Flaherty to slash public funding for federal parties

[Argus]

The Tories didn't go to the electorate about going into deficit. They said never, no way in the election campaign.

Sure, someone with experience in Ottawa like Ignatieff or Rae.

Ignatieff barely has experience in this COUNTRY, let alone Ottawa. And Rae has experience in running up huge, wasteful deficits and social engineering.

[Argus]

Coincidentally, Harper had only three years as an MP before seeking leadership.

Harper has spent most of his life involved in Canadian politics.

Ignatieff has spent most of his life as an American academic living in Boston.

[Argus]

The budget officer of Parliament laid the blame right at Harper's feet.

Blame for what? Correcting a lot of past mistakes, not overtaxing citizens, funding infrastructure programs or paying down the deficit?

For raising spending far too much, too fast while cutting taxes. I concede he didn't know how bad the world economic situation was going to get, but you know, there's nothing wrong with keeping a little in savings just in case. I'm not big, enthusiastic supporter of the Tories these days because of this.

On the other hand, the sheer hypocrisy of the opposition in wailing about economics when EVERYONE knows this is about their party funding is a bit galling. And the effrontery in them suggesting that a change of governments would actually speed up plans for economic stimulus is even moreso. It would clearly throw all the current plans into chaos and disarray while they desperately try to come up with new ones which at least "sound" good to those who don't pay close attention.

I don't like people who tell bald-faced lies to my face.

[Argus]

So? This means Harper was okay to bypass an election then and the Liberals are not now?

Bypassing an election and grabbing for power solely in order to protect your party financing is not quite the same thing.

And anyone who says this is not about party financing is a bloody liar or an imbecile.

[Argus]

Transfer payments. The CBC. Atlantic Opportunities cut. Western Diversification cut. VIA cut. The military college cut. Polling chopped to the bone. A much smaller cabinet. Salaries cut. Positions let to attrition or outright cuts. Ethanol cut.

The Liberals have cut before. They can do it again.

I will make you a bet that if the Liberals get in they will not make any cuts except funding to the military, and, like last time, will download the need for cutting by slashing transfers to the provinces.

[Argus]

Nope. But then I haven't been displaced from my job.

Unemployment has been rocketing up lately?

[Alta4ever]

Nobody has to spend money

[Smallc]

Hmm, wasn't he the imbecile who gave a conference call to "insiders" during the election who, when asked how the Liberals would pay for so many promises, and where they would cut back said that Defense has too much money and that would be the first place he would be making cuts? Of course, he didn't check to see if anyone was recording him....oops!

So I suppose the first thing we would see would be major cutbacks to Defense. So much for rebuilding. Got to find money for those arts programs somewhere!

ummm....ok....if that's what I said then I apologize, but I don't remember it.

[Shakeyhands]

So you're saying that a Liberal coallition would definitely NOT run a deficit, right?

There's no choice at this point I would think, perhaps if someone had made cuts to income tax that would have been cheaper than cutting a consumption tax.... hmmmm

[madmax]

Unemployment has been rocketing up lately?

Actually the past 11 days have been alarming. I have been talking to numerous people in the field, wondering how we went from 10s to 1000s in such a short period. Walk in traffic is huge, and the numbers are yet to ring in. But it is everything from iT people, internet providers, retail outlets, communications, small business, and independent skilled trades and sales people, looking for the magic solution out of this F#@#&$(# MESS. And it is a mess if you didn't live in a glass tower. However, anyone who manages to maintain steady employment through the next couple of years will not notice anything different other then lower prices and better deals.

Harper is a loser, but I doubt he has lost his job, nor will he.

[blueblood]

Actually the past 11 days have been alarming. I have been talking to numerous people in the field, wondering how we went from 10s to 1000s in such a short period. Walk in traffic is huge, and the numbers are yet to ring in. But it is everything from iT people, internet providers, retail outlets, communications, small business, and independent skilled trades and sales people, looking for the magic solution out of this F#@#&$(# MESS. And it is a mess if you didn't live in a glass tower. However, anyone who manages to maintain steady employment through the next couple of years will not notice anything different other then lower prices and better deals.

Harper is a loser, but I doubt he has lost his job, nor will he.

Agriculture still looks pretty good. Time to pick up a western producer and go job hunting!!!

[Shady]

Transfer payments.

And what do you think transfer payments are primarily used for? I'll give you a hint. Healthcare. Education. That's almost as suicidal as running a campaign on a "green shift" that would increase taxes on fuel and manufacturing, during the highest gasoline prices in the history of the country, not to mention difficult economic times for Canadian manufacturing.

The CBC. Atlantic Opportunities cut. Western Diversification cut. VIA cut. The military college cut. Polling chopped to the bone. A much smaller cabinet. Salaries cut. Positions let to attrition or outright cuts. Ethanol cut.

Sure you could cut some of this, but not nearly enough to balance a budget. Plus, you'd leave yourself open to gigantic political attacks by opposing parties. Let's see, cuts in CBC, you're anti-art and anti-culture, cuts in Atlantic oppurtunities, you're anti-Atlantic Canada, cuts in Western diversification, you're anti-Western Canada, cuts to VIA, you're anti-public transit, cuts to military college, you're anti-military at a time when the troops need all the help and resources possible. Cuts to ethanol, you're anti-farmer. Good luck winning an election alienating that many constituencies.

I don't think cuts are necessary. 12 months from now, the economic outlook will be much brighter, and the budget will balance itself out, provided government doesn't increase spending, which from all signs, points to no. A small budget deficit during a global recession is not a bad thing.

[Shakeyhands]

I don't think cuts are necessary. 12 months from now, the economic outlook will be much brighter, and the budget will balance itself out, provided government doesn't increase spending, which from all signs, points to no. A small budget deficit during a global recession is not a bad thing.

