Federal Budget Balanced - last year (without GM shares too)

[cybercoma]

LOL

it was!! That showed the disaster that "first past the post" can turn into.

1987 New Brunswick election. Frank McKenna won all 58 seats in the legislature, despite the popular vote being 60.39% Liberal, 28.59% Progressive Conservative, and 10.55% NDP.

[ToadBrother]

LOL

it was!! That showed the disaster that "first past the post" can turn into.

Much as the previous NDP win in 1996 with less of the popular vote than the BC Liberals demonstrated FPTP's serious problems.

[Topaz]

Oh yeah, don't the Howe bridge, which will be over a billion. I still think when an election is coming up before the Parliament is over, the seating government should have the AG put out a statement out on the bottom line of the finances of the country.

[PIK]

I'm sure the Liberals will simply say "That small surplus was gained on the backs of the Middle Class!" In other words, minimize the surplus and blame the Tories for gaining it by cuts.

It's all BS, but this is an election, and in elections, like war, the truth is the first casualty.

The middle class, the most spoiled people in the country and they are doing well. But anyways this is a response from trudeau's team. The question was what are you going to do with the repairs to 24 suffix and the liberal answer is....

• Jean-Luc Ferland, spokesman for Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau

  “What Mr. Trudeau is focusing on is meeting Canadians and presenting his plan to kick-start the economy through strategic investments in infrastructure to create jobs and strengthen the middle class.”

How stupid do the liberals think canadians are.

[Argus]

How stupid do the liberals think canadians are.

No one ever went broke overestimating the gullibility of the Canadian public.

In the end, though, they will believe whoever tells them the nicest things, and offers the most money. The public are shallow and largely ignorant of political and economic realities.

[cybercoma]

Much as the previous NDP win in 1996 with less of the popular vote than the BC Liberals demonstrated FPTP's serious problems.

Indeed. Or Rachel Notley getting a majority with less than a majority of the votes in Alberta. Or the fact that more than half the ballots cast in an election go towards losing candidates. Edited September 14, 2015 by cybercoma

[Canada_First]

Indeed. Or Rachel Notley getting a majority with less than a majority of the votes in Alberta. Or the fact that more than half the ballots cast in an election go towards losing candidates.

Do you think that PR would be a better system? Wouldn't it polarize parties further?

[ToadBrother]

Do you think that PR would be a better system? Wouldn't it polarize parties further?

I doubt it. Do you see major polarization in most European parliaments? Yes, there is Israel, but I'd say Israel is pretty atypical of PR-elected legislatures.

[Canada_First]

I doubt it. Do you see major polarization in most European parliaments? Yes, there is Israel, but I'd say Israel is pretty atypical of PR-elected legislatures.

Under PR all parties are more or less the same as it would be almost constantly be minorities. How would they solve the big issues? No one party would want to disrupt the apple cart....would they?

[CITIZEN_2015]

Federal budget was balanced in the usual MANIPULATIVE way by these CONSERVATIVES on the back of venerable people like veterans. They manipulated the numbers, made cuts to venerable citizens, sold assets in order to come up with a positive number just before the election.

Edited September 17, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015
*CONSERVATIVES

[ToadBrother]

Under PR all parties are more or less the same as it would be almost constantly be minorities. How would they solve the big issues? No one party would want to disrupt the apple cart....would they?

And yet other governments do just fine. Germany has one of the strongest economies in the world and has a system where majorities are all but impossible.

I'll give you a hint as to how it works; starts with a "c" and ends with an "n".

[Topaz]

The news said that the Tories are not saying were the surplus came from until AFTER the election. So are they just saying they have one or is it the missing money they lost and did they stick their hand in the Treasury?

[Smallc]

So are they just saying they have one or is it the missing money they lost and did they stick their hand in the Treasury?

There was no missing money.

[Canada_First]

The NDP stole $3 million which hasn't been paid back and Mulcair said he's not going to pay it back. Where us the outrage!?

[Topaz]

When Mulroney was PM, there was 10 million missing from the Treasury, and they never found it, so lets agree, all parties have their problems with taxpayers money.

[Argus]

Federal budget was balanced in the usual MANIPULATIVE way by these CONSERVATIVES on the back of venerable people like veterans.

As I recall, the Liberals cut foreign aid in half, slashed the military to the bone, cut funding for health care, education and social welfare by billions of dollars, and raided the EI suprlus to balance the budget.

I believe you're a Liberal, right?

[CITIZEN_2015]

Yes I am Liberal but not this liberal party with Trudeau around. Yes the liberal did all that at the time that country's finances was real bad and was losing its competitiveness and productivity and Canadian currency was sinking. They had no choice but to cut and balance budget over time. It was not out of selfishness but a nationalist act and for the good of the country was a necessary medicine as sour as it was. But these Cons did it for themselves. They wanted to show the voters that they keep their promise at any cost and retain their conservative core support. All economists were saying that a few billion in deficit or one year sooner or later will not make a difference to an economy of this size but they had to do it for their own sake no matter how many or who they hurt.

