Flahrety Budget 2010, what gives?

[William Ashley]

So what is everyones take on this? Will it be a poison pill, or will they actually deliver something the opposition wants?

Will it be a matter of polling a day before?

Will Flahrety write a "GOOD NEWS and a BAD NEWS" version of the budget, so he can pick which one to deliver?

What is going to happen with it come march?

Edited January 16, 2010 by William Ashley

[ToadBrother]

I suspect there are two budgets in the works. One will be the "mid-to-high 30s" budget, which will be a veritable mine field of cuts and policies guaranteed to blow up in the Opposition's face.

The other is the "below-35" budget, which, while still austere in some regards, will generally possess the properties of a delightful scented flower, pure and spring-like, with narry an opposable section in it.

They won't know until the pre-Throne Speech polls come out at the end of February which one they'll put on the table. Perhaps that's why Flaherty needs time away from Parliament. Creating two sets of books can be kind of tough, especially with jerks like Kevin Page around.

Edited January 14, 2010 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The budget effort is a waste of time, the Throne Speech will kill Harper.

[punked]

The budget effort is a waste of time, the Throne Speech will kill Harper.

No the really good stuff in the budget will leak before the Throne Speech and they will have to pass that at least.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

No the really good stuff in the budget will leak before the Throne Speech and they will have to pass that at least.

No opposition party will let the Throne Speech pass. Its too good of a chance to punch Harper in the nose. The dummies will leak something for sure, that is how they operate by leaking the right stuff at the right time. Its a way of using the free advertising of the media to support their cause without expense. The buggers having done this several times already. That is not to say that the opposition parties haven't done it because they all do, its just the biggest bang for the buck comes from being the government at the time.

[punked]

No opposition party will let the Throne Speech pass. Its too good of a chance to punch Harper in the nose. The dummies will leak something for sure, that is how they operate by leaking the right stuff at the right time. Its a way of using the free advertising of the media to support their cause without expense. The buggers having done this several times already. That is not to say that the opposition parties haven't done it because they all do, its just the biggest bang for the buck comes from being the government at the time.

You have to let it pass with a Budget coming out the next day becuase otherwise the Conservatives release it the next day and say "See what they stopped from happening this spending in these Liberal and NDP riddings it is becuase they hate you time to vote Conservative." They will pass just to see the Budget and have something to run against, I know the Liberals will pass it because they need something to run against because they have no policy.

[ToadBrother]

You have to let it pass with a Budget coming out the next day becuase otherwise the Conservatives release it the next day and say "See what they stopped from happening this spending in these Liberal and NDP riddings it is becuase they hate you time to vote Conservative." They will pass just to see the Budget and have something to run against, I know the Liberals will pass it because they need something to run against because they have no policy.

And what precisely is the Tory policy at the moment. "Kevin Page is wrong and who needs the House of Commons"?

[punked]

And what precisely is the Tory policy at the moment. "Kevin Page is wrong and who needs the House of Commons"?

Ummmm they will say it is the budget and they will be right their policy will be the budget, and the Liberals if they force an election will have to run against that because they have come out with nothing.

[nicky10013]

Ummmm they will say it is the budget and they will be right their policy will be the budget, and the Liberals if they force an election will have to run against that because they have come out with nothing.

The Liberals can run on the Tory budget. Considering what we've seen in the past any projection is sure to be without a doubt wrong. Before the prorogment and afghan scandal Flaherty was always their biggest problem. Income tax trusts and now the ballooning deficit. Now, Harper and Mackay have joined him. The Liberals have plenty of ammo it just depends on if they use it.

[punked]

The Liberals can run on the Tory budget. Considering what we've seen in the past any projection is sure to be without a doubt wrong. Before the prorogment and afghan scandal Flaherty was always their biggest problem. Income tax trusts and now the ballooning deficit. Now, Harper and Mackay have joined him. The Liberals have plenty of ammo it just depends on if they use it.

Yah I am going to say it is a none starter. The Liberal brand in money manners is as poor as the NDP one Federally.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

If you give the Conservatives the Throne Speech and then turf them on the budget, you will be handing Harper a stick to beat you with. Why bother? Harper has played out enough rope to hang himself already. It is not as if the opposition can convince him to follow the instruction manual on the rope package, Harper isn't that stupid. Harper thinks the rope is nothing more than bait, FOR THE OPPOSITION. Harper is betting that folks approve of his methods and still don't want an election. He is half right, folks do not WANT an election, but folks think that it might have to happen. He is half wrong too because folks don't approve of his methods.

To me, the proper way to go is straight into an offensive mode. Don't give him the chance to even get near an apple box to preach. You don't offer up opportunities for the opponent to come after you, you attack and attack and attack. You don't give the a chance to recover from the first strike before the next hits. Look at all the ammo laying around already! Does anyone think there will be no more between now and the Throne Speech?

[William Ashley]

Yah I am going to say it is a none starter. The Liberal brand in money manners is as poor as the NDP one Federally.

