Harper's End of Year Speech

[jdobbin]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

When asked what troubles him about the year ahead, Stephen Harper said he's concerned about the slowdown in the American economy and how it could impact businesses north of the border.

"I believe 2008 will likely be a challenging year in terms of the economy," he told CTV News' Chief Anchor and Senior Editor Lloyd Robertson, and Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.

While Canada's unemployment rate is the best in 30 years and inflation is low, the prime minister said the soaring loonie is hurting Canadian exporters. Last September, it eclipsed the U.S. greenback for the first time in more than three decades.

If the U.S. economy continues to be sluggish in 2008, Harper said Canadians will feel the pinch.

"There is no way we can be completely insulated from what is going on in the United States or in the global economy," he said.

The Canadian economy will also get jolted by new mandatory targets to slash greenhouse gas emissions.

"We think the costs are manageable but they are real. They are going to bite," said Harper.

Given that the federal banks had to bail out the financial section to the tunes of billions and billions this week, the fear on the economy are justified.

[M.Dancer]

I don't think injecting liquidity into the market can rightly be described as bailing out. It isn't a great thing, but it hardly an abandon ship order.

[jdobbin]

I don't think injecting liquidity into the market can rightly be described as bailing out. It isn't a great thing, but it hardly an abandon ship order.

Harper himself used the word bailout.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...mp;refer=canada

Canadian investors holding $33 billion in short-term debt that plunged in value will have to rely on commercial banks for support after Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he won't bail them out.

``If the government became the day-to-day underwriter of market risk in commercial securities markets, that's a bottomless pit,'' Harper said in an interview in Ottawa. A government rescue wouldn't be ``healthy for the long-term growth of the Canadian economy.''

Harper's refusal to shore up the market for asset-backed commercial paper -- 30- to 90-day securities backed by car loans, credit card debts and mortgages -- leaves holders at the mercy of the country's biggest banks. Some banks have already expressed reluctance to provide support and are resisting pressure from the central bank.

``If the Canadian chartered banks don't go along with what they are apparently being promoted to do by the Bank of Canada, then what? Then we have a potential financial and economic problem,'' said Dale Orr, managing director of Canadian research in Toronto for Global Insight, a Lexington, Massachusetts-based economic forecasting firm.

The Canadian commercial-paper crisis comes as the nation's economy is weakening. Harper said he's worried that a U.S. slowdown will exacerbate matters, leaving little room to stimulate the economy with spending or tax cuts in his next annual budget proposal, due in February or March.

[jdobbin]

Harper also said that the Dalai Lama is not a "call girl."

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/p.../20/152224.aspx

“I met the Dalai Lama in my office but I meet everyone in my office. I don’t know why I would sneak off to a hotel room just to meet the Dalai Lama. You know, he’s not a call girl,” Harper told OMNI television.

I'm glad he got that straight.

[M.Dancer]

Harper himself used the word bailout.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...mp;refer=canada

He used the B word but not in the context you used it. Injecting liquidity is not a bail out. The government covering the debts of the banks would be a bail out, something he just said he would not do.

[jdobbin]

He used the B word but not in the context you used it. Injecting liquidity is not a bail out. The government covering the debts of the banks would be a bail out, something he just said he would not do.

What Harper is doing is considered a bail-out by many.

http://www.financialpost.com/analysis/stor...367&k=84704

Don't call it a bailout, they say. Call it a temporary facility to relieve short-term liquidity problems. Or, as the Bank of Canada put it this week, these are "measures designed to address elevated pressures in short-term funding markets." More grandly, call it a noble attempt to save the financial system from chaos.

The word "bailout" implies throwing rescue money or policies at economic players who should be forced to deal with their own problems. Nobody in government likes to admit to engineering bailouts, but that's exactly what's taking shape in Canada's financial markets.

[M.Dancer]

What Harper is doing is considered a bail-out by many.

http://www.financialpost.com/analysis/stor...367&k=84704

Funny you should call upon Terry Corcorran as a source. I worked at the Financial Times of canada while he was editor there. Terry would call it a bail simply because he is the most laissez faire freemarket business journalist in Canada. I would not doubt that he believes there should be no Bank of Canada at all.

[DrGreenthumb]

I hear Harper says the biggest challenge in the new year will be the economy and the environment. That is no surprise that the economy and the environment will be in trouble when conservatives are in power. When the conservatives have destroyed both of them completely enough I guess we will have to vote the liberals back in to repair the damage. Its no surprise to me that the economy down south has tanked either, thats what happens when conservatives (republicans) are in a position of power.

[Higgly]

I thought it was interesting that the Toronto Sun characterized Steve's economic outlook as a "Lump of coal". Naturally, we all understand that the Chairman of the board at Sun Media is none other than Brian Mulroney? Of course that has nothing to do with it....

[DrGreenthumb]

Now I know why the sun chain papers are such full of shit prohibitionist rags. I always considered the sun papers right wing bird cage liner but now I know why they are so full of bullshit.

[Higgly]

Now I know why the sun chain papers are such full of shit prohibitionist rags. I always considered the sun papers right wing bird cage liner but now I know why they are so full of bullshit.

