[mersar]

Alright, let's try to keep all the budget discussion in this thread so it can easily be found.

Link to the budget (http://www.budget.gc.ca/2009/home-accueil-eng.html)

[mersar]

Flaherty promises billions in spending, tax cuts to boost economy
Federal budget pegs deficit at $34B in 2009-10
Last Updated: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 | 4:24 PM ET
CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/credit.html)

Canada would have to weather large deficits to “do what it takes to keep our economy moving,” including cutting taxes while boosting infrastructure and worker training, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said in tabling the federal budget Tuesday.
Flaherty promises billions of dollars in new spending - ranging from money for infrastructure projects to aid for worker training, and cash for enhanced employment insurance (EI) benefits - to help the county ride out the global economic downturn.
"We must do what it takes to keep our economy moving, and to protect Canadians in this extraordinary time," Flaherty said in his budget speech in the House of Commons.
Flaherty's budget plan predicts a deficit of $33.7 billion for the 2009-10 fiscal year and $29.8 billion the following year. For 2011-12, the red ink would diminish to $13 billion, followed by a deficit of $7.3 billion for 2012-13.
While the big-spending budget is meant to aid the Canadian economy, it would also be key to the survival or failure of the Conservative government. Opposition parties have threatened to topple the government if they don't believe it is doing enough to aid the economy.

Tax cuts on block
For individual taxpayers, the government would boost the basic personal amount – which would allow people to earn more before they have to pay federal tax. The basic amount would go from $9,600 to $10,320, retroactive to Jan. 1.
The government would also raise the upper limits on the two lowest income tax brackets. The upper limit for the 15 per cent bracket would go to $40,726, while the upper income limit for the 22 per cent bracket would rise to $81,452.
The tax changes would cost about $1.9 billion for the 2009-10 fiscal year, and almost $2 billion the following year.

Help for current, wannabe homeowners
Flaherty also promised action to stimulate the housing sector.
A new home renovation tax credit would give up to $1,350 in tax relief on home improvement projects. The eligible expenses must be at least $1,000, but not more than $10,000, and the work would have to be done between Jan. 27, 2009, and Feb. 1, 2010.
The temporary credit would cost the government an estimated $2.5 billion for the upcoming fiscal year.

Infrastructure, EI priorities
As promised in the days leading up to Flaherty's announcement, the budget includes billions of dollars earmarked for infrastructure spending.
The federal government is promising $4 billion over the next two years for projects beginning construction in the 2009 and 2010 building seasons. The government said it would approve provincial, territorial and municipal projects, and cover up to 50 per cent of eligible project costs.
"Since Sir John A. Macdonald laid a railway across a continent, infrastructure has been both an immediate response to an urgent need and a hopeful act of nation building," Flaherty said.
With job losses expected to rise as the economy struggles, the government is proposing changes to the EI program.
For Canadians hit by layoffs, the government would extend maximum EI benefits by five weeks, bringing it up to a maximum of 50 weeks. The measure would be in effect for the next two years, at a cost of $1.15 billion.
Another $500 million over two years would go to extend EI benefits for Canadians participating in longer-term training programs.

Government shares ‘regret’ to run deficit
"Canadians regret the need to run a deficit in order to invest in our economy," said Flaherty. "Our government shares that regret.
"We have chosen this course because we know it is what Canadians families and businesses need," he said.
Canada is expected to run deficits until 2013, when a $700-million surplus is forecast.
While the government is promising billions of dollars in spending to boost the economy, Flaherty hinted there could be more to come if deemed necessary.
"While our projections are based on the best information available, we cannot guarantee them absolutely," Flaherty said. "Forecasters all agree that there is substantial uncertainty, so some flexibility is advisable."
Economist Jeff Rubin of CIBC World Markets called the government's approach to its handling of the economic situation a "sea change.
"Government has now returned to taking a leadership in the economy," Rubin said.
The government is assuming the economy will contract by 2.7 per cent in 2009, which is worse than the 1.2 per cent drop that is the average of private-sector forecasts.

Tories in political survival mode
Now that the budget has been delivered, the Conservatives hope it will be enough to win support in the House of Commons. The NDP has already said it will vote against it, while the Bloc Québécois has said it doesn’t support the speech from the throne.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has not displayed much support for the Liberal-NDP coalition that formed under previous party leader Stéphane Dion in the wake of last year's economic update.
The coalition partners, together with the support of the Bloc, had threatened to topple the government over its handling of the economy.
Ignatieff has said he wouldn't give his take on the budget until he has read it.