Let me guess you are the spend and spend type.

[nicky10013]

Yah I am going to say it is a none starter. The Liberal brand in money manners is as poor as the NDP one Federally.

Which is why only the Liberal government has managed to keep balanced books over the past 20 years. The Conservatives took over and pointed the nose of the fiscal airplane towards the ground.

[Bugs]

If you give the Conservatives the Throne Speech and then turf them on the budget, you will be handing Harper a stick to beat you with. Why bother? Harper has played out enough rope to hang himself already. It is not as if the opposition can convince him to follow the instruction manual on the rope package, Harper isn't that stupid. Harper thinks the rope is nothing more than bait, FOR THE OPPOSITION. Harper is betting that folks approve of his methods and still don't want an election. He is half right, folks do not WANT an election, but folks think that it might have to happen. He is half wrong too because folks don't approve of his methods.

To me, the proper way to go is straight into an offensive mode. Don't give him the chance to even get near an apple box to preach. You don't offer up opportunities for the opponent to come after you, you attack and attack and attack. You don't give the a chance to recover from the first strike before the next hits. Look at all the ammo laying around already! Does anyone think there will be no more between now and the Throne Speech?

Why is this what you expect? My own sense is that Harper has a pretty good idea about how Canadians in general react to things. The majority of people don't care about proroguing and that kind of stuff. Canadians aren't torturers, either, so that's a dead issue.

The Liberals think this approach will, one day, sooner or later, lead them to an issue that has traction.

I think you are wrong, Mr. Fortin because, in English-speaking Canada, people do not consider the Liberal Party to be capable of governing -- at least not at the moment. The Liberal Party has been a great political institution, with a glorious past that's almost synonymous with 20th Century Canada. But at the moment, it has lost its way. Its leadership is confused, the party has no apparent plan, and their critique of the Conservatives is erratic and opportunistic. When they overplay their rhetoric, they look fatuous.

The Liberals have another problem. People now look askance at Liberal coalitions. Essentially, a coalition with the NDP is OK, so long as the two parties have enough seats to give them a majority. If they need the Bloc, however ... very dangerous.

Hyperventilate as much as you must, but for the Liberals, the way back to power involves going back to the grass roots, and rebuilding, not campaigning on suspicion and innuendo.

[nicky10013]

Why is this what you expect? My own sense is that Harper has a pretty good idea about how Canadians in general react to things. The majority of people don't care about proroguing and that kind of stuff. Canadians aren't torturers, either, so that's a dead issue.

The Liberals think this approach will, one day, sooner or later, lead them to an issue that has traction.

I think you are wrong, Mr. Fortin because, in English-speaking Canada, people do not consider the Liberal Party to be capable of governing -- at least not at the moment. The Liberal Party has been a great political institution, with a glorious past that's almost synonymous with 20th Century Canada. But at the moment, it has lost its way. Its leadership is confused, the party has no apparent plan, and their critique of the Conservatives is erratic and opportunistic. When they overplay their rhetoric, they look fatuous.

The Liberals have another problem. People now look askance at Liberal coalitions. Essentially, a coalition with the NDP is OK, so long as the two parties have enough seats to give them a majority. If they need the Bloc, however ... very dangerous.

Hyperventilate as much as you must, but for the Liberals, the way back to power involves going back to the grass roots, and rebuilding, not campaigning on suspicion and innuendo.

English speaking Canada isn't western canada. By account of the last poll to show voting intentions by province, I'm pretty sure the Liberals were leading in Ontario.

[Bryan]

Which is why only the Liberal government has managed to keep balanced books over the past 20 years.

The Liberals never balanced the budget.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The Liberals never balanced the budget.

Really, I though Paul Martin did that a few times.

[Molly]

The Liberals never balanced the budget.

That's right. They budgeted surpluses, and came up with even larger surpluses than were budgeted.

I like that better than 'We're going to spend more than we make, and ... um... maybe sell some stuff, I guess.'

[Wild Bill]

That's right. They budgeted surpluses, and came up with even larger surpluses than were budgeted.

I like that better than 'We're going to spend more than we make, and ... um... maybe sell some stuff, I guess.'

Actually, they only balanced the deficit. The actual debt keeps increasing. We haven't been debt free since Pearson's time.

Or more simply, we're so far in debt we have to look up to see our ass but it's ok, we earn just enough to handle it! Sure hope we never lose our job or sumpthin', eh?

[Bugs]

English speaking Canada isn't western canada. By account of the last poll to show voting intentions by province, I'm pretty sure the Liberals were leading in Ontario.

Yes it is.

[Bugs]

Really, I though Paul Martin did that a few times.

Amusing.

The Liberals ran a deficit from Trudeau's ascension, to until Paul Martin's budget in the mid-1990ies. Mulroney, the only serious interruption to Liberal rule in that time, took over in the midst of huge inflation, and really had no chance of balancing the budget -- his fight was with inflation.

