After the 1993 election I went to work at CTV for a while, and was the talking head business news guy in Toronto, and on the newly-launched news channel. I chased stories like all other TV journalists, hung out with Lloyd Roberston while he got his perfect hair washed every day down in makeup, parked near Ivan Fecan’s always-brand-new company-leased Mercedes sportster, grew a huge admiration for the unsung heroes in the edit suites, and gave out a lot of mortgage advice to people who asked for it.
That happened with Bev Oda one day, when I was in her office pitching the network on a new TV show I wanted to create. Bev was a CTV executive, and I was an on-air guy, but despite that, we got along just fine.
I actually went on to create that show, but to do it I had to leave the network, start my own television production company, and then become a client of CTV. I was still an on-air guy, but this time I paid CTV $8,000 a week. Oh well.
Meanwhile Bev left, ran to be an MP, got elected and went to Ottawa. Today she is the minister of Heritage, which means CTV has to suck up to her – which should be a special challenge after today’s announcement that Bell Globemedia, CTV’s parent, is buying up the CHUM group for a little under $2 billion. This is a massive consolidation in the media business, and the immediate first consequence of it seemed to be the loss of 287 CHUM jobs a few hours ago.
It’s hard to look at this concentration of broadcasting and print power and not be concerned. CTV, the Globe, a vast network of Internet sites, dozens of specialty TV channels, major broadcasting outlets – radio and television – in every major market in the country, and a stable of other print products. Then there is Global CanWest, which also runs a national television network and a cross-country ribbon of dailies, and has its fingers deep into the fabric of every other media product.
The consequences of this include not only an instant and interconnected news source for almost all of the population, but also a homogenization of the voices we hear and the stories we read. A wise government will look upon this latest move – one that threatens to quash one of the most innovative and leading-edge media corporations in history – with a suspicious, cautious, guarded eye. Certainly the media marketplace needs to as free as every other one, but increasingly the media defines us, influences us, reflects us and can lead us astray as quickly as it can guide us.
Bev Oda now moves into the centre of this storm. Her first one as a minister. A vital one.
But today she was just wet, unhappy at being 30 minutes late, and as peeved as anyone would be having just spent two hours grinding through Toronto traffic in a day of torrential rain. However, she recovered her composure instantly, and we trotted off to do the arranged photo shoot, for an announcement to be made on Monday.
The topic was child care – not her bag, but I guess she was the designated GTA-area cabinet rep assigned by PMO to this gig. Also with us was a family, constituents of mine, who think the Tory plan to send $1,200 a year, per kid, to Canadian households is an excellent one. Right now they spend $1,700 a month (that’s in after-tax dollars, of course) to put their two kids into day care, which more or less blows a giant hole in one salary. And while the $200 a month won’t do much to alleviate that burden, at least it’s two hundred bucks more than they were getting, and it gives them choice.
Actually that word – choice – was one they used a lot when we talked about the program before the shoot. It seems there is a genuine feeling that the Conservative strategy, of giving money over for parents to spend as they see fit, is showing a trust factor that never existed under the Libs. Amazing how that alone is appreciated, money aside.
Fifteen minutes later, we were all back in the downpour. Now Bev had maybe a three-hour drive back to the far east end of the GTA, guaranteed at 3 pm to run into a giant, impenetrable wall of traffic on the 401. Five hours in the car. Fifeteen minutes of photos. Being a minister means some shitty days, too. And I think it’s just started.
41 comments ↓
Hi Mr. Turner,
I heard you on CJBK radio in London today. You were talking about
Meals-for-Mortgages. I applaud your stance on this. I fully support your
fight. I find the notion of using what I feel is an exhorbitant allowance,
for personal investment, appalling. I am fed-up with some of the Perks that
are afforded MP’s. I have been a Liberal supporter in the past, but if you
are representative of your party then I am seriously rethinking my
commitment. I hope you are successful in reversing this loophole. I hope
more of your party members can demonstrate the same commitment to their
constituents that you do. We need more Garth Turners in parliament.