Source (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/27/budget2009-main.html)

[0773|=\]

Alright, let's try to keep all the budget discussion in this thread so it can easily be found.

Link to the budget (http://www.budget.gc.ca/2009/home-accueil-eng.html)

thanks for this link, I couldn't find it before.

[240glt]

Overall, from what I've read this budget is a big dissapointment.

[waterloowarrior]

I'd rather the government keep the $20 billion in personal income tax cuts and spend it on high speed rail... or just lower the deficit

[Coldrsx]

from what i have read thus far it seems acceptable but will not do all that much to reverse the tide so to speak.

[MrOilers]

I'm all for the tax cuts. Bring it on!

[Coldrsx]

Budget highlights


CANWEST NEWS SERVICEJANUARY 27, 2009 2:41 PM


The highlights of the 2009 budget include:

- The economy will be in deficit until 2013.

- At its worst, the federal debt is projected to be $542.4 billion in fiscal 2012-13.

- This budget will create or maintain 190,000 jobs.

- The federal government will spend $40 billion over the next two years to stimulate the economy.

- $200 billion to the financial markets to improve access to credit.

- $8.3 billion for the Canadian Skills and Transition Strategy for job retraining.

- Create a Home Renovation Tax Credit that will provide up to $1,350 in tax relief for home renovations between Jan. 27, 2009, and Feb. 1, 2010. Some 4.6 million families are expected to benefit.

- $12 billion for infrastructure projects over the next two years.

- $7.8 billion over two years for the housing, construction, renovations and energy retrofits.

- $7.5 billion for sectors and regions especially hard hit by the global slowdown, such as one-industry towns, the auto sector and forestry.

- Extending employment insurance benefits by five weeks.

- Freezing employment insurance premiums for two years.

- Protecting the severance pay for employees when companies go bankrupt.

- Increase the Working Income Tax Benefit for the working poor.

- Increase funding to existing regional development agencies and create two new agencies — for southern Ontario and the North.

- Enhance a program to encourage businesses to invest in machinery, equipment and computers systems.

- $500 million for hockey arenas, swimming pools and other community recreational facilities.

- $1 billion for social housing in the next two years, including more housing for seniors, the disabled and on reserves.

- $407 million to Via Rail to improve passenger service, between Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto.

- $175 million to shipyards to build 98 new small vessels, lifeboats and barges for the Coast Guard.

- $75 million to Parks Canada to upgrade historic sites connected with 200th anniversary of the War of 1812.

- $200 million over the next two years to the Canadian Television Fund.

- Work with willing provinces and territories to reform securities regulation into a single regulator as quickly as possible.

- Create a secretariat to explain financial concepts to Canadians with an aim to improve financial literacy.

- The personal exemption allowed before taxes are assessed will increase to $10,320 from $9,600.

- Streamlining the approval process for new construction.

- Spending freezes for public servants for travel, conferences and hospitality.

- Cabinet ministers and their staff can no longer fly business class for trips under two hours.

- Reduce the number of governor-in-council appointments.

- Cap public service wage increases to 1.5 per cent for this year and the next two.

Budget bottom line over next five fiscal years:

2008-9: - $1.1 billion

2009-10: -$33.7 billion

2010-11: -$29.8 billion

2011-12: -$13.0 billion

2012-13: -$7.3 billion

2013-14: $0.7 billion (surplus)

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Budget+highlights/1223704/story.html

[Wooster]

Well, like the Building Canada fund, I think we can expect very little of the infrastructure money actually flow to municipalities. Cities must apply for the available funding coming to the table with already 2/3 of the funding in place (combination of provincial and municipal funds). Municipalities have mostly budgeted for at least 1 year and in many cases 3 years out what they can afford based on their tax base. To come up with a third of multi-billion dollar transit projects, is quite impossible for most cities because they lack the ability through property taxes to create that kind of revenue. Municipalities only get about 8% of the share of someone's overall taxes.

[craneSpotter]

So, apparently Vancouver's Evergreen line gets funding in this budget. How much funding and will this allow it to start ASAP?

[graupner]

A western canadian budget proposed to solve an eastern canadian recession.

[mylesmalley]

The $20 billion in tax cuts are going to be about as beneficial as the 2% GST cut was. Spending won't increase, and the gov't's coffers take a kicking.

But now the federal debt is going to balloon by $85 billion in just four years! Good lord, it took more than ten to get it down to where is now. We wouldn't be in nearly this bad a situation if the GST hadn't been cut. an extra $12 billion or so a year for the past three years could have gone a long way to boosting infrastructure spending.