Just don't use it for arse-wipe when you go camping. We're talking serious camper's rash here.

[jdobbin]

Funny you should call upon Terry Corcorran as a source. I worked at the Financial Times of canada while he was editor there. Terry would call it a bail simply because he is the most laissez faire freemarket business journalist in Canada. I would not doubt that he believes there should be no Bank of Canada at all.

If he was the only one saying that, I'd probably agree but the cash injection has been described as a bail out for the banks who have been in full panic the last several weeks. Even after this week's money, they are saying it won't be enough. They're probably right.

[jdobbin]

TD's Don Drummond expects a tame budget.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Stephen Harper's gloomy forecast of economic turbulence in the year ahead is likely meant to cool expectations before the release of a new budget, financial experts said Friday.

Don Drummond, TD Bank Financial Group's chief economist, described Harper's remarks as "political conditioning" ahead of a tame budget next year.

"We are so used to, in Canada, to have blockbuster budgets that always have billions and billions of dollars in new spending, or billions of dollars in tax cuts, and I just don't think we're going to have that in 2008," Drummond told CTV's Mike Duffy Live.

"If you don't want to get nasty surprises when you release a document, you try to do pre-conditioning."

During year-end interviews, Harper said there would be no more federal tax relief in 2008. There would also be no major spending increases either, as the government focused on cutting debt.

He said a cautious fiscal policy would be needed to combat a global slowdown and a fragile U.S. economy, which is expected to impact Canada.

"There is no way we can be completely insulated from what is going on in the United States or in the global economy," Harper told CTV News' Chief Anchor and Senior Editor Lloyd Robertson, and Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife on Thursday.

The Tories might push Canada into further deficit with the additional tax cuts coming. So far they have done very little cut spending and will probably gear up to spend like drunken sailors when the election comes.

[August1991]

Harper himself used the word bailout.

Let's be straight here, if "bailout" it is, it's not Harper who's doing it. It's the Bank of Canada. Or more accurately, the US Fed.

Should there be a "bailout"? I dunno. These guys are looking at Greenspan in 1987 and figuring liquidity is the right way to go. (So, I dunno? I reckon that a "bad public perception" of asset-backed commercial paper is not the same as a "bad public perception" of stock certificates. In 1987, it was far more serious.)

----

Returning to Harper's year-end interviews, I only heard snips on CBC Radio. I though the Dalia Lama/Call Girl comment was ill placed but then I realized that the CBC would of course use it. Why did Harper say it? If he hadn't used the word "call girl", the interview wouldn't have run at all. Harper made his point: He's still here; he's taking care of business; he meets and greets foreign visitors in equal fashion.

I'm more surprised that Harper even met the media. Why? Will he do a New Year fireside chat too? Is Harper going soft and fuzzy?

Note to Harper's speechwriters: Find a better line than "call girl" to get the money shot.

Edited December 22, 2007 by August1991

[capricorn]

Note to Harper's speechwriters: Find a better line than "call girl" to get the money shot.

In the comments I read in the blogosphere, a lot of them said something to the effect "he does have a sense of humour after all". The call girl reference resonated in different ways with people.

[capricorn]

TD's Don Drummond expects a tame budget.

So I take it Drummond took Harper's comments into consideration in his forecast of a tame budget. Here's a thought. If Harper wanted to throw the Liberals off their game, what better way than to discourage the expectation of tax cuts in the coming budget. The Liberals would plan their strategy around the assumption of a stingy budget. Then, Harper turns around and announces personal income tax cuts in the budget. Is he sneaky enough to pull this off?

So far they have done very little cut spending and will probably gear up to spend like drunken sailors when the election comes.

Well he had the Liberals showing him how to do it. It worked for them didn't it?

How about we add a thirteenth day to the Twelve Days of Christmas and call it "13 drunken sailors spending"?

[jdobbin]

Let's be straight here, if "bailout" it is, it's not Harper who's doing it. It's the Bank of Canada. Or more accurately, the US Fed.

Should there be a "bailout"? I dunno. These guys are looking at Greenspan in 1987 and figuring liquidity is the right way to go. (So, I dunno? I reckon that a "bad public perception" of asset-backed commercial paper is not the same as a "bad public perception" of stock certificates. In 1987, it was far more serious.)

----

Returning to Harper's year-end interviews, I only heard snips on CBC Radio. I though the Dalia Lama/Call Girl comment was ill placed but then I realized that the CBC would of course use it. Why did Harper say it? If he hadn't used the word "call girl", the interview wouldn't have run at all. Harper made his point: He's still here; he's taking care of business; he meets and greets foreign visitors in equal fashion.

I'm more surprised that Harper even met the media. Why? Will he do a New Year fireside chat too? Is Harper going soft and fuzzy?

Note to Harper's speechwriters: Find a better line than "call girl" to get the money shot.

The Call Girl comment was picked up by all media, not just CBC. I guess though that it is as good a time as any to bash the CBC.

As for Harper going to the media... can you smell the election in the air? Can't very well go into an election and have the media freeze. It won't work.

