GST on poppies

I was doing the recycling when I noticed a newspaper editorial (that appeared back in November throughout the Sun Newspaper chain) by Kalvin Reid entitled, Tax on Poppies is Pure Poppycock.

Welland NDP MP Malcolm Allen introduced a private member's bill to eliminate GST on poppies and the conservative newspaper chain's columnist urged readers to lobby their MPs to support this bill.

This is all very strange to me.

We wear poppies to honour and remember those who sacrificed for Canada, and yet we are so unhappy to pay taxes to support our country, that we are willing to go to considerable expense to introduce legislation and then create an exemption for poppies?!

I say that I'm happy to wear a poppy and find it particularly appropriate to pay a tax on poppies to fund my government. I'll put in a little extra into the Royal Canadian Legion's box next time.

Can taxes be too high? Sure, but the problem is in how efficiently or effectively they are spent, not in the fact that we pay them in the first place.

And most ironic of all? That an NDP member of parliament would be the one to introduce such a bill. NDP?! Hey, NDP, it's like when folks complain about how union dues are too high! You of all political parties should know that if people do complain about high union dues, they need to be reminded about the struggles and sacrifices so many people have made in the past just so that they could have unions.

The NDP is making it hard for me to be sympathetic

I hope NDP candidate Michael Byers had a recent change of heart about pricing fossil carbon emissions with a carbon tax considering what he wrote yesterday in this article, and I hope he wasn't believing one thing and helping to destroy it by saying another during the 'green shift' debate last year.

The point was brought to my attention today very clearly here and here.

Kingston Liberals/NDP/Greens continue to meet

Following up on a rapidly organized and successful town hall (literally) meeting last weekend in Kingston, Ontario, members of the Kingston and the Islands Liberal Party, New Democratic Party and Green Party met again tonight to discuss how to work together over the next seven weeks (and beyond) to promote the proposed coalition government.

What is most amazing is how well we get along and how smoothly we have worked together (I'll admit I was ready to throttle the NDP over a couple of issues during the recent federal election campaign). Hats off to Mr. Harper and the Conservatives.

Stay tuned for more developments...

Progressive Coalition Event at City Hall, Kingston, Ontario

Progressive Coalition to Host Meet and Greet in Kingston

This Sunday, December 7 at 2:00PM, Kingston's Memorial Hall will play host to a 'Meet and Greet' in support of the proposed Progressive Coalition Government.

The event has been coordinated by representatives from Kingston's Liberals, Greens and New Democrats, and is supported by the Kingston District Labour Council. It is aimed at helping concerned Kingston and area residents to better understand what is behind the current political crisis and how we can best work together to resolve it. Speakers will include prominent local political figures and an expert on Canadian constitutional practice.

According to Kim McFarlane, President of the local federal Liberal Association, “Only a week ago, all parties signalled their willingness to work with the current Government by accepting its Speech from the Throne. Rather than building on that, Mr. Harper responded with destructive partisanship that irretrievably cost him the confidence of the House. Under our parliamentary system, that requires his resignation. The Coalition Accord represents a sincere effort on the part of the majority of the members of the House of Commons to make this Parliament work for Canadians to deal with the real problem, which is the state of the economy. We fail to understand how Mr. Harper’s move to shut down Parliament for almost two months will help those Canadians facing job losses.”

Eric Walton, the Green candidate in the last election added that “by proroguing Parliament primarily for reasons of self-preservation, Stephen Harper has deeply damaged Canada's democratic system and for that reason alone should be voted out at the first opportunity.”

The local gathering has been designed with a focus on socialization, education, and community spirit. The event is open to the public and refreshments will be provided.

“We all agreed that rather than holding another rally, the wide-range of political support in Kingston might be best-served by a more social event where we can get to know one another and commit to working together on a local level.“ said Daniel Beals, President of the local New Democrats.

It should be noted that Kingston has a history as a site of unification and cooperation, having hosted the first meeting of the Parliament of the united Upper and Lower Canadas on June 13, 1841.