Sincerely,
Andy K.
London, Ont.
at least it’s two hundred bucks more than they were getting, and it gives them choice.
Choice to do what? It’s only a fraction of the cost of daycare and the entire year’s worth of cheques won’t even cover a month’s worth of lost salary if one of the parents stays home. So exactly what choices have they been given?
Garth, I’m not sure why you would be at all concerned about so-called media concentration. Your worry seems predicated on the unfounded assumption that the market will simply stand still after this takeover. Wrong! The free market adjusts, as unwieldy behemoths like Bell expose vulnerabilities and opportunites for little players and new players to take advantage of. CHUM arrived on the scene in the 1970s, when media concentration was much tighter. Don’t worry, more CHUMs will come along in due time. In the meantime, keep government FAR AWAY from mixing in and mucking it up! And disband the irrelevant CRTC while you’re at it.
The absorbtion of CHUM by Bell Globemedia is just another example of what seems to be the natural evolution of the free market system.
The bigger fish eat the smaller fish until all there is left is one really big fish.
Walmart is doing it in the miscellaneous retail sector and Home Depot is busy cornering the market on home improvement and hardware. It’s hardly surprising that it’s also happening in the broadcast media biz.
The result is the elimination of any real competition in the marketplace and less choice for consumers.
I’m not particularly concerned about the homogenization of TV news. That’s nothing new. TV news has been little more than infotainment for long time now. I doubt that this merger will make much difference.
Keep up the good work Garth, you are a breath of fresh air to this voter — John Mccormick
“Right now they spend $1,700 a month (that’s in after-tax dollars, of course)”
Garth, surely you are aware that this is a tax deductable expense, which makes the $1700 more like before tax dollars. By the way, making this expense tax deductable was a far better tax break than the new $200/month.
“And while the $200 a month won’t do much to alleviate that burden, at least it’s two hundred bucks more than they were getting, and it gives them choice.”
By the way, the $200 will get taxed.
Don’t get me wrong. I support this new deal parents are getting. I just think it is time to stop talking about it…you’ve taken enough credit for it, move on.
First a tax deduction is not a tax credit, and the value is far less than you infer. Second, the new benefit is taxable in the hands of the person with the lowest taxable income, so in many case it is essentially tax-free. As for talking about this, the issue of child care and family expenses is the No. 1 issue we deal with in the constituency office every day. It’s obviously more important to many others than it is to you. So, be tolerant. — Garth
While we’re on the subject of government spending,The Globe has an interesting article on the Minister of Veteran’s Affairs and his deputy chartering a bunch of planes to fly around Atlantic Canada and to/from Ottawa,with meal receipts in Ottawa contradicting flight destinations in the Atlantic.
I hope they have overblown the issue and PMO or someone corrects them,otherwise it’s just new pigs and the old trough.
CHUM hasn’t been innovative for quite some time.
RocketBoom; that’s innovative TV and where things are going but places like CTV and their parent company haven’t realized it yet.
Worrying about all those media outlets being brough under one roof is wasted time. The audiences they serve will move on very quickly to other sources if they find their content or slant has changed.
$1700. a month in day care!!! Surely this is not a “typical” family.
That’s over 20 grand a year. When the median family income is under $40,000. using the atypical family to support your child care policy is a farce.
“First a tax deduction is not a tax credit, and the value is far less than you infer.”
Are you actually saying that the new tax credit has a bigger impact than the existing tax deduction?
“Second, the new benefit is taxable in the hands of the person with the lowest taxable income, so in many case it is essentially tax-free.”
If it is fact tax free for a familly, wouldn’t the lowere income earner be making less than 10k/yr? That doesn’t even cover the daycare expenses in your example. In that case, the lower income earner is working because he/she prefers the workplace to staying home with the kids as it isn’t a financially motivated decision. I would submit that even though you say that “MANY” would get this benefit tax free, that the great majority will see it taxed.
