Day Two of the new budget and not a lot has changed: Only one opposition party will support the thing (the Bloc), but that’s enough to secure passage. Meanwhile the Liberals and NDP say it amounts to little more than electioneering, and a surprising number of interest groups and economists are calling the plan a mish-mash, with no clear focus and uncertain consequences.
The next step is a budget implementation bill which will give the nuts and bolts of what MPs are actually asked to vote for, which should hit the House of Commons today or tomorrow. The first budget vote is scheduled for Wednesday.
As the budget was being dropped, MPtv was there, of course. Here is footage of what happened in the madhouse scrum in those crucuial 40 minutes following the moment when Finance Minister Jim Flaherty got up on his new skates to talk.
To view the video, click here.
55 comments ↓
I definitely do not like the tax on cars. That really bothers me and upon listening to John McCallum this morning on the radio, he supports this measure as well. It does not bode well for Canadians when they are being penalized for purchasing a legal item.
Sean,
Wait until the Liberals get back in power. You will see plenty of these taxes. Increased Gas Taxes for instance – something they shouted for the government to lower last year. Now they want to apply a carbon tax on the oil industry which will filter down into the price of gasoline. It will probably be even taxed higher when the levy on oil exports is transferred on to domestic supply. Of course if the oil industry hire magic fairies to zap away all the green house gas emissions by next year, you may not have to pay anything on top of the existing gas tax.
Hmmm…Garth, I’m really not convinced we’re going to be in a campaign within the next 10 days. How come you’re the only person saying this? Why isn’t it being reported in the media?
Because I’m a visionary? Or an idiot? — Garth
KPK, I agree, but I still don’t like this tax at all. I think its an affront on my freedoms all for the sake of keeping the enviros happy.
I definitely do not like the tax on cars. That really bothers me and upon listening to John McCallum this morning on the radio, he supports this measure as well. It does not bode well for Canadians when they are being penalized for purchasing a legal item. – Sean
Of all the provisions in the budget, the idea behind this one is correct. However, it did not go far enough. My old van gets only 550Km on a tank of gas 65L. Work that out and even if I bought it now, it would not be subject to the tax. As one pundit already pointed out, you’re going to have to buy one of those monster SUV’s that few people really need to be affected by this levy.
At the other end, there are only a few vehicles that meet the consuption requirements to get the rebate, since with the exception of Honda Civic and Toyota Prius, all the other hybrids are on bigger vehicles, which improves their efficiency but doesn’t bring them under the 5.5L/100Km.
Basically, the way its written, this is either a tax grab or a waste of the paper its written on as it does little to cut down on fuel consuption and GHG’s.
BTW, if you have A/C on your car when you buy it, there’s already an additional tax for that legal product!
Therefore nothing new on the idea of taxing for taxings sake!
The devil is in the details. One example, the so-called monies of health aren’t effective until 2014.
I think before people start getting excited here they better pay attention to the details – makes quite a different picture.
This is just like the Flim Flam Flaherty days under the Harris government. I always thought Harper had a striking physical resemblance to Mike Harris – but this proves it goes beyond physical.
He’s a Mike Harris through and through.
I had been on the fence about this government and I respect you but I like so much of what is in this budget that I have resolved to give them my support through the next election.
Cummon Garth, give us a clue. What’s going to trigger an election?
James, they’re going too far in my opinion.
James,
Funny the environmental groups say $4000 on a gas guzzler is too low – that people with Hummers can easily afford it. The problem is this will probably hit the $40000 SUV market as well and not just the $120000 Hummers.
The only problem Layton has with it is that it doesn’t encourage hybrids to be built here – not that Layton could force a company like GM to build them here if they didn’t want to anyway. It just shows the mindset of the man though.
Excuse me, but there have been taxes on legal items since taxes began. Indeed, before there was an income tax, that’s how taxes were collected.