[graupner]

So, apparently Vancouver's Evergreen line gets funding in this budget. How much funding and will this allow it to start ASAP?

'ASAP' and 'Federal Funding' are opposite words.

[Wooster]

So, apparently Vancouver's Evergreen line gets funding in this budget. How much funding and will this allow it to start ASAP?

Well Vancouver can apply to get federal funding for the Evergreen Line. From my understanding, BC/muncipalities/Translink (or whatever combination) will have to come to the table with either half or up to two-thirds of the funding.

This will go for any major infrastructure project outside of the ones that the federal government is undertaking itself like the Via Rail upgrades.

[0773|=\]

Didn't read anything in the budget regarding Edmonton's NAIT LRT line. I did, however, see that Calgary's Telus World of Science was listed as a "Priority Infrastructure Project."

ooooookay...

[mersar]

Didn't read anything in the budget regarding Edmonton's NAIT LRT line. I did, however, see that Calgary's Telus World of Science was listed as a "Priority Infrastructure Project."

ooooookay...

It's just on the 'could include' but not necessarily limited to list of projects that may be eligible... though most of its funding is already in place.

[mr.x]

Shipbuilding and transit spending for B.C.

BILL CURRY

Globe and Mail Update

January 27, 2009 at 5:01 PM EST

OTTAWA — New Coast Guard ships will be built in British Columbia and Vancouver's Evergreen Transit Line wins an extension as the federal budget outlined Canada's plan to spend its way out of the economic recession.

In addition to billions for skills training and infrastructure projects nation-wide, the Conservatives' 2009 federal budget includes several specific measures aimed directly at British Columbians.

In his budget speech Tuesday, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promised that public transportation in Vancouver will be benefit as a result of the federal stimulus package.

“In British Columbia, funds will flow for the Evergreen Transit Line and for a more modern railway station in Vancouver – key projects as the city prepares to host the Olympic Winter Games,” said Mr. Flaherty in his House of Commons budget speech.

On shipbuilding, the budget promises $175-million for new Coast Guard vessels and repairs to the existing fleet. Ottawa indicates that when the contracts are awarded, work will be conducted in Canada and, where possible, by shipyards located within the regions of the vessels' home ports.

The Coast Guard is in line for 80 new small craft and 30 new environmental response barges. There will also be five new lifeboats home-ported in Prince Rupert, Campbell River, Dartmouth, Quebec City and Burlington, Ont.
Two Coast Guard ships ported in Victoria, B.C. – the CCGS Bartlett and the CCGS Tanu – will receive “vessel life extensions.”

For small craft harbours, the budget pledges $1.9-million for repairs at the Stevenson Harbour and $300,000 for wharf repairs at Ladysmith Harbour.

Border infrastructure that would lead to Pacific Highway improvements is included, as well as added Canada Border Services Agency infrastructure in northern B.C.

Meanwhile, B.C.'s Fort Nelson Airport is listed in the budget as a possible beneficiary of an $81-million fund for cleaning up contaminated sites.

The province's mountain pine beetle woes are also mentioned as an example for spending that will flow from a $1-billion nation-wide “community adjustment fund.” The budget provides few details on the fund, which “will help mitigate the short-term impacts of restructuring communities.”

[SteelTown]

"Funding will also be used to modernize VIA Rail Canada’s fleet of locomotives and passenger cars, and to upgrade key stations in Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Hamilton, Belleville and Windsor."

HA! Hamilton is FINALLY getting a VIA Station.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

"Nearly $12-billion federal dollars will be made available for “shovel-ready” public works projects across Canada that can be commenced quickly, but there's a catch. Provinces and municipalities will have to contribute nearly $9-billion more in order to get the roads, bridges and sewer upgrade work started.

The Conservatives warn, however, they will withdraw offered funding if there's not a speedy pickup by provincial and municipal governments. “The government is expecting all partners in this stimulus plan to act with urgency and will reinforce this with a strong, consistent, ‘use it or lose it' theme,” the budget said."

From the Globe - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090127.wbudget_main0127/BNStory/budget2009/home

Where are municipalities going to come up with billions of dollars? They can't run a deficit and most are limited by provincial governments regarding how much they can borrow. Where are small provinces like NB, NS and PEI going to find that money? Does it really make a lot of sense to ask tiny provinces with terrible finances to help try to spend the country out of trouble?

What a disaster from an infrustructure point of view.