“It’s obviously more important to many others than it is to you. So, be tolerant.” It is an important issue for me and I agree that the issue should continue to be discussed. I’m just asking that instead of praising your government’s decisions of the past, let’s discuss what else can/should be done. Debating decisions that the governement already took (and won’t alter) is useless. Let’s talk about what you are going to do next.
hey robert!
2 points:
#1) when u get paid at your job/business u get to choose how you spend it. this is true for someone making a million bucks as it is for someone getting a few hundred bucks from their aunt for their birthday. now, the guy making more money has more choices, granted. however, i beleive having a choice is far better than having none. praise god u live in a country where people still have the freedom to choose.
#2) in regards to your childish (imho) comment about garth not being a Conservative his whole life and that the party is not his – no comment. i think you just had a bad day and wanted to be noticed by garth turner. hope his response made u feel better.
have a nice day!!!!!
karim
Garth, you tend to put a lot of very good information on things such as the child care tax credit in various postings on the blog, which may be why people keep asking about it. Maybe it would be worth collecting the information about programs such as those in some FAQ’s accessible off the main page?
Oh geez Robert… where does it say that the government (and by extension ME as a taxpayer) should be responsible for sending your rugrats to daycare??? All you lefties who are griping about the plan keep saying how insignificant an amount it is… but in my opinion it’s more than you SHOULD get. If you’re grown up enough to be procreating you should also be grown up enough to make sure you have the means to support them. This whole notion of entitlement has REALLY permiated the left of centre deeply hasn’t it? I’ve popped out a kid… gimmie gimmie gimmie.
The CPC plan gives parents of young children a bit of a break. That’s it. It acknowledges that they have a few more expenses because of the kids and helps out a bit with some cash that they can spend as they see fit. If Grandma takes care of the kids it can pay for their lunches for the month or gas money or whatever. If Mom stays home it can be added to the family budget for whatever they need. If the kids are in daycare it can go towards offsetting the costs.
REGARDLESS… it puts the care of children square on the shoulders of their parents… WHERE IT BELONGS.
Paul Wells (a columnist for MacLean’s magazine) has a very interesting article out that highlights a disappointment in the conservative party…
http://www.macleans.ca/switchboard/columnists/article.jsp?content=20060724_130433_130433
Between things like this and the dogging around of the issues regarding the campaign financing, it really makes me wonder if the CPC (other than Garth) have what it takes to lead, which is not only the ability to try and succeed, but also to try, fail, be honest about it, and correct the mistake (or admit it can’t be corrected).
It’s too bad, because fixing their “scandals”, or saying “hey, health care is a tough nut, we’re trying to get something going, but have patience” would have gained them support with undecided or fence voters, instead, they are going to lose the weaker voters that voted for them last time… after all, if they’re just as bad as the liberals, why bother voting for them?
ACHNAD
“This whole notion of entitlement has REALLY permiated the left of centre deeply hasn’t it?”
I have to disagree with you. The culture of entitlement OWNS the centre.
The attitude that parents should maybe be personally responsible for their childrens’ upbringing has become right wing extremism.
Now that I’ve got that little quibble out of the way … GREAT POST!
Garth
So I went for lunch this afternoon to one of the pubs downtown Oakville. They provided me with great food(fish and chips), service and atmosphere, and I provided them with a few bucks(as did many others apparently-the place was packed).
Downtown Oakville was bustling on a Thursday afternoon, the smell of capitalism in the air.
It seems like only yesterday that the merchants association down there were screaming bloody murder about the construction of the Oakville Place Mall in fear that it would put them out of business. The strong not only survived but continue to thrive. The last time I was in the mall it was empty.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the concentration of power. The free market seems to have a way of sorting itself out.
Robert has kids?
ACHNAD
Enough beating around the bush, tell us what you really think.
Actually I think you nailed it.
Cheers.