As for the tax on vehicles (gas guzzlers), its hard to imagine the type of vehicle this tax applies to. To be hit with the lowest ($1,000) penalty, the vehicle has to use more than 13 liters per 100 km. Since the tax won’t apply to trucks – those big gas guzzling SUVs (which are classed as trucks) won’t be affected by it. Even big cars which huge engines don’t use up gas at a rate sufficient to be hit with any penalty. For example, the 400 hp (7 liter!) Corvette gets 11 liters per 100 km (combined city and highway – see http://www.gm.ca). A Cadillac with a super charged V8 (460 hp!) gets about 12 liters per 100 km. So, other than a few Ferraris or Lamborghinis, this measure does NOTHING.
On the other end, a few (well, only two) hybrid vehicles qualify for the tax saving – I’ve seen about half a dozen of them on the road over the past few years.
In short, this budget is much like PMSH himself – a lot of hot air.
Hmmm…Garth, I’m really not convinced we’re going to be in a campaign within the next 10 days. How come you’re the only person saying this? Why isn’t it being reported in the media?
…saw a comment on a G&M blog. The suggestion is that when the Conservatives fail to honor the bill requiring them to present a plan for the implementation of Kyoto by mid-April, the Conservatives will try to engineer a confidence motion on the issue.
Sean: You still have the freedom to buy any car you want-you are just going to have to pay for the privilege of polluting. Call it an individual carbon tax!! Easy to avoid the tax–buy a more environmentally friendly vehicle.
Heck, Harper let you off the hook–buy a big V8 dually super-sized pick-up–they seem to be exempt from the tax.
Guess a lot of rural folk buy these big suckers.
It is interesting that no one has noticed that the negative effect of the “gas guzzler” tax will be felt in Ontario through possible job loses at the car manufacturers, while there are no negative impacts on Alberta as would be the case if the tax had been applied to gas.
…saw a comment on a G&M blog. The suggestion is that when the Conservatives fail to honor the bill requiring them to present a plan for the implementation of Kyoto by mid-April, the Conservatives will try to engineer a confidence motion on the issue.
By Ed Brooks on 03.20.07 10:39 am
Ed, I read that to and I am hoping that the BQ will still not want an election bad enough to continue on propping up Harper just to Pee him off so he can’t generate his own demise. That way they can’t get what they really want and blame the Liberals for it at the same time. Make them be ACCOUNTABLE for this stupid budget they brought out.
On another note did anyone notice that even the Sun Media, the biggest Conservative cheerleaders, are not happy with this budget. Hmmmm
Mike Harris was the best Premier in Ontario’s history. Canada really needs a Mike Harris style Prime Minister.
Robert McLelland (myblagh.com) makes an interesting point:
“After looking through the budget, the first thing that jumped out at me was that the Cons are shifting more of the tax burden onto the backs of Canadians. Income tax revenue from table 7.4 in $billions.
06/07 Personal Income Tax: 111.64–% of total: 73.43%
08/09 Personal Income Tax: 120.8–% of total: 75.08%
The corporate tax burden however, will continue to drop.
06/07 Corporate Income Tax: 35.03–% of total: 26.53%
08/09 Corporate Income Tax: 35.35–% of total: 21.97%
Clearly Joe Canadian is getting screwed over by the rightwing fiscal agenda.”
That acccords with what I would call the “perpetual motion” theory of economics: that corporations will pump profits back into the economy
to keep them circulating ad infinitum. Works fine, until someone discovers profit taking – and salting them away for personal accounts or benefits, introducing friction (if not a monkey wrench) into the theoretical machinery.
Garth,
I really wish that someone would point out that there is essentially no money for health research in this budget. Canadian research has reached a critical point wherein if a huge infusion of funding is not received we will be seeing irreparable damage to Canadian research and another brain drain.
I’ve also heard many instances that a election will be called within days.
Judy, the minimal impact these cars have is not worth the tax.
How can a budget that is supposed to give so many Canadians something – not help my situation? Especially when it is our largest budget ever!
I am a 55 year old recent retiree. My 2 children are older than 18 – missed the child care help. In May, they will be finished with their university education – missed the RESP help. My wife and I have the same small pensions – missed the pension sharing help. I just bought a Honda Civic for the gas savings – missed the environmental tax break.
The GST cut (even though I believe there are better tax cuts) would have helped.
The capital gains tax holiday would have helped a little.
