regulators in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The SEC, Cuomo's office and other state regulators have been conducting a wide-ranging investigation into banks' marketing of auction-rate securities. The regulators have alleged that the banks misled customers into believing auction-rate securities were safe, cash-like investments.

If you listen to Steve tell it though, Canadian banks are squeaky clean with basically no problems and that's the problem with people being lulled into a very false sense of security by all of this stay the course talk the Cons are trying to sell. We're not panicking. We just want the truth along with assurances that the next PM actually understand what his job is - and we certainly aren't getting that from Harper.
 

Cons: RCMP Raid Was a 'Publicity Stunt'

Pass the tissues. Oh how I weep for those poor victims of the RCMP raid of the Cons' headquarters.

Not.

The tories are scrambling to paint themselves as being oppressed after yesterday's raid (which continues today). The problem is that they appointed the two Elections Canada officials they're now suing and that they applaud the RCMP (even protecting Zaccardelli to the bitter end) except when they're the targets of a legally-sanctioned warrant. And now, they're also trying to implicate the Liberals in some sort of conspiracy theory:

News of the raid first broke on CBC Newsworld Tuesday and other media quickly arrived on the scene. Liberal staffers from the Liberal research bureau, which is one block away from the Conservative party headquarters, then followed with a video camera to record the event.

Several Conservatives expressed suspicion Wednesday that the media and Liberals were made aware of the raid. Liberals insist they learned of it by watching television. CBC News has not yet said how they became aware of the raid.

“I do find it odd when I look at a photograph as I did this morning, and I see someone knocking on the door with cameras, news cameras present, and to see that there were Liberal party people in the hallway,” said Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.

“I find that very strange indeed. This is I gather some sort of enforcement warranted activity that was being undertaken. In my life as a lawyer in the courts of Canada, I'm not used to the media being along with officers carrying out their duties. It's rather unusual actually.”

Obviously, Flaherty has never watched COPS.

Ontario Tory MP David Tilson made similar remarks.

“Why are they picking on the Conservatives?” asked Mr. Tilson. “It's very suspicious.”

Well, nail Harper to a cross and give him a crown of thorns.
 

Quotes du Jour: Flaherty v Dion on the Budget

Yes, that's right. Today you get 2 quotes for the price of one because they're both incredibly boneheaded on the same subject: Budget 2008.

First up, Mr Stingy:

“Sir John A. Macdonald used to say ‘look a little ahead my friends.' And if we look a little bit ahead, we see how morally deficient it is for us to live high on the hog now and pass our debt on to the next generation,” Mr. Flaherty told a breakfast audience in Toronto.

I suppose you might to have to go back to Sir John A's time to find a period when Conservatives weren't spending like drunken sailors while the Liberals had to bail them out and sober them up later.

And then there's Stephane:

'We'll find a way to not defeat the government'

I've misplaced my Dion to catnip translator but what immediately comes to mind is "I'll get you my pretty, and your little dog too!!!"

And we all know how that turned out.
 

Mr Stingy's Budget

"Stingy". That's the word being used by the Globe & Mail.

"Modest" and "one mile wide and one inch deep". That was Stephane Dion's assessment. Apparently, long and shallow doesn't bother Dion one bit since he's said the Liberals will support it. The NDP and the BQ will oppose it, as expected.

So, how do we explain that the Conservatives seem to have been itching for an election the last few months, making confidence motions left and right, yet have proposed a budget without a poison pill - as the pundits call the one divisive issue that might push the Liberals to oppose it? (The National Post's Don Martin described the budget as a "sleeping pill" and "an uninspiring cure for insomnia" instead.)

Perhaps the Conservatives have realized, finally, that their poll numbers have barely moved in the 2 years they've been in power and that, despite the fact that the Liberals are not well-poised to challenge them, they'd only likely end up in a minority government situation again. That certainly isn't what they want. What changed? After all, with so many scandals currently plaguing the Conservatives, you'd think they would have played this differently just to avoid that accountability bogeyman that has reared its ugly head. And yet, they demurred - even compromised - by throwing in some Liberal-friendly spending. This, after having updated their first Afghanistan motion to include demands made by the Liberals as well.

Is Harper finally learning how a minority government works? Or is he just playing it safe enough so he doesn't cause any ripples that might lessen the party's popularity? He definitely tried hard to reel in Ontario voters with the new money allotted to the auto sector - a province he knows he needs to gain more support in if he wants majority power. But that focus is not enough, according to manufacturing sector analysts.

As for the rest of the country, there was absolutely nothing for anyone to get excited about in this budget and future economic projections are even more sobering.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what other tricks the Conservatives have up their sleeve if they really don't want to stay in power as a minority until the next legislatively mandated election in 2009. In the meantime, one thing we can count on is that they'll continue to behave badly - disrupting parliament as often as possible - while they plan whatever strategy is being cooked up in the back rooms in Ottawa.

Related:

You can find the budget here.
 

Quote du Jour: Flaherty as Jesus

Via The Star:

The finance department estimates that once this year’s bounty is spent, the treasury will be all but bare for the next two years with tiny surpluses of $1.4 billion and $1.3 billion, not counting the annual $3 billion set-aside for debt repayment.

Flaherty’s challenge is to the make meagre offering of loaves and fishes he has on hand appear like a banquet so that if the government falls, he can not only paint the opposition as irresponsible spenders but his budget as an investment in future good times.

And it seems he's already performed one miracle:

OTTAWA–The Conservative government will disclose tomorrow, when it tables its budget, that it has on hand at least $1 billion more in spending money than it had anticipated, sources have told The Canadian Press.