Actually, to be fair, I don’t think Robert is saying (in that post at least) that the program is no good because it doesn’t pay for all the daycare, he is just saying that it is being marketed as giving parents a “choice”, but that the amount is so small it isn’t enough to open new opportunities.
In other words, if I gave you $100, sure, it would be nice of me and helps you out a bit, but have I earned the title, “The Great Benefactor”?
To all of those opposed to the CPC child care plan,
What exactly is it that you folks want?
Being the eldest of four children I have come to understand one basic truth; Young parents with young children will most likely struggle financially.
I do agree that “it takes a village to raise a child”. My taxes help pay for your childs’ education, protection and health care. You’re welcome, I’m happy to help out as the little tyke will be subsidizing me in my old age.
Now you’ve got a hundred bucks a month in your pocket that I don’t. I guess I don’t begrudge you that either.
What I do begrudge however, is the constant complaining about a plan that’s providing you with real money to help raise your child.
When I was a kid I considered hot dogs cooked on the BBQ(old school hibachi, of course) as opposed to boiled in a pot a treat. Mom and Dad’s treat; a cheap bottle of wine or a six pack to wash down their hot dogs with once a month or so.
Oh, and I walked to school barefoot, uphill both ways of course.
Suck it up, quit your bitching and don’t look a gift horse in the mouth!
Andrew McDonnell
Thanks for the heads up, ALW. I had no idea that my parents, grandparents and great-grandparents were extremists.
Hard to believe that I looked up to them and respected them.
Achnad, perhaps you could explain to me how it is possible to sustain an economy (such as ours) that is based on having a huge supply of low-paid workers, without providing those workers with affordable daycare (or housing for that matter)? Your vision might fit some societal ideal for personal responsibilty, but economically it would be disastrous.
Eddie:
Let me field that one. I agree with Achnad that it all boils down to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. If you don’t have the means to support children DON’T HAVE THEM. That doesn’t mean lower income earners shouldn’t ever have kids… it just means that maybe they should keep it in their pants for a couple of years and SAVE for it. Why is that such a tough concept to grasp? Here’s another one:
LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS
If you can’t afford a car, ride the bus. If you can’t afford a mortgage, rent a small apartment. If you’re just making enough money to support yourself and your spouse, DON’T HAVE KIDS. Just because you CAN pop out a kid doesn’t mean you SHOULD. I have a hard time imaging that anyone would disagree with the notion that you should have some personal responsibility in the direction of your life. I think if more people gave a little more thought to what was important to them before just jumping into MAJOR things like parenthood you’d have not only happier people but you’d have fewer neglected, abused, and unwanted children.
Now affordable housing is a COMPLETELY seperate issue that I don’t think anyone is going to argue with you about.
Paul:
I don’t think ALW was insulting anyone… I believe he was making the point that the belief that parents should be responsible for their kids upbringing has somehow been PAINTED as right-wing extremism by the lefties who think that we should just be popping out the kids left right and centre and the government (funded by ridiculous levels of taxation) should take care of them Walden II style.
You know even though this is not related to the story I still had to post this link for all to read and see if Garth would comment on it. It really does make me sick, the arrogancet that is, that Mr.Harper, Emerson and some of the other members of the CPC are showing the people of Canada and the Industry involved in this deal. ” My Way or the Highway” This may be the one that will bring down the Conservative Government in the Fall.
http://www.politicswatch.com/softwood-july13-2006.htm
Families should also be responsible for their aging parents. Do not expect government run facilities to care for them.
Smokers, the obese, alcoholics, drug addicts, the inactive couch potatoes, the accident victims (surely that could have been prevented) single mothers (surely that could have been prevented)
should all be cared for by their families and not expect government health benefits or tax breaks.
They all made life choice decisions and should be responsible for their actions.
And according to previous comments the above Canadians would fit into the same category as Canadian children: if they’re yours take care of them yourselves because they are of no benefit to the rest of us!!!