Of course there are $20 billion in personal tax cuts. Only time will tell whether this money recirculates in the economy or is stashed or used to pay down personal debt.

So we are running large government deficits but I'm not sure what else this deficit might accomplish.

[SteelTown]

I know what I'll do with my money from the tax cuts....pay down my VISA.

[mersar]

How the tax cuts are setup they'll more then likely just be absorbed and not even noticed. If you're making $50k a year will you actually notice an extra $100 or less each month on your pay cheque? Not likely.

Overall most reaction in Calgary has been mixed, a few groups are saying it doesn't go far enough though.

So now its up to the liberals. I do hope they realise its not a yes or no question though, I can't see them willing to take a gamble on defeating it outright, so I expect we may see them propose some amendments to it first.

[Yume-sama]

I'm normally for lower taxes, but in this case I agree that taxes should stay where they are and that money should be spent on infrastructure, spread across the Country. There is certainly a big wish list in every city, and yes, most people are unlikely to even notice the tax savings. And like the old joke goes, the biggest winners in tax cuts like this will be Molson Canadian and Marlboro. :P

[cornholio]

as i read more and more and think this over i have to say this is laughable. i hope harper is tossed out quickly. the tax cuts are beyond idiotic, infact as far as i know their counterproductive as the money will evaporate in a recession and just lead to biger defficits and more negative news. at the same time the money could of been used to actually help retrain people and support people during this ruff time and build new infrastructure to allow the economy to run at max efficiency once everything gets sorted out and we come out of a recession. i swear this conservative goverment is run by chimps.

[trueviking]

How the tax cuts are setup they'll more then likely just be absorbed and not even noticed. If you're making $50k a year will you actually notice an extra $100 or less each month on your pay cheque? Not likely.

Overall most reaction in Calgary has been mixed, a few groups are saying it doesn't go far enough though.

So now its up to the liberals. I do hope they realise its not a yes or no question though, I can't see them willing to take a gamble on defeating it outright, so I expect we may see them propose some amendments to it first.

i dont think they can propose changes can they?

it said on the CBC that the income tax cuts will give back $280 at the end of the year to a two income family making $100 000 per year...that money should have stayed in the government's pocket, it will be wasted....im all for tax cuts in good times, but when this budget was specifically for immediate economic stimulus, it seems that was not a prudent inclusion....with consumer confidence so low, nobody will change their spending patterns because they know they will get $140 in june..

this whole thing doesnt sit well with me...it seems like completely blowing 12 years of paying down debt at the first instance of a downturn is irresponsible....im not really holding my breath that this will work anyways...seems like throwing good money after bad....i dont have the answer, but this just seems gluttonous to me...

i hope at least we get some good stuff out of the deal...a few football stadiums and some rapid transit and other quality of life amenities...since we seem to be just throwing our money away anyways....

they should buy winnipeg, hamilton and quebec NHL teams...that would stimulate the economy....another half bill for that wouldnt be missed.

[coildomain]

I'm glad Via Rail is getting some money, even though it is way too little. I would rather not see the tax cuts, especially since its such a large amount that could be spent in many other meaningful ways. Does anyone know if the CSA will be getting the extra money or are they just announcing a new program withing the agency funded with existing money?

[mersar]

i dont think they can propose changes can they?


I do believe they can as the budget is really just a bill thats in front of the house of commons like any other (with the exception that it must be treated as a matter of confidence). I recall hearing things in other recent budgets about the opposition (possibly as recent as it being a liberal opposition) trying to get changes made before they voted for it. I'm sure that someone can clear this up if I'm wrong on this.

[mr.x]

Here are some facts: half of the deficit is from the stimulus, and the stimulus itself is less than two percent of Canada's GPD.

Who actually thinks that it will really impact the economy?

[newflyer]

News out of Winnipeg...


City's inland port big budget winner
By: Mia Rabson and Mary Agnes Welch

OTTAWA – Winnipeg’s inland port and a little known railway in northwestern Manitoba are among the biggest winners from the federal budget today.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s much-anticipated document for Canada’s economic recovery singled out both the inland port at the Winnipeg airport and the Keewatin Railway Company for new cash from federal infrastructure programs which are being fast tracked and enlarged to get people working from coast to coast.

The port project – mentioned recently by Premier Gary Doer as a priority for Manitoba – would see roads and rail lines near the Winnipeg airport upgraded to help make the city a hub of trade in North America.