Well, there is a slight resemblance...




 

Flaherty's Mini-Budget

Poor People Suck.

Let's face it. It's time for Conservatives to be honest and come right out and say it. In fact, I think the Conservative party should just use that as their next campaign slogan.

And let me say this right off the bat too about Flaherty's neon green tie: Call the fashion police. there's been a violation. (And no, I don't care if some kid picked it out for him. It's still butt-ugly.)

Alrighty then, moving onto the business at hand - Flaherty gave what was supposed to be his "fall economic statement" today. What it turned out to be was a) a mini-budget and b) electioneering.

If you're too poor to pay income taxes (like me), here's your little gift: a 1% reduction in the GST on stuff you can't afford to buy in the first place but have to so you can survive. Big whoop.

If you're a big profitable corporation, you got a tax break too (albeit much, much more than the heathens - of course.)

If you're an average Joe or Jane, you got a mini-break. That'll get you a few extra apples at the grocery store.

If you're the Bloc or the NDP, you're voting against this nonsense when it's brought up in the Ways and Means committee this week.

If you're Stephane Dion of the Liberals, you're speaking against it (except for the corporate tax cuts) but you're not ready for an election because your party is wrapped up in internal scandals, so you're going to do a lot of bloviating about it but you'll still vote for it in the end.

If you're a voter, you won't be going to the polls for a federal election this year.

If you're the Conservatives, you just played another game of chicken with the Liberals and won.

If you want to look at the details, check out the Dept of Finance's site.

News related to the Poor People Suck Conservative philosophy: Alberta premier Stelmach vows to "eradicate homelessness" in 10 years. What could possibly be wrong with that, you ask?

1) Quick. Name one big city or Canadian province that's eradicated homelessness - especially one run governed by Conservatives. That's right - it's.not.gonna.happen.

2) 10 years? Like Liberal MLA Dave Taylor said in response to this announcement (paraphrasing): "We already know how to build houses. It shouldn't take 10 years to do that." And the kicker? This proposed "secretariat" won't even be formed til next spring and the government's not sure what powers it will have yet. That lost time counts against your "10 year" timeline, Eddie. I'll be doing the countdown (from whatever overpriced rental I'm living in because the waiting list for low-income housing in Calgary is always at least 2500+ people long and buying is absolutely out of the question.)

Let's get real here. My province and the feds have more than enough money to really help the poor. The fact is that they simply don't want to. They still believe in Reagan's trickle down economics. Apparently, none of them care that's there's been a drought down here in Povertyville for a helluva long time.
 

Budget 2007

Budget 2007 has been posted on the Department of Finance's site.

Via CTV:

Key measures include:

* A new $2,000 child tax credit that will provide up to $310 of tax relief for each child under 18
* The Working Income Tax Benefit, which is intended to assist low-income Canadians who are making the transition from welfare to the workforce.
* $140 million over the next two years toward a Registered Disability Savings Plan
* Resources to the Canada Revenue Agency to detect and close down tax avoidance through offshore tax havens
* A rebate of up to $2,000 to buyers of fuel-efficient cars
* A levy of up to $4,000 on fuel-inefficient vehicles, which does not extend to gas-guzzling pickup trucks
* An increase in the age limit to 71 from 69 for registered retirement savings plans and registered pensions
* $300 million toward offering a vaccine to protect women against cervical cancer
* An end to the marriage penalty by increasing the spousal and other amounts to provide up to $209 of tax relief for a supporting spouse or single taxpayer supporting a child or relative

Thanks to continuing strong employment growth and high corporate earnings, Canada is expected to post a budget surplus in 2006-2007 of $9.2 billion.

Overall government spending next year will total $233.4 billion, up about 7 per cent compared to this year.

The finance minister also committed to pay down at least $3 billion a year on the $472 billion national debt.

About two-thirds of the budget is going toward resolving the so-called fiscal imbalance while the remaining one-third is committed to tax reduction and other spending initiatives, Flaherty said.

more...

I haven't had the chance to review everything yet and the opposition responses aren't in at the time of this writing. I'll add them once they're available.

I hesitate to add this because some might think it's selfish or that I'm unable to see the impact on society of some of the larger measures announced but, as a mid-40s woman on permanent disability living well below the poverty line, there's nothing I can see in these announcements that will have a directly positive impact on my daily life or standard of living. It's been that way every year for a long time now. I think too many of us are too often forgotten...

Opposition party reactions:
Budget fails to close prosperity gap: NDP
Liberals: Conservative Budget Fails Canadians
Bloc likes Canada budget; government may survive
More from Duceppe:

Duceppe had this to say: "He (Prime Minister Stephen Harper) went around Canada last week saying he doesn't want an election ... he should say thank you to us."

I caught a bit of an interview with Elizabeth May who said her Green party certainly wouldn't have supported this budget either.

First Nations response from Phil Fontaine on CBC: "I'm extremely disappointed and seriously frustrated."

And what was that I heard Andrew Coyne say on CBC? That this Conservative finance minister was the biggest spender in the history of the country? That doesn't sound very "conservative" to me.

Via The Globe & Mail:

The rapid spending growth brought concern from economists and business groups, who noted Mr. Flaherty is promising restraint later, but spending big now.

"We are certainly overspending," said Nancy Hughes-Anthony, president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. "I'm concerned because the level is not sustainable."

"We're spending on everything from the CFL to truckers' lunches."

Truckers' lunches? I missed that line item...