Panglossian Notes

Good show PM Harper

Finally a Prime Minister that supports the killing of his country's own citizens.

Thanks Steve just what we need for another of our hot summers. Oh how is that new environmental policy coming along any way?

Just in case you might have forgotten the briefing book from the American and rapture handlers I've sent along a link from John Bolton assuring the world that Canadians killed by the Jewish state aren't the same as those killed by the homeland's enemies.

Hope you can fit these lines into one of your next statements when you think is useful to talk to the media again.

Remember you need to keep the lines straight or you could be cast out.

Your Friend,

Pan Gloss

Technorati Tags: Canada, foreign policy, Globe and Mail, Stupidity, The Harper

Poor baby Okalik, dreaming of being a strong man?

You wonder sometimes about this leader from Nunavut, Okalik and his frustrations.

He told a group of ambassadors at a conference in Whitehorse about his difficult life. Seems his biggest problem may be that someone might ask a question. From the CBC report, he indicated that:

"Using the consensus style of government, with no political parties, means during budget debate all 18 MLAs can ask as many questions as they want, ... ."

For some reason he thinks that this does not happen in a party style parliamentary system.

"It can be frustrating at times," said Okalik [when people ask questions I presume]. "Those days you wish you had party politics."

Blogger's comment in square brackets.

He is supposedly a lawyer, at least he seems to have passed the bar examine in Canada's newest territory Nunavut.

I wonder if he has practiced law? I think he was made the leader of this territory the day he also got called to the bar so maybe that's his excuse for being frustrated, poor baby, no time for any real world experience.

The reason I raised this is that his statements at times seem to make little or no sense and indicated a marked lack of understanding of any parliamentary system whether it be the political party variety or the consensus type.

I would have thought that a graduate of any Canadian law school might know the basics of the Canadian governing system.

Oh well, I guess it's not required if you are, Okalik.

I wonder what party he might dream about forming when he is out on the golf links.

I wonder if he might think that actually developing policy and really leading a party could maybe be just a bit, as he'd clearly think based on his comments to the ambassadors, frustrating.

Why?

Well, of course, because someone might ask a question.

Glad what an idiot. Maybe he needs an internship in a failed foreign state where no one asks questions.

I'd say that stringing this so-called territorial leader's comments together indicates one of the serious problems facing this new territory and it isn't the housing, education or general social issues normally trotted out as dilemmas in this part of the Arctic.

It is that the territory seems to have a completely immature and badly functioning political system and this is underlined and highlighted by the Leader Okalik.

Technorati Tags: Canada, CBC, Democracy, Nunavut, Politicans, Stupidity

The Equalization quagmire.

Everyone is waiting breathlessly for the Report of the Expert Panel on Equalization and Formula Financing. The first press staged leaks are now starting to happen. This is an old game and as the end of May approaches maybe we'll see more and more of them. The G&M this morning carried the first of this balloon testing.

Since the G&M allows comments - some anyways, you'll have to test this yourself and see if yours are actually accepted - you can get a very rough gage of sentiment regarding increasing Equalization payments.

Unfortunately the sentiment seems to be dumping on Quebec and not really understanding what the implications of the Expert Panel's potential recommendations, to include resource royalty revenues as one of the revenues to be equalized, mean.

I maybe wrong here and people may have simply cut to the quick without actually understanding any of the glorious detail of the Equalization program.

The message from the comments is: the "haves" are getting fed up with subsidizing the "have nots". This means provinces line up against each other. Normally a standard federal strategy - play the buggers off against one-another.

Currently, in the bizarre world of federal transfers ,there are only two "have" provinces - Ontario and Alberta. Saskatchewan believe it or not, is just hovering on the line between "have" and "have not" while poor British Columbia is a basket case under federal legislation. This latter situation seems to go against common perceptions but is little high lighted or spoken about by federal officials.

It seems as if the old line main stream media - bad in the great US of A but almost completely hopeless in the great North - generally finds any concept past the "see spot run phase" as too complex for them to understand let alone try to explain to their shmo public.

The divide and conquer approach is likely to be adopted by the Harper government to ensure itself more Quebec votes and maybe a majority next time out.

This, unfortunately, seems to be Harpers only real goal - i.e. he is definitely lacking on the vision thing for Canada - to get a majority no matter what the short or long term cost and no matter what the implications for our country.

Really too bad. But it maybe the situation for awhile.

Very long lead into a couple of notes I'll start to put up tomorrow going through the mechanics of transfers and in particular Equalization.