"Now is not the time for political posturing. In the face of an economic crisis it is crucial that we work together for the good of all Canadians. Nobody can question the sincerity that underlines the Coalition Accord." said Debi Wells, President of the Kingston District Labour Council.

- 30 -

Inquiries: Ron Hartling

Policy Director - Kingston & the Islands Federal Liberal Association

613-384-5710

Daniel Beals

President - Kingston & the Islands New Democrats

613-549-8399 (h)

Eric Walton

International Affairs Critic - Green Party Shadow Cabinet

613-542-9365

Debi Wells

President - Kingston District Labour Council

613-548-4952

NDP and Bloc pre-coalition talks: as it should be!

CTV has broken the story that the NDP and the Bloc have had talks for a "considerable period of time" about a coalition. CTV is taking the angle that this means there are "political motives" to bringing down the government. That is, CTV and their favourite commentators (I'm listening to Ezra Levant right now) are implying that they were not really motivated to act by Flaherty's financial update.

I disagree. In a minority parliament, when minority governments are likely to be the norm in the foreseeable future, and when we've just had an election, I believe that opposition parties should be ready to present an alternative should the governing party try to act unilaterally to do something which the opposition thinks is harmful to Canada. The alternative can't be an election at this point in time, and so the opposition should be ready to govern, if necessary.

Even though the Conservatives have now retreated on public funding of political parties, and on taking away the right of civil servants to strike, and are moving up the date of the budget, the organization of an alternative, coalition government should continue. It is needed to keep the government honest and focused on the important issues of the day.

Prepare the coalition and keep the engine running to, at the very least, keep the party in power honest and focused on governing.

Fighting the Conservatives Together

There is talk today about opposition parties perhaps being willing to form a coalition government. This is in response to the Conservatives' lack of definite policies to address the global economic crisis and use of the crisis as a screen to seek political advantage. They want to save $30 million by cutting public funding for political parties - a move that would, in the short term, greatly favour the Conservative party, but do nothing to address the economy. The government may fall on a confidence vote in the next few days and the possibility of a coalition amongst the current opposition parties would be a very strong bargaining chip.

Today I received an email from Steven MacKinnon, Michael Ignatieff's national campaign director. The email draws attention to the Conservatives' move to cut public funding and then asks for donations to Mr. Ignatieff's leadership campaign because, "Michael Ignatieff can only succeed with your support."

That rubs me the wrong way. It rubs me the wrong way because it's taking a direct and imminent threat to the Liberal Party and the Canadian political system, and using it to appeal for funds to a particular leadership candidate's campaign. Even though we have a Liberal Party leadership race under way, in the House of Commons we, the Liberal Party, should still be fighting the Conservatives together. If we do not fight them as one team, we won't win. If the NDP, Bloc Quebcois and the Liberal Party can get together to form a coalition, surely the Liberal caucus could work tous ensemble.

Fight the Conservatives as a united party. Support Stéphane Dion in the House. Fight the leadership race elsewhere.

Picking a fight between cap and trade and carbon taxes is not going to help Canada move forward

Here is my letter to the editor that was published in the Kingston Whig-Standard on June 12, 2008. It is in response to a letter that can be found here

Reponse to Letter to the Editor of the Whig-Standard, "NDP has best policy to cut greenhouse gases", June 7, 2008.

In criticizing the Liberal or Green Party's green/carbon tax shifts, Jamie Masse and the NDP are picking a fight that is not going to help move Canada and the Canadian economy forward to meet the challenges of the 21st century. A carbon tax shift (rebates and lower income taxes financed by increased taxes on pollution and greenhouse gas emissions) can co-exist with a cap and trade system (which is used for managing greenhouse gas emissions from large emitters). For example, British Columbia has a carbon tax that starts on July 1, and has also joined the Western Regional Climate Action Initiative, a group that aims to establish an international carbon trading mechanism. Quebec, which just announced its intention to work with Ontario to set up a
cap-and-trade market, brought in a carbon tax on motor fuel.