The Keewatin railway which connects The Pas to Pukatawagan is scheduled to get a share of $7.9 million set aside for repairs to two First Nations-owned railroads. The other is in Quebec.

Source: Winnipeg Free Press

[mylesmalley]

From the CBC

Defeat PM over 'vindictive, nasty' budget, N.L. premier tells Liberals
Equalization changes will mean loss of $1.5 billion to N.L., Williams says
Last Updated: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 | 6:54 AM NT

CBC News
Premier Danny Williams: 'The indication over the next three years is a pretty crippling effect.' (CBC)
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams is calling on opposition parties to show Prime Minister Stephen Harper the door, following a federal budget he described as callous.

Williams said the fine print in changes to the federal equalization program, contained in the budget that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty delivered in Parliament Tuesday, have left him no choice but to rekindle his notorious battle with the governing Conservatives.

"It's a good indication of the punitive, vindictive, nasty side of this prime minister," Williams said. "The indication over the next three years is a pretty crippling effect."

Until this budget, provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador were given different choices under the constantly changing equalization formula, which exists to ensure a standard level of services are provided in all provinces and territories.

Until now, the program allowed provinces to pick different options each year and take the one that put them in the best financial position. Williams said the new budget removed that flexibility, and means a substantial drop in expected revenue.

"The impact in the province over the next three years is — according to our early calculations — at least a billion and a half dollars," Williams said.

Williams said the latest change uniquely affects Newfoundland and Labrador because of the way its two offshore accords interact with equalization. The first Atlantic Accord, negotiated in 1985, recognized the province as the principal beneficiary of the offshore oil industry. The second accord, completed in 2005 with Nova Scotia, addressed problems, including a clawback of equalization.

Williams believes the changes in Tuesday's budget documents are a direct retaliation for the ABC campaign — standing for "Anything but Conservative" — that Williams, a Progressive Conservative, successfully waged in his province leading up to October's general elections. Voters in Newfoundland shunned all Conservative candidates.

"It's a very clearly orchestrated campaign by the federal government to cause maximum damage to Newfoundland and Labrador," he said.

"There obviously has to be a change of leadership.… We've seen this man betray [a] commitment before," said Williams, who launched the ABC campaign when Harper dropped written campaign promises from the 2006 election to continue to exclude offshore oil revenues from the equalization formula.

Williams said he would like Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to help defeat the budget and perhaps allow a coalition government — involving the New Democratic Party, with support from the Bloc Québécois — to take over.

The change in equalization policy comes just weeks after Newfoundland and Labrador was told that it had become, a full year earlier than expected, a "have" province, in that it no longer qualified for equalization payments at all.

After the general election in October, Williams adopted a much more conciliatory tone with the federal Conservatives. Williams said the budget proves Harper cannot be trusted.

[wild wild west]

This budget is a mess - a throwback to the '70s. Anyone hoping for an ounce of fiscal conservatism from this government (or, for that matter, from any of the federal parties) is bound to be disappointed. The infrastructure spending is welcome but the rest is a mixed bag of tax cuts and unnecessary, pork-barrel spending. I'd almost rather the three stooges had seized power, tabled a budget like this one and then faced the consequences. As it is the Tories, by bending over to table a budget the opposition would allow to pass, has painted itself into a corner where they will be held responsible for both the resulting deficits and the underwhelming results of all the spending. Mr. Ignatieff has played the Prime Minister like a fiddle. All the debt paid down over the past decade will now be slapped back on in the coming years, and all the federal parties between them apparently couldn't care less.

[mr.x]

Here are some facts: half of the deficit is from the stimulus, and the stimulus itself is less than two percent of Canada's GPD.

Who actually thinks that it will really impact the economy?


Not to mention that a lot of the money is attached with conditions that municipalities also pay up, and municipalities simply don't have that money.



And with regards to tax cuts, what good would it exactly do if a family making a combined income of $100,000 is able to save $250? That's barely nothing! The money is much better used if spent on creating jobs!

[harls]

Ignatieff won't support the budget unless amendments are made, no surprise here.

[SteelTown]

haha love the look on Ignatieff

http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/ef/08/2a7594e846f0bec92efe58d34cf4.jpeg
Ignatieff puts Harper on probation

[harls]

^ it looks like someone passed gas... possibly the cameraman.