With harper around you want to always close saying: "keep the faith, eh."

Technorati Tags: Canada, Economics, Equalization, Globe and Mail, Resource Revenue

This has something to do with our National interest?

The G&M carried today a statement by the new defense minister -seems he doesn't like the give and take of debate or is being completely controlled by Harper. No matter the other parties wade in for what it's worth.

Have a look under globeandmail.com: Afghanistan.

Me

Some of it just seems funny. The new Defense Minister sounds like he is reading directly from his a briefing book.

"the mission is ongoing -[wait for it] - and evolving"

"we will stay the course"

I wonder if he knows why we are there with silly standard business speak like this. Come to think of it I'll bet the defense department drones didn't put clunkiers like this in the guy's speaking points, likely they are an indication of his own thoughts.

Now, why again is this mess a Canadian national interest?

Please no bromides that it is spreading good governance and will ultimately result in a more secure world. I hope Canadians are past being taken in by this type of feel good statement.

Haven't the CPC government just inherited the Liberal policy and isn't this policy just linked to Canada's Nato commitment. So I'm wonder what choice we had or have since most of our allies (trading partners) have been saying we are not carrying our weight when it comes to military commitments.

The new defense minister didn't say we are there as peace keepers so have to give him that but it would be nice for him to tell Canadians what the rules our characters are operating under and how will we know if there is any success.

The recent poll numbers indicating that 62% of Canadian were concerned with Canada being in this mess I take with a large grain of salt. I suspect what it really indicates is some uncertainty about any of the messes started after 9/11 and this country getting to far down some path and into some situation created by some other country.

After all the army - do they still call it that? - is all volunteers isn't it? So it's no skin off my nose if someone wants to go off and have an adventure in some dusty place. If a draft was in place you might really get peoples attention and maybe even some focus.

I dread the inevitable laboured media BS when some of these volunteers start coming back in bags and really don't want to be told by solemn politicians about self-sacrifice. This current little adventure has nothing to do with this countries defense or for that matter some of our democratic principles.

I'm not hopeful that any of our federal politicians will be able to clearly explain to me or Canadians as a whole why we are there.

I'm ultimately afraid that some of our federal politicians are quite uninformed about the whole Afghan mess and some of the charmers currently in power in Afghanistan.

This means, that as always, the politicians will commit other Canadians or other Canadians' kids to a situation they will cleverly steer themselves and their kith an kin away from any harm.

As a starter I'd like to know which of the current federal party spokes persons have read Kathy Gannon's book "I is for Infidel". If any had it might at least give me some confidence that an attempt at being informed had been tried before decisions had been made to get into this mess.

Technorati Tags: Canada, Globe and Mail, Politics

Tory Government!

I think the Emerson behavior is completely inexcusable.

Everyone can be nicy nicy about it but it has pointed a pretty ugly finger at our so-called Canadian democracy.

This guy should be run out of town on a rail.

Jeffrey Simpson in a "to and fro" with G&M readers today called his behaviour undemocratic.

A very polite way of describing completely unacceptable behavior on the part of a politician.

Sorry Jeffrey this guy needs to be given a message. You maybe competent as a technocrat but we don't want you in our political system: you smell. You are odious.

Harper, unfortunately has shown really bad judgement at the beginning of his tenure and tried to paper it over with sweet comments that odious Emerson served Paul Martin well and has now gone over to the CPC.

Jesus is the guy, Emerson, a Deputy Minister or a Member of Parliament representing a particular party.

Seems that the odious Emerson is nothing but a Deputy Minister.

Would have been nice if he'd told his constituency this, you'd think.

Ah, but no, not part of the modern politicians reason for being.

In consumer law I think there are mechanisms for correcting this type of flim flam - even though for this particular character the rail and some tar and feathers may be more appropriate.

Guess we'll have to wait to see what the polls say. I'll bet the Vancouverites will forgive:

"oh he is a really nice man"

"he never let his dog shit on my lawn"

I'm just waiting for it. See I have a theory that too many laits diminish your gray matter, least those cells that have something to do with self-respect.

Technorati Tags: Accountability, Canada, Globe and Mail, Politics

First signs "of what?"

With everyone now back in Ottawa having caucus meetings, some to lick wounds others to celebrate, the spin, bs, and indignation is starting, in the lead up to the Harper government's first budget.