The idea that the Liberals are a party that normally runs a balanced budget is something that hasn't been true since Lester Pearson.

[DrGreenthumb]

Amusing.

The Liberals ran a deficit from Trudeau's ascension, to until Paul Martin's budget in the mid-1990ies. Mulroney, the only serious interruption to Liberal rule in that time, took over in the midst of huge inflation, and really had no chance of balancing the budget -- his fight was with inflation.

The idea that the Liberals are a party that normally runs a balanced budget is something that hasn't been true since Lester Pearson.

They have done a f%ck of a lot better job of it than Flaherty has. the PBO says we have a 20 billion dollar STRUCTURAL deficit. Thanks Jimbo.

[nicky10013]

Actually, they only balanced the deficit. The actual debt keeps increasing. We haven't been debt free since Pearson's time.

Or more simply, we're so far in debt we have to look up to see our ass but it's ok, we earn just enough to handle it! Sure hope we never lose our job or sumpthin', eh?

You can't balance the deficit. A deficit is an adjective describing how the budget is doing.

The debt increases because of interest not because of poor fiscal planning, even then, it was the Liberal Government who has paid off more debt than any other government.

Conservatives can go back to Trudeau all they want but the Liberal Government in the 90s has been the only government in the past 40 years to actually balance the budget.

END OF STORY.

[Bugs]

They have done a f%ck of a lot better job of it than Flaherty has. the PBO says we have a 20 billion dollar STRUCTURAL deficit. Thanks Jimbo.

Well, Doctor, partisanship forces you to say things like that, no doubt, but the facts are pretty clear. Canada's finances were in deplorable state after the Trudeau years. Since that time, Canada's finances have been handled well by all the parties. Mulroney and Wilson brought in the GST, which, whatever you say, made it possible to balance the budget. Secondly, they, through their Bank of Governor, put us into a recession to give us a strong dollar, and without a strong dollar, we'd have never got the interest rates low enough to pay it down. Beyond that, they fought an election to get free trade with the USA. It took some political courage.

They were followed by Chretien and Martin, who inherited a strong dollar and low interest rates. They brought in the budgets that balanced the budget. Not only that, but probably as important, in hindsight -- Martin refused to allow the Canadian banks to merge, and thus be big enough to get in there, with Lehmans and Goldmans Sachs, going for the long green. Think about it -- we could be facing a situation where a quarter of the houses in the country

Since the, the Harper/Flaherty tandem has supervised the return to normal, putting "paid" to the Trudeau extravagance. They have lowered taxes and tried to remove the political barriers to wider trade.

I think any reasonably objective review would show that, regardless of the political craziness that has whirled all around this country, our finances have been comparatively well managed ever since Trudeau departed.

All of the politicians deserve credit, at least for the way they handled Canadian finances, but I would put Michael Wilson ahead of Paul Martin here, because I think the harder bit of medicine was implementing the GST, while negotation free trade, in the midst of crushing interest rates and years of 10%+ unemployment.

Paul Martin was so deep in the grass that people didn't see what he was doing. While he was professing that he would never balance the budget on the backs of the working poor, that's exactly what he did. He used EI premiums to skim off the money he needed. At the time, it was only assessed on incomes up to $36,000 a year! He probably delayed him from taking action for a year, but who can deny his deviousness worked?

Comments?

Edited January 14, 2010 by Bugs

[fellowtraveller]

Conservatives can go back to Trudeau all they want but the Liberal Government in the 90s has been the only government in the past 40 years to actually balance the budget.

END OF STORY.

and they did it by cutting back on transfers to provinces for basic services, and by gutting the military. I can see how you'd fall for that dog and pony show. I didn't.

I really doubt that there will be an election no matter what is in the budget or how badly Harper wants one. The country will have just finished an orgy of back-patting and nationalism after the Olympics. The economy will likely still be showing signs of a slow economic recovery. The Opposiiton just does not have any traction from such 'scandals' as Afghan detainees or prorogation. Try as they might, the Opposition just can't anybody except their own suppporters to care about either, and that own support is halfhearted at best.

But they have bigger problems, much bigger. Ignatieff is looking more and more like a bust for the Liberals. Jack Layton is invisible in the media.

But most of all and worst of all is the reality that Stephen Harper has been PM for nearly four years now and has yet to be caught eating a baby on camera. Canadians are more comfortable with him than ever. They are usedf to having him as PM and the fear gewnerated by the Liberals has abated. The Opposiiton has had unlimited opportunity and plenty oif time and two elections to dump him- and have not chosen to do so. All it takes is a moment of unanimity, a quick vote of confidence, and the country is rid of Stevie. It has not happened, all Opposition parties have supported him at crucial times, and that does not help their chances of replacing him. The optics on that are brutal for the loyal Opposition, who have mostly been loyal to Harper himself.

Edited January 14, 2010 by fellowtraveller