That was a wonderfully sarcastic response Judy. Nobody said anything about the relative worth of Children (or anyone else). Do you disagree that a little bit of personal responsibilty in making life choices wouldn’t improve society greatly? And NOBODY was advocating that we abolish all social programs as you so facetiously implied… being a conservative does NOT mean being anti-social programs. But blindly throwing money at every problem that can get enough supporters for a “program” isn’t the answer either.
But the discussion is not about all the other issues you threw in there to skew the issue. It’s about people taking a little more responsibility for themselves and their own lives… and having the intelligence to realize that if you are having a hard time supporting YOURSELF then you should maybe consider postponing procreation until your financial house is in order. “Cuz I wanna” is NOT a good enough reason to start having kids and then expecting society to pony up for them. Taxpayers pay enormous amounts in the rearing of your children already… and that’s okay… but there should be just as much onus on YOU to be doing everything you have to, including making any sacrifices of conveniences that are necessary, to make damn sure you have enough to support your family. Sure… life happens. people find themselves incircumstances beyond their control that they never in a million years could have planned for… and the social safety net is there to help them. But people who knowingly have kids when there’s no way they can afford them, I believe, are the problem.
I really think the true cost of children should be taught in school. But I also think that basic parenting, money management and investing should also be taught but it isn’t either. Maybe THAT’S what we should be focusing on instead of debating ridiculously expensive daycare solutions.
K2, you are still trying to build an economy with a model that doesn’t work. Like it or not, our economic machinery demands a vast pool of low-paid workers. If those low-paid workers don’t have children (and that’s really what you’re saying since they have no savings to put away) where will the next generation of low-paid workers come from?
Garth,
Even though I live in Winnipeg I still want to say thank you for allowing us from all walks of life and polictical stripes to post & comment on your site.
I used to be a Die Hard NDPer all my life but after the last Forced Election and following 6 months have become pretty fed up with them as well. Bill Blaikie is my member of Parliment. If more Policticians were like you I would feel a whole lot better about Poitics in this country.
When I read things like this http://www.politicswatch.com/softwood-july13-2006.htm I really get disillusioned about all of those serving us on Parliment Hill and Provincially. Certainly your party has introduced and done some really wonderful things the last 6 months or so but the Watering down of the Accountability act and bullying tactics of ” we dare you to disagree” We will make it a non confidence matter, in order for Mr. Harper to get his way is becoming very tiresome. Now bullying the Lumber Companies and Provinces with the same type of arrogant tactics is really gotten to me. I really had hoped that I could change the way I vote towards the Conservative party but now I am very doubtful of that.
All the best to you and your family.
Randy H.
Winnipeg
Eddie:
I think you’re making a MAJOR assumption that I believe is false. You’re suggesting that only people who come from a low income background will be low income workers. There’s a million reason why people might work in lower wage industries… and there’s a million more reasons why children born of hard working but lower wage-earning families can do better for themselves.
And I’m NOT by any stretch of the immagination suggestion that lower paid people shouldn’t have kids… but I do think that they should make a reasonable assessment of their lives and plan their families accordingly. What’s wrong with waiting a few years to have kids and saving what you can to prepare for it? Why not just have one child instead of 2 or 3 if you can’t afford 2 or 3?
I’m not trying to be callous or mean or anything. I do think people who need some support should get it. I’m 100% opposed, however, to people EXPECTING handouts when they make their choices in life.
The phrase of the day, ladies and gents, is Personal Responsibility. Responsibility for our own actions as well as responsibility for the direction of our lives.
Oh and just to clarify I think EVERYONE should plan for their families accordingly… not just the low income earners. A middle class family with 6 kids could have just as much trouble as a low income family with 3.
Robert, if you really feel that $200 per month is insiginifigant, please feel free to send me a cheque for $200 every month…You won’t even miss it!
I can put it toward my $2099 monthly daycare bill!
Thanks!