[amor de cosmos]

Ignatieff won't support the budget unless amendments are made, no surprise here.

the only specific thing i saw was periodic progress reports so that people can see if the budget is having any effect on the economy

here are the results of a more recent poll than that other one:

50 per cent of Canadians approve of budget, poll finds
Updated Wed. Jan. 28 2009 7:48 AM ET
CTV.ca News Staff

Canadians are split on Tuesday's federal budget, with 50 per cent approving of the fiscal blueprint, according to results from an Angus Reid Strategies poll released early Wednesday.

It provided a snapshot of how Canadians feel about the budget, which incorporated tax cuts and infrastructure spending as a means of boosting the economy.

According to the document, 53 per cent of those polled think the government should pass the bill, while 20 per cent felt it should be rejected by Parliament. Another 28 per cent said they weren't sure how they felt about it.

The Conservatives' plan will result in a deficit of $34 billion in 2009-2010, and $85 billion in deficit over the next five years.

In total, 50 per cent of respondents believe the budget will have a "minor positive impact" on Canada.

Another 41 per cent believe the fiscal plan will have a minor positive impact on their province.

But only 26 per cent believe it will have a positive impact on their own household.

"Pretty much what this tells me is Canadians understand the economy is a complicated thing and the stimulus is going to help their country first, and then their province, and then them personally," said Tim Olafson, of Angus Reid Strategies.

"So they're not feeling it necessarily right now but certainly they think it's good for the country."

Here are some other key findings from the poll:

53 per cent of Canadians want the budget to pass
49 per cent say the deficit is a manageable challenge
39 per cent say the deficit is a severe impediment for the future
50 per cent are not confident the budget will promote economic stability


Olafson said the poll results show that most Canadians' feelings about running a federal deficit have softened in recent months, as the reality of the global economic recession has sunk in.

"What this tells me is Canadians don't mind watching the deficit rise but they certainly don't want to see the government fall, pretty much everywhere except in Quebec," Olafson said.

When asked whether they approved or disapproved of the budget, only 35 per cent of Quebecers said they approved - the lowest approval rating in any of the provinces.

Another 42 per cent of Quebecers disapproved of it while 24 per cent were unsure.

Here are the provincial and regional results:

B.C.: 47 per cent approved, 34 per cent disapproved
Alberta: 66 per cent approve, 17 per cent disapprove
Manitoba/Saskatchewan: 41 per cent approve, 34 per cent disapprove
Ontario: 57 per cent approve, 26 per cent disapprove
Atlantic Canada: 57 per cent approve, 32 per cent disapprove


Olafson said most Canadians see the budget as a step in the right direction for Canada's economy, but the poll results suggest few will dramatically increase their spending as a result of the budget.

"A number of Canadians don't really feel a personal sense of attachment to this budget so I think even with tax cuts and the like in this budget Canadians are still going to keep their hands on their wallets, keep them in their pockets for the foreseeable future, at least until there's more certainty for the future," he said.

Polling details
On January 27, 2009 Angus Reid Strategies conducted an online survey among 1,020 randomly selected Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panelists. The margin of error--which measures sampling variability--is +/- 3.0 per cent, 19 times out of 20. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of Canada. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090128/budget_poll_090128/20090128

[Yume-sama]

Politically smart move for the Liberals.

Unless of course they continue to be unable to raise funds, and in the next election fall below the NDP in seats...

[MrOilers]

By the conditional acceptance the Liberals are also distancing themselves from that windbag, Layton, who wants to vote against anything the Conservatives propose because he apparently has a personal hate on for Harper.

More people will accept a centrist Liberal party than a hard-left uber-socialist Liberal party.

[wild wild west]

Looks like the coalition is officially dead. Looks like Layton and Duceppe are raging.

Tories put on probation; coalition declared dead
To Layton's chagrin, Ignatieff says he is prepared to 'swallow hard' and support budget so long as Harper releases regular economic status reports
Article Video Comments (545) BILL CURRY

Globe and Mail Update

January 28, 2009 at 12:49 PM EST

OTTAWA — Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said his party is prepared to “swallow hard” and support the Conservative government, provided they agree to table regular updates outlining how they are living up to their commitments outlined in the federal budget.

The Liberals will move a budget amendment today that will force the government to provide reports updating its progress on implementing the stimulus in March, June and December.

The Liberal Leader said he informed his would-be coalition partner, NDP Leader Jack Layton, in advance of his decision. However Mr. Layton told reporters the budget failed to meet the criteria Mr. Ignatieff himself had laid out in advance: that it protect the vulnerable, protect the jobs of today and prepare for the jobs of tomorrow.

As a result, Mr. Layton declared the coalition dead and said Stephen Harper will remain Prime Minister for a considerable amount of time thanks to the support of the Liberals.