My biggest concern is the environment. Shouldn’t this have been more prominent in the budget if it is so important to so many Canadians?
Don’t forget the retired middle class
My hat off to the Conservatives…they get my full support.For once the hard working family is being recognized and supported.
The Liberals say they are not spending enough. The Conservative media say they are spending too much. Sounds like the porridge err budget is just right.
I’m a Liberal and posted an article here some hours ago stating that the government has spent far too much. Read it, please. — Garth
At the risk of repetitive posting I see others like the G+M blog are noticing the upcoming Kyoto deadline. Opposition Parties have already brought down the government. We all know the Kyoto plan is a no show, no go. The Bloc will not support any initiatives the Tories announce because Kyoto still has legs in Quebec.
The rhetoric about Canada leading the way is out the window. Both Russia and China have put together scientific teams to support the notion that GW is a natural phenomena, no Kyoto targets over there. The Tories will call an election over Kyoto and they will look like the only sane players on a field of political opportunists willing to do anything or say anything to regain power.
For Garth the bright side.
Wasting all the time and energy pushing Ottawa to meet the Kyoto targets will not only give the Tories a majority but the Libs will be lucky to come out of the next election with 50 seats. The Libs will have to reach deep into the barrel so Garth provided you get re-elected you should get a shadow cabinet post and may I add you deserve one.
On behalf of all the non-partisan posters on this site and all the other sites, we told you so.
Darn, Kevin never thought of it that way, your right, now we both understand how the people of Alberta felt last week with Mr. Dion plan
“Mike Harris was the best Premier in Ontario’s history.”
Have you asked the residents of Walkerton about their opinion of Mr Harris?
“Darn, Kevin never thought of it that way, your right, now we both understand how the people of Alberta felt last week with Mr. Dion plan”
They may have felt some grievence but I do not think that a tax on gas would result in loses of existing jobs in Alberta: only future jobs.
Garth, John McCallum stated this morning that the Conservatives cut spending. The Liberal website talks about too many cuts, meaning, they want more spending.
Interesting. I was sitting with him, and missed that. — Garth
Sean..you are so isinformed, Mr. Dion stated clearly yesterday that the cuts took place last year and in effect the net gain for Quebec is 700 million, not three billion. Not that he would have done anything different…time for a new party..these two are cut from the same cloth!
It’s a sad time in politics when trading for votes: i.e. @ $310 per kid for families is going at the expense of these programs:
Environment/Koyoto 3 billion cut, only 1.5 bill now reinvested.
First Nations/Kelogna Accord cut, very little reinvested
Woman’ programs cut or severely reduced
Health Transfer etc. payments to provinces cut, 10 Bill cut, 11.5 bill reinvested in the transfer payments (of the extra 1.5 Bill increase, 1.6 bill goes to Quebec!)
Many other programs were cut or now greatly reduced last year by the consrevatives, at least 40 by my account.
Some were important to local economies but not a priority for the Conservatives
Like the mountain beetle program in BC
Women: Workplace Equity/Employment Equity Programs
Youth: HR Human Resources and Skills Development, Youth Employment Programs
Adults: Learning and Literacy programs,
Human Resources and Skills Development.
Garth, Have you checked out the LPC response on Liberal.ca, it sure sounds like there beating up the budget over not spending enough and cutting programs.
I didn’t write it. The only words I can take abject responsibility for are here! — Garth
The car tax/benefit would’ve affected my purchase of a car two years ago if it existed. I debated buying a hybrid but did some math and found that I would’ve needed gas to be at $1.25 per litre to justify it (we hadn’t hit $1 per litre at that point). Shave a few grand off the price of the car and now it makes sense to buy one.
To me this is the ideal method to encourage people to reduce gas usage and more measures along this line should be done. Perhaps ones that discourage people from buying hot water tanks and encourages purchases of the tankless systems, others on products in the extremes of energy usage (ie: fridges that are inefficient are taxed, ones that are efficient are subsidized). Shift levels annually to keep it as revenue neutral as possible. An easy green measure that makes those who don’t want to ’save the planet’ pay to help those who do.