Paul:
K2 is correct. I certainly wasn’t insulting anyone when I used the term right wing extremist. I merely used the term to describe a viewpoint that is considered, by today’s standard, to be very right of the political centre.
The belief that raising children should be the financial responsibility of the parents has become very much a right wing attitude. The CPC , the supposedly right wing alternative, believes that it’s a fine idea to give people my tax dollars simply because they have kids. That makes my view (and K2′s) well to the right of the CPC.
The comment that you somehow interpreted as a personal slight was merely an illustration of how far the political centre has shifted to the left in this country.
The term extremist is not necessarily an insult. Garth Turner’s digital democracy initiative is extremist in nature. I certainly respect him for having the passion and conviction to promote it as he has done. Uh-oh, I just complimented the host. Now I’m in for it.
K2, I was kind of worn out yesterday when I read ALW’s comment, so thank you for correcting my understanding of it.
Personal Responsibility – Sounds good.
Paully: if you can afford $2100. a month for child care you are earning at least 3x the Canadian average. If you need an extra $200. a month perhaps you should squeeze your own household budget? Those Canadians earning less than $30,000. a year and whose tax dollars would go to support your life style are the ones being “shafted” by the Conservative plan.
Of course personal responsibility sounds good. But there is no way that anyone can be personally responsible for the fact that — and I apologize for repeating myself — our economy (as it exists) needs millions of low-paid workers who can’t afford what the marketplace is asking for daycare. Personal responsibilty is only an issue when everyone makes a living wage. That’s not the reality of our economy.
This is the kind of issue that divides social conservatives from progressives. It seems like the former don’t ever want to let the realities of a stable economy get in the way of their ideology.
Judy:
Let’s dissect your insightful comment:
If you need an extra $200. a month perhaps you should squeeze your own household budget?
Oh look. A leftie advocating Personal Resonsibility. How refreshing.
Those Canadians earning less than $30,000. a year and whose tax dollars would go to support your life style are the ones being “shafted†by the Conservative plan.
Oh really? And just how many tax dollars are the sub $30K earners “supporting” his lifestyle with? That’s a completely spurious arguement and you know it. It’s been said over and over on this thread by myself and others – if you don’t make enough to support a family DON’T HAVE KIDS. These people aren’t being shafted by anything other than the constant Liberal propaganda and notion of entitlement. Awwwwww you’re too poor to have 4 kids? Then why did you have them?
EVERYONE needs to live within their means. It’s not the role of government to earn you a bigger salary and it’s not taxpayers’ role to take care of your kids for you. You made your bed – you lie in it. And before you start whining no, I am not saying people who find themselves in dire straits shouldn’t get help. But to be popping out kids when you KNOW you can’t afford them and just expecting handouts is utterly ridiculous. We’re not Soviet Canuckistan. We don’t need Big Brother to take care of us.
Eddie:
Perhaps the “marketplace” is asking too much for daycare.
I’d be more willing to posit that the marketplace would inflate daycare prices to fit whatever the handouts will cover…
Eddie I do see where you’re coming from. I’m not advocating a complete “fend for yourself” solution. All I’m trying to get across is the idea that if everyone, as Achnad said, lives within their means and puts a little bit of thought into family planning things would be a lot easier. Let’s face it… kids are bloody expensive. So what’s wrong with having, for example, a plan whereby a couple decides where they want to be in 5 years (be it ready to start a family or to have one or both go back to school to improve their employability or to have a house of their own or WHATEVER) and then doing what’s necessary to get there? Sitting back and riding the system is not the way to go.
It’s interesting that you’re advocating a system that would perpetually keep low-income workers on the bottom rung of the wage ladder. I believe that if people made better choices then it would make it easier to increase their lot in life as opposed to just accepting their social class and flipping burgers for their whole lives.
Jessica M.
I’m sorry for little off-topic, but I want to ask you about design of this site. Did you make this template yourself or got from any templates website? Looks pretty cool for me