Edited September 15, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[Freddy]

Yes I am Liberal but not this liberal party with Trudeau around. Yes the liberal did all that at the time that country's finances was real bad and was losing its competitiveness and productivity and Canadian currency was sinking. They had no choice but to cut and balance budget over time. It was not out of selfishness but a nationalist act and for the good of the country was a necessary medicine as sour as it was. But these Cons did it for themselves. They wanted to show the voters that they keep their promise at any cost and retain their conservative core support. All economists were saying that a few billion in deficit or one year sooner or later will not make a difference to an economy of this size but they had to do it for their own sake no matter how many or who they hurt.

Your sounding like a crazy person. It's like your trying to make something up to make it sound like a good thing is actually a bad thing......

[socialist]

How could Harper possibly have seen the tax revenue increase without having seen the actual numbers? And the actual numbers were released TODAY!!!

The Harper government was not out that much.In fact, their prediction was very prudent. It came out better than expected.

[DFCaper]

1987 New Brunswick election. Frank McKenna won all 58 seats in the legislature, despite the popular vote being 60.39% Liberal, 28.59% Progressive Conservative, and 10.55% NDP.

FPTP delivered the best government in recent NB history. People with a problem with our system tend to be on the extremes...

[DFCaper]

Indeed. Or Rachel Notley getting a majority with less than a majority of the votes in Alberta. Or the fact that more than half the ballots cast in an election go towards losing candidates.

And I am betting that years from now, this will show that FPTP worked out for the people

[waldo]

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/business/ottawa-posts-surprise-1-9b-surplus-1.2562055

So much for 8 straight deficits, eh?

that you would be the member to post this... I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya! But, of course, it's all a smoke and mirrors Harper Conservative surplus (without GM shares too)! Federal departments left $8.7 billion unspent last year

so ya... the deficit is still there... a deficit in announced programs/promises to the public... with no accompanying notification that the promises will go unfulfilled!

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper on Monday defended federal departments for holding on to billions of dollars last year. The unspent money was instead returned to the federal treasury, and played a huge role in the Conservative government posting a $1.9-billion budget surplus in the last fiscal year.

Finance Canada reported the federal surplus Monday, after initial projections in April had suggested a $2-billion deficit. The report said a variety of factors were responsible for the surplus, including a slight bump in government revenue from corporate and personal income tax.

But federal departments and agencies also chipped in by handing back an estimated $8.7 billion for different programs that had been requested — and in some cases publicly announced — by the government and approved by Parliament.

“The government’s lapses are completely normal,” Harper said. “Obviously we always make sure government departments have more than enough money but we don’t expect them to spend every single dime. We expect them to spend effectively.”

However, last year’s lapse, as unspent federal funds are called, was anything but normal. The Conservatives’ own budget plan in April, which projected only a $7.2-billion lapse, said government spending through February was “well below the historical average.” Spending to that point was also “at the lowest level in a decade.”

While the Conservatives have portrayed lapses as proof of economic prudence, critics say they amount to cuts by stealth. They say this is how the government can take money from Veterans Affairs, National Defence and other departments without actually cutting budgets.

Canadians won’t know exactly which departments or programs were affected until after the election, when the government publishes its annual detailed accounts. But figures produced by the Parliamentary Budget Office over the weekend provide an idea of where some of the money came from.

The PBO figures aren’t final as not all departments, agencies and Crown corporations have reported their full end-of-year spending. But they do suggest hundreds of millions set aside for new military equipment, processing refugee applications, First Nations communities and transportation infrastructure went unspent.

.

Edited September 15, 2015 by waldo

[G Huxley]

A lot of refugee applications to process after the neoconservatives tore apart the Middle East.

[Smallc]

Funny then that projected expenses were only $800M less than budgeted for last year:

The difference in the two numbers can be explained by $3-billion more in revenue than was projected in April — largely because personal and corporate taxes were higher. Program expenses were also $800-million lower than forecast in the budget — the result of “higher than expected lapses in departmental spending.”

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-ivison-harper-hoping-surprise-surplus-will-convince-voters-the-tories-are-on-right-economic-track

[waldo]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-ivison-harper-hoping-surprise-surplus-will-convince-voters-the-tories-are-on-right-economic-track

"The release of the annual financial report in the middle of an election campaign is suspicious enough. The fact that the Finance Department was prepared to sanction a budget that projected a $2-billion deficit last April and now turns out to be a near $2-billion surplus, suggests its integrity has been seriously compromised by the politicians."