Enlarge Image
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff speaks during a news conference in Ottawa Tuesday. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Videos
00:01:29
Ignatieff puts Harper government on notice

The federal Liberals want status reports on the budget's stimulus spending goals in exchange for their support.

Play Video

00:02:21
Budget hits and misses

After a torrent of leaks there were still some surprises in the 2009 federal budget. Canadian Press reporters Rob Russo and Bruce Cheadle look at the hits and misses in the financial plan

Play Video

00:07:02
The challenge of our time

A laid-off retail manager, a self-employed consultant, a young mother and a small businessman reflect on the recession as Finance Minister Jim Flaherty delivers the budget

Play Video

Related Articles
Recent

Transcript: Ignatieff's budget response
Analysis: Harper spends big, but can he go back?
Highlights: Tax relief to major spending projects
Simpson: A reasonable prescription for pain relief
Economic Assumptions: Betting on a rosy recovery
Editorial: A missed chance to build toward Canada's future
Gender: Stimulus falls short for many women
Carrick: Small tax cuts, and help with the kitchen reno
DeCloet: Faster, higher, stronger
Credit: Budget offers a $70-billion credit kickstart
Infrastructure: Strings attached to infrastructure funds
Toronto: Union Station revitalization will be a marquee project
Business: Ottawa moves to open credit flows
Arts: Canadian culture back on the national agenda
Employment: EI changes fail to garner experts' praise
B.C.: Shipbuilding and transit spending
Sport: Rundown rinks get a refit
Energy: Cash and tax breaks for the carbon agenda
Autos: A $12-billion boost
Science: A $4.3-billion injection
Native issues: Aboriginal spending tops $1.4-billion
“We have a new coalition now on Parliament Hill: It's a coalition between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff,” said the NDP Leader, who dismissed the Liberal amendment as “a fig leaf.”

“Today we have learned that you can't trust Mr. Ignatieff to oppose Mr. Harper. If you oppose Mr. Harper and you want a new government, I urge you to support the NDP.”

Mr. Layton's decision to oppose the amendment means the Liberal proposal will likely require the support of Conservative MPs when it comes to a vote next week.

Mr. Ignatieff said his proposed status reports will provide the Liberals with an opportunity to withdraw its support of the government if the progress is deemed unacceptable.

“We will be watching like hawks,” Mr. Ignatieff told reporters, describing the amendment as effectively putting the Conservative government “on probation.”

“Canadians don't want another election, and they're tired of political games. They have waited too long for action on the economy for us to fail them now because of partisan interest,” he said.

Mr. Ignatieff said his party is concerned the budget fails to improve Employment Insurance, backtracks on equalization pledges made to the provinces two years ago, does little to position Canada for the “green economy” and does not have an adequate plan to return the government's numbers to surplus.

Nonetheless, Mr. Ignatieff said the budget contains enough positive stimulus measures to avoid a federal election. Mr. Ignatieff said the Conservatives only changed course because of the threat of being defeated by an opposition coalition.

“These measures are only in the budget because the opposition parties did their job,” he said. “This is a budget that means the needs of today. We'll see if it meets the needs of tomorrow.”

He told reporters the budget's measures around EI and tax cuts were not easy for his party to accept. “They came right up to the red line of what I could accept,” he said.

Mr. Layton and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe had been urging the Liberals to reject the budget and follow through with plans to topple the Conservatives and form an opposition coalition government.

Today, Mr. Duceppe ridiculed the Liberal proposition, saying the timeline ensures the Conservatives will remain in power until at least the next budget. Mr. Duceppe predicted Mr. Ignatieff will respond to a report in June by saying Canadians want an election during summer like “a hole in the head,” mocking a recent line from the Liberal leader. Mr. Duceppe predicted the Liberals will use the same line again in December to argue there's no appetite for an election over Christmas.

The Bloc Leader said the idea of supporting a coalition government is clearly over.

“The coalition is dead. It's finished. It's over,” said Mr. Duceppe.

Earlier Wednesday, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said the fundamentals of the budget “will not be changed.”

The minister made the comments at a Tim Horton's in his home riding of Whiby, Ont.. He said he would look at any proposals put forward by the Liberals regarding the budget, but stressed that the “fundamentals will not change.”

Mr. Flaherty said it bothers him to run deficits, but it's the right thing to do. “I'm a fiscal conservative,” he said. “It troubles me to run deficits.”