The G&M covers, still Minister of Finance, Goodale as vowing a battle over income-tax cuts and NDP finance critic Judy Wasylycia-Leis as telling the Conservative government elect that they don't have a mandate to make decisions, at least in respect to the Liberal government's Early Learning and Child Care policy.

Good to see everything off to such a nice start but I guess I'm hoping that this - the 39th Parliament - may be just a bit more constructive then the 38th, least the 38th in its last days.

Unlike, Worthwhile Canadian Initiative, I read the Conservative Party policy document, but quickly and only a few things have stuck in my head - the GST rate reductions and the new Family Allowance Payment for kids 5 years old and under.

Interestingly these 2 items seem to be the 2 red flags right now for the Liberals and the NDP. The Bloc, I'm not sure what they may think of the GST initiative now. During the election campaign the Bloc did point out, correctly, that a rate reduction will have a direct impact on the government of Quebec's consumption tax revenues.

A small back and forth over on the Conservative Party web page.

My back of the envelop calculation is that the Bloc was about correct in saying that the rate cut to 5% would cost Quebec about $200 million per year (the QST is applied to the price of a good plus the GST. There is a nominal 7.5% QST rate which is then an effective 8.025% rate with the current 7.0% GST. Dropping the GST to 6.0% means the effective QST becomes 7.95% and with the GST at 5.0% the effective QST is 7.875%. Small changes, eh. But sort of big effects when the tax base is about $136 billion.)

If the Conservative Party spin is correct and Quebec is unconcerned with this then we have moved to a new federal/provincial level of understanding. You want to bet this isn't the case. As an aside wasn't the whole Gomery mess over $250 million?

You could also believe that the GST rate reductions will cause consumption to increase and offset the Quebec revenue short-fall. But if that's the case doesn't every other provinces with a retail sales tax not only keep existing revenues but win because of the increase in consumption.

I just couldn't avoid this.

I can't see the Liberals going to the wall on their income tax cuts for the years after 2005, but until the budget is actually tabled I guess we'll have posturing. I'm assuming I don't see any tax savings for awhile as I don't plan on changing my consumption pattern any time soon even though it looks like I could save 85¢ every 2 months on my electrical bill.

As for the NDP and their rhetoric on provincial agreements on . Hmm. Just rhetoric. There was a mad scramble to sign agreements or agreements in principle on Early Learning and Child Care before the writ was dropped. But I think this was simply to get the trust funds which had been set aside in the 2005 budget for 2004-05 and 2005-06.

As usual you could drive a bus through these agreements so they were only worth something if Parliament voted the funds annually. I think this means that the Party in power choices if it may be its policy of not.

Todays G&M has some provinces weeping about the Liberal program. I take this as the normal provincial bs in its look for more federal funds. After past experiences with federal based funding only a really dumb dumb provincial finance minister would count on any guaranteed federal funding.

Also having the feds provide phony non-earmarked funds to a province for a specific portfolio (I say this because there is no real reporting requirement to get federal ELCC money - if it was earmarked the federal funds would have gone to provinces as contribution agreements with actual strings and auditing requirements attached) allows provincial ministers a leg up in actually getting provincial funds allocated to their specific departmental needs. Notice it hasn't been a provincial finance minister weeping for the ELCC funds. If this stuff had been factored into a province's medium term fiscal plan someone needs to have a serious chitchat with that person.

None of this, of course should be taken that I personally agree with the proposed Harper approach to the child care issue.

I think it has now been generally agreed that the early years of kids are extremely important to their later development. This means there is a real economic interest in ensuring that kids get lots of benefits - it helps the country later (see David Dodge's piece from 2003). I get a real kick out of the type that consider kids a strictly consumption decision on the part of parents. Yes, to some degree, but society or a country's future economic well being is also linked to having a productive population which is better ensured if you look after the kids at an early age.

Harper's proposal for the new family allowance, from my perspective, is more ideologically driven than any concern for ensuring good early learning or child care policy. More individual and less state decision making, that's fair I guess I just don't agree in this case. The concern, of course, isn't with the middle or upper income level families. but those near the bottom have more difficult choices to make about daily life and the long term expectations for a kid sometimes get sacrificed.

The good thing about the structure of the family allowance is that it will be taxable and likely considered income for social assistance payments thus reducing these payments so provinces, that actually have to implement this social - better name would be economic - service to their citizens, will collect some of the funds needed to provide it.

You, if nothing else, should be realist about things.

No one yet has mentioned much about the "fiscal imbalance" although I think it was hinted at yesterday by the Ontario Premier in his comments about the upcoming provincial budget.