I think items like this have been Green Party policy for awhile. The CPC picked up one item, just a shame they haven’t picked up more.
http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?type=news&id=12583
Are you referring to his interview with CFRA’s Steve Madeley?
Here’s the link:
http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/John_McCallum_Mar20.mp3
“For once they help the hard working families”?? Like people without kids don’t work hard and like the people without kids don’t pay a good portion of their property taxes to pay for the education of the kids they don’t have.
And, like the whole world is responsible for some one else’s kids.
Give me a break.
I liked John McCallum’s to the point statement ‘No government has ever spent more and accomplished less!’
I thought that summed it up perfectly!
As to all the clapping and hooting… ‘This I am paying taxes for? This?’
Garth, John McCallum stated this morning that the Conservatives cut spending. The Liberal website talks about too many cuts, meaning, they want more spending.
Interesting. I was sitting with him, and missed that. — Garth
By Sean P. Hogan on 03.20.07 11:50 am
Yea, Garth I just love it when the idiots try and tell you what was said in committee meetings.
Makes me laugh which is good for the soul .
Al Brekke,
Do ordinary Canadians really care about these things?
Pretty much everything you mentioned in your post is supposed to be provincially run. The only exceptions would be Kyoto – where the environmental commissioner chastized the Liberals for wasting 6 billion dollars and “native” issues – which is not a vote grabber. The provinces are getting a hell of a lot of money for social programs. That is why I think Layton is being an ass. There are lots of things there for him to support but he nitpicks on one issue and says he can’t support the budget.
What I don’t like is that I’m not getting anything in terms of reduced taxes. I guess I will have to be satisfied with better social services.
“I liked John McCallum’s to the point statement ‘No government has ever spent more and accomplished less!’”
Except for his own. I would like to take a tally of how many re-announced initiatives over the last 12 years were made by the Liberals where they never delivered the funding. Toronto Harbour Front for one?
Again, I’ll type it for those who may have misunderstood me. I never said what was said in committee. I said in interviews, and I gave links to them. How hard is that to understand? Just proves that you didn’t read or listen to the links I gave. When you resort to insults, you lose all credibility in any argument you make, that’s if you make one at all.
As opposed to yours? — Garth
Garth, a very simple question, that I must ask for the fourth time. Forgive me if it has been answered previously….
Was the Income Trust legislation in the Budget or the Implementation Plan? Was it altered in any way from the original Flaherty presentation?
The budget implementation bill has yet to be tabled. Wait for it. — Garth
KPK said: Do ordinary Canadians really care about these things?
I do believe ordinary canadians believe in the Environmment, Health, prosperity through: equality for women, youth and first nations.
Garth, do you see any insults in my statement(s)? Where do you see me lose credibility? The poster who insulted me accused me of suggesting something incorrect at committee. I’ve never even mentioned that. I’ve provided links, links which include the Liberal website. When that poster stated that Liberals wanted more spending and you questioned it, I provided proof of his statement. Now, you have stated that you oppose more spending, I guess that demonstrates your opposition to Dion’s/McCallum’s statements.
KPK,
“Toronto Harbour Front for one?”
And I suppose the fact that Toronto can not get their own act together is a moot point?
Likewise, funding Toronto’s Harbour Front is NOT, or should NOT be a federal project with perhaps the exception of actual freight ports for international shipping.
Toronto is too busy spending $40 million on Nathan Phillips Square (a total frigging waste of money) to be able to deal with things like their own water front, mass transit, unimportant stuff like that!
Too many egos and too few brains are the real problem!
The Toronto mayor blames the lack of productivity on grid lock. Still trying to get a handle of the connection between traffic flows and retooling a factory.
Have all the international investors been tied up in traffic for the last 2 years?
“Likewise, funding Toronto’s Harbour Front is NOT, or should NOT be a federal project with perhaps the exception of actual freight ports for international shipping.”
Can we get rid of the federal albatross, the Port Authority?
What the boomers and single seniors are now going to have to do is go out and adopt a child or two in order to get any benefit from this budget. I fail to see why milloniares with children need a tax break from PMSH
KH,
Just read the LPC response on Liberal.ca that you mentioned. Didn’t ‘read’ it quit ethe way you did.