As for bail out, the Fed does have some latitude in what they do but as the article goes on to say, it will require a political decision on how liquidity proceeds. In the U.S., Bush has accepted Chinese and Arab money to come back their banks. What will Harper do?

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

So I take it Drummond took Harper's comments into consideration in his forecast of a tame budget. Here's a thought. If Harper wanted to throw the Liberals off their game, what better way than to discourage the expectation of tax cuts in the coming budget. The Liberals would plan their strategy around the assumption of a stingy budget. Then, Harper turns around and announces personal income tax cuts in the budget. Is he sneaky enough to pull this off?

Well he had the Liberals showing him how to do it. It worked for them didn't it?

How about we add a thirteenth day to the Twelve Days of Christmas and call it "13 drunken sailors spending"?

Yes, it will be interesting to see him announce tax cuts and spend like crazy in advance of an election. I wonder if he will be able to keep the mounting deficit a secret if that is the plan.

It worked for the Tory government in Ontario for a while.

Edited December 22, 2007 by jdobbin

[daniel]

Interesting discussion over the usage, meaning or interpretation of the word "bailout".. Reminds me of similar discussions whether or not Bush linked Iraq to 911 as described in his speech to Congress.

....When the conservatives have destroyed both of them completely enough I guess we will have to vote the liberals back in to repair the damage. Its no surprise to me that the economy down south has tanked either, thats what happens when conservatives (republicans) are in a position of power.

That's precisely why Harper stated that 2008 will be challenging - so that when it does happen it won't look like he was to blame (wanna guess how quickly the blame wil be on the Liberals?)

Also, the costs to fix the conservative damage will be billions and billions and guess who's going to be opposed to this type of spending? They'll be looking for a "made in Canada solution" instead.

[Oleg Bach]

Interesting discussion over the usage, meaning or interpretation of the word "bailout".. Reminds me of similar discussions whether or not Bush linked Iraq to 911 as described in his speech to Congress.

That's precisely why Harper stated that 2008 will be challenging - so that when it does happen it won't look like he was to blame (wanna guess how quickly the blame wil be on the Liberals?)

Also, the costs to fix the conservative damage will be billions and billions and guess who's going to be opposed to this type of spending? They'll be looking for a "made in Canada solution" instead.

Harper is a big disappointment - he is not a nice guy...He is not interested in anything other than the drug that he was addicted to by his handlers - POWER - sorry - that's not enough to be king of Canada - he is an inferiour hockey playing kid from Leaside - one hand picked and formed by some old bay street lawyers not to mention the power hogs in Montreal- thats all you get for your money - is a Harper - what the hell good is this twit to the Canadian public - he don't give a crap ...he's like a kid that you buy a Porche for - and now he wants more - a faster and more impressive car - he is bribable - not by money persay - buy by the power within the office - this is not a Winston Churchill - just a poor version of Dick Cheney - and I hope I spelled that right for you overly educated boys....Harper is neither liberal or conservative - he is strickly big buisness - all they asked of him was "will you whip your lesser slaves?" - and he said yes - simple.

[jbg]

Harper also said that the Dalai Lama is not a "call girl."

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/p.../20/152224.aspx

I'm glad he got that straight.

And your point?

[jbg]

Harper also said that the Dalai Lama is not a "call girl."

I'm glad he got that straight.

What he means is that Western leaders should publicly embrace those that fight for freedom, even where the oppressors are the revered Communist Chinese rather than the Israelis, who some would consider pariahs.

Edited December 23, 2007 by jbg

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I will respectfully reply that the intervention of outside force into a domestic situation is a very dangerous game to play, as the United States is well aware. I would recommend that Canada not follow the lead of other nations and instead return to the role of keepers of the peace. I would further suggest that this nation focus instead on the humanitarian effort to reduce the pain and suffering experienced by nations in conflict. To do otherwise would in my opinion be merely passing judgment on a culture not our own. Taking sides is a political exercise that seldom results in the sparing of lives but often results in the taking of lives.

[jbg]

I will respectfully reply that the intervention of outside force into a domestic situation is a very dangerous game to play, as the United States is well aware.*******Taking sides is a political exercise that seldom results in the sparing of lives but often results in the taking of lives.

I respectfully disagree.

I once agreed with you, during the Viet Nam era.The problem is that modern-day opponents project their unique brand of carnage in our hemisphere and seemingly have as their goal submission of other "people of the book" to their beliefs. Thus, either we fight them where they are or where we are. I choose to fight them on their turf.

One of the lessons of Viet Nam, indeed, is that fighting the enemy on our turf is a serious mistake.

[margrace]

Interesting discussion over the usage, meaning or interpretation of the word "bailout".. Reminds me of similar discussions whether or not Bush linked Iraq to 911 as described in his speech to Congress.

That's precisely why Harper stated that 2008 will be challenging - so that when it does happen it won't look like he was to blame (wanna guess how quickly the blame wil be on the Liberals?)

Also, the costs to fix the conservative damage will be billions and billions and guess who's going to be opposed to this type of spending? They'll be looking for a "made in Canada solution" instead.

Is Made in Canada anything like the Product of Canada on our fish supplied by the Asian Marke?