I think this issue is where provincial governments will spend there time and not trying to get Harper to maintain previous Liberal government policies. It's also an area outside parliament, at least for the time being.

Whomever ends up being the federal Minister of Finance gets to deal with the Expert Panels report on Equalization and Territorial Formula Financing which should be out in the spring.

Right now federal transfers from both these programs are fixed to grow at, I think, 3.5% annually. The Panel's report could allow a segue into the re-balancing promised by Harper.

Technorati Tags: Canada, Finance, Politics, Stupidity, Tax Policy

I wonder how we ensure our claim?

It seems that some Canadian bloggers maybe waking up to the oil & natural gas (O&G) potential in the high arctic.

The article in the To Star referenced at the cathiefromcanada blog doesn't really go into to many details about the rather large O&G potential in the north. Nor for that matter some of the other interesting things that have been happening while the government of Canada's view was almost solely focused south of 60º.

The Star article makes a guess that PM Harper's comments in the Common's foyer regarding the US ambassador's statement about sovereignty in the north are likely just good PR bluster.

I guess I tend to agree.

I'll bet most Canadians haven't heard of: Pat Broe from Denver. But they might in the future, eh. He's the guy that bought the old Hudson Bay port facility in Churchhill Manitoba for $7 in 1997. Wonder whether he paid for it with USD or CAD.

With natural gas prices seeming to be ever on the rise (even through there are day to day drops in price the trend is up), high arctic projects are starting to look better and better. CERI has updated its report on the Melville Island's Drake Point and Hecla natural gas fields for example.

I think PetroCan has the main interest in these fields. Discovered in the hay day of northern O&G exploration and likely heavily subsidized by Canadian taxpayers either through "super depletion" or the famous Petroleum Incentive Program (PIP) which itself was part of the Alberta hated NEP.

To give a view of what things look like from the to of the world have a peek at this map. It helps to put some things into focus, I hope. PM Harpers is talking about putting a military style harbour facility in Iqaluit - which is a 100 or so miles down the Frobisher Bay from the Davis Strait.

Iqaluit likely made some sense during WWII and part of the "cold war", the former as an airport in ferrying planes to Britain and the latter as a fuel station and radar center, put now who knows. Its the capital of Nunavut but really there is very little economic activity with the city other than government or birth right organization supported.

The US has 2 coast guard icebreakers which are stationed, I think, in Seattle.

If the arctic file heats up, want to bet that they will be stationed closer to the action.

What is that famous Northwest Passage anyways.

It of course has been a number of things but again, thanks to Athropolis, here is a map showing the concept over time.

Notice that until the permanent sea ice actually does melt the passage cuts south of Victoria Island and goes right pass Cambridge Bay - very close to Gjoa Haven also (I think Amundsen ship is still there in the harbour just sunk). Now if you are close to Cambridge bay you are close to Bathurst Inlet which is a natural deep sea harbour.

Technorati Tags: Canada, Nunavut, Politics

Boy this tax stuff is tricky,eh!

This morning, as would now seem to be customary in this election campaign, the various party leaders made statements which were carried lived on TV. I presume this approach is to ensure that the jest of the statement will be carried over and over again on the 24 hour news channels through out the day.

The CPCs statement this morning had Stephen Harper providing an example of the benefit the proposed GST reductions would provide to new home buyers. He picked a house valued at $200,000 for his example. Thus he got to say that in year one of the GST reduction plan a new house purchaser would save $2,000 (1% of $200,000). Further, sometime over the next 5 years, this savings would be $4,000 once the other one percentage point was knocked off the GST rate.

However, the savings as stated aren't quite correct. Currently new house buyers are eligible for a 2.52% rebate on the purchase price up to, I think, $450,000. After $450,000 nothing.

So the $2,000 saving will actually only be $1,280 and the $4,000 savings will only be $2,560. The difference is because the new home buyer rebate will be appropriately adjusted downward to 2.16% with a 6.0% GST rate and to 1.8% with a 5% GST rate.

Although I've not been haunting the media outlets for follow up no one has mentioned this small distortion.

Interesting,maybe?

Technorati Tags: Canada, Politics, Stupidity

My First note in awhile!

So the election is now 5 days away. Me, I voted last Friday as soon as the advance polls opened. I admit I have systematically avoided any articles, media assessments and blog commenting on this particular election since early December, until the beginning of this week.