Rather than decrying that not enough was spent, it’s beating up the budget for the way money was allocated. i.e. they could have spent less and spread it around differently.
And no, I am not a Liberal.
I guess it’s a bit better than what a Gath Turner budget would be.
I guess you can’t please everyone.The Liberals had their chance.
Frank, I guess its in the perception combined with listening to politician on TV and radio.
I just checked they have to more statements up since then Frank, this is the one I am referring to.
http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?type=news&id=12583
Judy Roberts ,
I fail to see why millionaires should get $7 a day daycare like in Quebec either when there are poorer couples who need the spaces.
Robert McLelland (myblagh.com) makes an interesting point:
“After looking through the budget, the first thing that jumped out at me was that the Cons are shifting more of the tax burden onto the backs of Canadians. Income tax revenue from table 7.4 in $billions.
06/07 Personal Income Tax: 111.64–% of total: 73.43%
08/09 Personal Income Tax: 120.8–% of total: 75.08%
The corporate tax burden however, will continue to drop.
06/07 Corporate Income Tax: 35.03–% of total: 26.53%
08/09 Corporate Income Tax: 35.35–% of total: 21.97%
Clearly Joe Canadian is getting screwed over by the rightwing fiscal agenda.â€
That acccords with what I would call the “perpetual motion†theory of economics: that corporations will pump profits back into the economy
to keep them circulating ad infinitum. Works fine, until someone discovers profit taking – and salting them away for personal accounts or benefits, introducing friction (if not a monkey wrench) into the theoretical machinery.
By Herb on 03.20.07 11:11 am
GARTH, THE INFO IN THE ABOVE POST SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF ALL CANADIANS
Hey Bill-Muskoka…Did you know that Toronto is the only major city in the world that doesn’t have its mass transit system paid for by either the federal or provincial governments…Toronto’s budget this year had 51% spent on mass transit…And people wonder why Toronto isn’t a world-class city?? Simple, they are treated like a small-town village by the rest of governments…
Nelson, that number shocked me, so I went an checked, your corrected that 51% of the capital plans budget from 2007-2011 is dedicated to mass transport but not 51% of the City’s budget is spent on mass transport. It is grouped in with about six or seven other agencies such as the library at about 27 percent of the budget.
There are several other problems with this budget.
What is the objective? Is it merely to buy votes? There is lots of spending but to what purpose? I believe this is the point the Liberals are trying to make.
Most of the transfers to provinces are going to Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta. Two of these provinces are the wealthiest in Canada. It appears that this is regional “he who has gets” budget. The poorer provinces, such as Nova Scotia actually will get less unless they succumb to federal blackmail and agree to tear up the off shore accord.
Many of the tax cuts are aimed at groups who may be happy to receive them but probably need them less than others. For example, young people just starting out with large education debts or relocation costs get nothing. While senior couples, who often own their own homes, and are comfortable will get a significant tax cut. Again it seems that “he who has gets.”
The $1000 to $500 tax incentive to get people off welfare is a joke. Anyone who has retired will understand that the costs associated with working are so much higher that the amount is useless.
C.B. Innes,
I believe what has been done is to ‘fix’ the whole stupid equation. Past Prime Ministers have continuously signed one-off agreements that has resulted in the equalization becoming what it was — unmanageable and subject to election influence.
As far as Alberta, Ontario, as per McSqinty’s demand for fairness, Ottawa has agreed to return to a ‘FIXED’ funding amount per capita. Alberta had been the province that was being screwed the worst given it was the province in receipt of the lowest per capita funding transfer (for healthcare & post-secondary education for example), followed by Ontario.
Now (or by 2014?) every province will receive the same level of funding transfers, in order to ensure an equity of service provision, regardless of their fiscal capacity.
Ed the Hun
I am loosing confidence in Liberal party ,take a stand ,we are making the war in Afganistan ,it would appear more and more citzens of that country are joining the battle against us we have lost their confidence DONNT TURN THIS CONFLICT OVER TO THE MILITARY and your guess is as good as mine why it should not happen WE are loosing respect of the world as is the USA