Despite what Harper said in Lima? He specifically stated that cutting spending was what made the Depression the Depression. He stated that we should actually continue spending and not cut it...

"They allowed a rapid contraction of the banking system. They allowed widespread deflation (falling prices) as a consequence. They undertook to balance the books at all costs – raising taxes and contracting government economic activity at the one time when fiscal stimulus was absolutely essential.

http://www.thestar.com/article/542017

[Argus]

ummm....ok....if that's what I said then I apologize, but I don't remember it.

Is your name McCallum?

[Argus]

Actually the past 11 days have been alarming. I have been talking to numerous people in the field, wondering how we went from 10s to 1000s in such a short period. Walk in traffic is huge, and the numbers are yet to ring in

I have no real idea what you're talking about. Walk-in traffic to what?

From 10s to 1000s? So you're saying that whatever this bad stuff is, ie, a shelter or food hamper, traffic is up one hundredfold? I find that rather odd given there hasn't been any detectable rise in unemployment yet.

[Smallc]

Is your name McCallum?

Ok, I couldn't remember where I had said that. At the current time, the economy is my priority above all else...well, except ensuring healthcare continues to be funded.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Smallc

[Vancouver King]

Optic of the Year Award:

Attack dog Baird - with his tail between his legs - announcing an hour ago voter subsidy changes have been permanently shelved. It doesn't get much better than this with one reasonable exception: Flaherty's head on a platter as restitution for this episode of ill-advised Tory brinkmanship.

[johhny]

Optic of the Year Award:

Attack dog Baird - with his tail between his legs - announcing an hour ago voter subsidy changes have been permanently shelved. It doesn't get much better than this with one reasonable exception: Flaherty's head on a platter as restitution for this episode of ill-advised Tory brinkmanship.

I suspect that will not be the only changes he will make, give it 5 more days I bet he miraculously puts together a whole new economic budget too. These bone heads don't know what they are doing day to day let alone plan the future of this country.

[Smallc]

I suspect that will not be the only changes he will make, give it 5 more days I bet he miraculously puts together a whole new economic budget too. These bone heads don't know what they are doing day to day let alone plan the future of this country.

I'm starting to think that its more likely the government will cave to almost everything now. I don't think they have a choice.

[johhny]

I'm starting to think that its more likely the government will cave to almost everything now. I don't think they have a choice.

Lobbyists must be fired up they now have to bribe all party's lol and those who invested in Harper will lose confidence . I bet tory's don't rake in the same contributions next election.

[capricorn]

Lobbyists must be fired up they now have to bribe all party's lol and those who invested in Harper will lose confidence .

Bribe? Please share the source of information which backs up your allegation of parties being bribed by lobbyists.

I bet tory's don't rake in the same contributions next election.

And I bet you would be wrong. You underestimate the resiliency and loyalty of Conservative supporters. Conservatives fundraising is healthy not just during elections but between elections. Here is one supporter who would increase her donation to help make up for the federal subsidy, if and when it is canceled.

The Liberal Party hasn't mastered the art of getting supporters to open their wallets. Is it any wonder they're pissed at Harper for proposing an end to federal funding of political parties? Think of all those cool millions pouring into the Liberal bank account...shut off like a tap.

Edited November 29, 2008 by capricorn

[Radsickle]

Public Funding for Federal Parties started in the 70's...

Political contributions backgrounder

... But the most significant overhaul came in 2003, with Bill C-24, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Income Tax Act (Political Financing), also introduced by Chrétien. Prior to this, political contributions could be made by individuals, corporations, unions and other organizations, Canadian or not, a point which was widely criticized.

Canadian or not?!?!

With these new rules, there will be no more black holes for campaign contributions," said Chrétien during the bill's second reading in 2003. "No more allowing un-receipted money and unaccounted expenses." This made the election process more grassroots, quelling the public's fear that corporations making large donations would wield undue power in the government. Chrétien said there was "a perception that corporate and union contributions buy influence." He said Bill C-24 would address the issue head on. "I firmly believe that the elimination of contributions to political parties by business and trade unions will greatly improve the political culture in Canada."

Why are some trying to portray the Liberals as bad when they brought the non-democratic political financing under control? Sure, they might've shot their own foot off a bit, but at least they tried to be accountable. Harper doesn't want to be accountable for where his party's money comes from. That's why he wants to cancel Chretien's efforts.

What could be a more democratic method of financing a pluralistic government than giving every Canadian a toonie of their own money and asking them to spend it on the political party of their choice?

[Smallc]

The Liberal Party hasn't mastered the art of getting supporters to open their wallets. Is it any wonder they're pissed at Harper for proposing an end to federal funding of political parties? Think of all those cool millions pouring into the Liberal bank account...shut off like a tap.

The real Liberal fundraiser problem is the leader. Rae and Ignatieff have paid their debts because they know how to fundraise. If either of them were leader, fundraising would be much less of a problem.

[johhny]

Public Funding for Federal Parties started in the 70's...

Political contributions backgrounder

Canadian or not?!?!

Why are some trying to portray the Liberals as bad when they brought the non-democratic political financing under control? Sure, they might've shot their own foot off a bit, but at least they tried to be accountable. Harper doesn't want to be accountable for where his party's money comes from. That's why he wants to cancel Chretien's efforts.

What could be a more democratic method of financing a pluralistic government than giving every Canadian a toonie of their own money and asking them to spend it on the political party of their choice?

Although I suport no party I would not mind throwing some money towards the Libs just to show my disaproval of Harper

[Radsickle]

Here is one supporter who would increase her donation to help make up for the federal subsidy, if and when it is canceled.

You've every right to do that, up to a certain amount: an amount that the average individual Canadian could give.

After that, your monetary influence becomes unfair.