I also avoided any TV coverage but did pick up what seem to be the main direction of the campaign from CBC radio news coverage.

At the beginning of the campaign I did considered some Harper announcements: here and here.

Since Monday I've read quite a few blogs commenting on the Conservative Party of Canada's (CPC) platform -"Stand Up for Canada" - and have now read it once.

I know the Liberal Party's policy proposals, I think. They were mainly contained in "The Plan for Growth and Prosperity" which was part of the November 14th of Fiscal Update delivered by Minister Goodale but also followed from the 2005 federal Budget and the various Bills pasted in late June.

Other than Minister Goodale's documents PM PM summarized Canada's coming challenges in a September 21st speech. I'm not sure what Harper thinks are the challenges the country faces other than the sponsorship scandal from the Chretien era.

Here is a summary of the 10 main points from the the Toronto Star:

1. Canada must invest heavily in child care and education, from early childhood to university and beyond, to produce a more highly skilled and innovative workforce.

2. We must welcome skilled immigrants who can fill jobs vacated by older workers.

3. We must upgrade language training and credentials recognition to compete with other countries for immigrants.

4. We must invest heavily in Canada's cities to turn them into world-class magnets that attract the best and brightest from places like China and India, and that attract foreign investment.

5. We must encourage private sector investment and job growth in innovative sectors.

6. We must capitalize on our comparative advantage in supplying energy to a resource-hungry world.

7. We must provide world-class health care to an aging population.

8. We must stake out our claims to the North, and its untapped resources.

9. Canadians must strive to be good global citizens by promoting growth and development, thwarting terror, battling climate change, curbing pandemics and challenging those who disrupt international peace. These trans-boundary issues affect us all, as our ties to the rest of the world become ever tighter.

10. And Canadians must do it all in a fiscally responsible way through balanced budgets, and a gradual paring down of the national debt. We do not want to saddle future generations with a crippling bill.

The Toronto Star
PM's clear vision of Canada's future
Sept. 21, 2005

The whole speech is here if any care to have a quick look before it goes next Tuesday maybe.

Although I generally agree with the 10 points as a pretty good assessment of what is likely needed in the coming years to ensure and maybe improve the county's standard of living, I was never convinced that PM PM had the talent to lead the country there.

My reading of the CPCs platform doesn't indicate as grand a vision. But if Harper gets in time will tell, I guess. So far the policies he has outlined as his party's preferred course of action seems parochial.

Harper's comments from yesterday, elaborated on today, about having checks on a government formed by the CPCs power because of Senate, judicial and senior civil servant appointments made by past government's are, to me, a disturbing indication of his mind set.

Senators are generally appointed along party lines but judges and senior civil servants no.

Why would he insult the judicial branch of government with an attack on their neutrality? And what was he thinking with his comment about senior civil servants?

Maybe he was trying to assure reasonable knowledgeable individuals that because our form of democracy - a parliamentary system - has no clear cut "checks and balances" or separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government not to worry so much about any CPC legislative initiatives.

The civil servant comment, maybe something similar to Mulroney. I think Mulroney ended up being less suspicious. As I recall Mulroney made a few changes, he brought Stanley Hart in to be Deputy Minister of Finance and got rid of Ed Clark (this was rumored to honour a promise to Peter Loughheed to axe the civil servant most identified with the National Energy Program).

Technorati Tags: Canada, Politics

ANWR, oh ANWR!

So the axe hasn't fallen yet - Senate Blocks Arctic Drilling. Notice that I haven't said that I was wrong in my last post, I thought the Demo's could not get anything together to block the Defence Bill.

So guess I'm wrong at times. I'm great at apologizes. But

I still think ANWR is ultimately going to be drilled.

And I think maybe the Inuit and Inuvialuit unfortunately have to face this.

So how to control the effects, it's their land and ultimately their culture which will take the big hit if the caribou's migrations and birthings are disrupted.

I don't want anyone to surrender but - what is your fallback situation. At time I don't think the charmers from outside ever consider this for the locals. Strong support until a complete defeat but the Inuvialuit and Inuit do live there. So what to do when you may have lost a battle, eh?

Got to admit the the House of Representatives and Senate politics is a bit more interesting than our HoC. This could be because I simply don't know enough, yet, about it and the various procedural games to be played.

I'm definitely a new boy as I'm still struggling to find my way around both the Houses websites. Great winter entertainment, hmm, need to what?

Technorati Tags: Canada, Economics, First Nation, Nunavut, Resource Revenue