Mr. Masse and the NDP seem to imply that businesses that pay a carbon tax could pass on the cost to the consumer, whereas that could not happen if they had pay for the credits that are auctioned off in a cap and trade scheme. That's clearly false. Either way a business will have a cost and some of that cost may be passed on to their customers. The "shift" part of
the green tax shift recognizes this and cuts or rebates income tax for both businesses and individuals, particularly low income individuals.

Vilifying "big, corporate polluters" and trying to put the cost of cutting greenhouse gases entirely on them, does not help to support a culture of energy conservation and efficiency. Any solution to the problem of our dependence on fossil fuels must involve efforts by every business and every individual to use energy in a sustainable manner. The participants in cap and trade schemes are so-called "Large Final Emitters" that account for only 50% of Canada's emissions. What about the other 50% of emissions that come from small emitters? As for making the 'big bad corporate polluters' pay, I would simply note that the biggest single greenhouse gas emitter in Canada
is the Nanticoke generating station, owned by us, the good people of Ontario.

Why should a carbon tax shift be considered in addition to a cap and trade scheme, or before a cap and trade scheme? One reason is that cap and trade schemes take time to set up. The 1990 U.S. Clean Air Act authorized emissions trading to control sulphur dioxide, but trading did not commence until five years later, in 1995. In 2002 the European parliament voted to endorse a cap and trade scheme for greenhouse gases but not until 2005 was the E.U. carbon market launched. A carbon tax shift, on the other hand, can be implemented much more quickly using the existing revenue infrastructure. The clock is ticking on climate change and that is why we should start moving now, beginning with a carbon tax shift. We can also start the preparatory work needed for a cap and trade scheme that would begin operating some time in the future.

Finally, the way Mr. Masse and the NDP look at things is that we need an environmental policy that respects "the needs of a fragile economy". The truth is probably closer to our needing to restructure our economy, with the environment foremost in mind, in preparation for the challenges of the 21st century. We must "energy-proof" our economy so that can withstand volatile fossil fuel prices. We must change how we live today, in order to preserve our natural environment and create a sustainable economy for future generations. A good step would be to remove the perverse incentives that we have now (pollution for free), to put a price on pollution, waste, and greenhouse gas emissions, to rebate taxes to low income Canadians, and to reduce taxes on income, investment, and innovation. A cap and trade scheme for greenhouse gas emissions also has its place, and I'm sure the NDP would be very welcome to work together with the Liberal and Green parties in this endeavour.

NDP's cap and trade plan: details?

I tried to find out details about the NDP's cap and trade plan from www.ndp.ca today, but all that site did was refer to Bill C-377. I read though Bill C-377 and all it seems to require is setting emissions targets, including long, medium and short term (5 year) targets (good in my opinion), and gives the government the authority to regulate emissions. But that's all. What about the details? Am I missing a document that somebody can point me to?

www.ndp.ca says that the "projected" price for credits when they are auctioned off will be more than $35/tonne. I'd be interested in how they get that figure. How certain can you be of it? If you are planning to spend the auction proceeds on new government 'green' programs, what's your budget?

Will the different provinces be upset and want to interfere (a very big political headache) because the auction process will be sending hundreds of millions of dollars from Alberta (where almost all electricity is generated from coal and other fossil fuels plus they have the oil sands projects) to, say, Quebec (where almost all electricity is generated from Hydro)?

Dear Mr. Layton: Don't wait for the debate over how to implement a carbon tax shift before planning to help the poor with spiking energy prices

Letter to the Editor of the Toronto Star

Re: Carbon Tax Would Hurt Poor, NDP Says May 23, 2008

We need to protect the poor from spikes in energy prices right now. I think that the NDP should concentrate on that issue instead of fear-mongering about the Liberal Party's carbon tax shift. The reason is that when we come up with a good plan to deal with that issue, a plan which does not contain a subsidy for fossil fuel use, we will also have produced a plan to help the poor adjust to the carbon tax. I suspect that the Liberal's carbon tax shift plan will contain just that.