The only longer term spending items included in his budget are tax reductions for lower and middle income earners, the Finance Minister noted.

The Finance Minister, who gave a speech to his local Chamber of Commerce prior to flying back to Ottawa, declined to comment on Liberal reaction to the budget or take any questions from the reporters who followed him out the back door as he left.

In his speech, he said that his economic action plan gives Canadians every reason to feel confident about the future.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the three opposition leaders are scheduled to deliver budget speeches in the House of Commons today. The first budget vote will come tomorrow on a Bloc sub-amendment to the Liberal budget amendment.

Members of Parliament will vote on the Liberal amendment on Monday.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty spoke favourably of the federal budget Wednesday morning, though he said more could have been done to improve Employment Insurance.

Mr. McGuinty said he will not resist the budget's requirement for provinces to match the federal infrastructure funds, even though it could cost his province billions.

“Traditionally that would have been met with resistance and resentment, but these are extraordinary times,” he told reporters. “We're going to have to find a way to come up with that money.”

Mr. Flaherty's financial plan outlined in Tuesday's budget devotes about half the new spending to construction projects that the government hopes will revive the economy by creating new jobs and stoking demand for lumber and other Canadian-made goods.

In his fourth budget in three years, Mr. Flaherty offers consumers a tax break on home renovations this year and pledges to expand employment-insurance benefits for two years.

The Conservative government also said it would make another $70-billion in credit available to businesses that are struggling to get affordable loans as a result of the global financial crisis.

Deficits will return in the fiscal year ending March 31, earlier than Mr. Flaherty had previously projected.

Still, Mr. Flaherty said his measures would create 189,000 jobs and keep the pledge Canada made to its international allies to spend at least 2 per cent of its economy on programs aimed at boosting demand.

“Our government will spend what is necessary to stimulate our economy, and we will invest what is necessary to protect our future prosperity,” he said in the House of Commons.

The Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party have already stated they will vote against the budget, saying they have lost confidence in the Prime Minister's commitment to co-operate with opposition parties in confronting Canada's first recession since the early 1990s.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, Premier Danny Williams said the government should be defeated, saying the budget would drive up his province's deficit.

“I would actually ask the Liberals and Mr. Ignatieff to vote this down,” Mr. Williams told CTV News Tuesday night.

Canada's economy is in the middle of a recession that the Bank of Canada predicts will endure for most of this year — even with considerable government spending.

The Finance Department, citing private forecasts, said the economy would shrink 0.8 per cent in 2009, and then bounce back to growth of 2.4 per cent in 2010.

The Conservative budget could be difficult for the Liberals to vote against. Mr. Flaherty's financial plan hewed closely to the types of initiatives that Liberals said were needed to win their support and what most economists said would comprise an effective stimulus program.

“I'm confident this will work,” said Glen Hodgson, chief economist of the Conference Board of Canada and a former Finance official.

The bulk of Mr. Flaherty's pledges are one-time expenditures, something analysts said is necessary to encourage consumers and business to spend now, when the economy most needs it, and to avoid long-term commitments that would cause deficits to become entrenched.

An example of this is the 15-per-cent tax credit for home renovations exceeding $1,000, which would end on Feb. 1, 2010. The non-refundable credit would provide tax relief of up to $1,350 for Canadians if they spend the maximum $10,000 eligible for the break.

The government's pledge to extend employment-insurance benefits for five weeks would snap back to the current 45 weeks after 2010.

“These are not ideological things,” Mr. Flaherty said at a news conference. “We heard from Canadians this is what we need to do. I'm a pragmatic person. We're doing what we need to do to ensure we respond to protect Canada.”

One exception to temporary measures is a sprinkling of permanent personal income tax relief worth about $3.2-billion annually that benefits the working poor, seniors and lower-income earners the most.

Under the budget, a two-parent family with two children earning $80,000 would get $199 relief while the same family, if it earned only $20,000, would get $539.

The return to red ink follows 11 consecutive years of budget surpluses, and promises by Mr. Harper and Mr. Flaherty as late as October that they would never allow deficits.

Mr. Flaherty, who was inspired to enter politics by the massive deficits Bob Rae accumulated as premier of Ontario in the 1990s, said it would have been irresponsible for him to balance the budget amid a global recession.

“Canadians regret the need to run a deficit in order to invest in our economy,” Mr. Flaherty told MPs in his budget speech Tuesday. “Our government shares that regret. We have chosen this course because it is necessary and because we know it will be temporary.”

The Conservatives offered relatively little for corporate Canada in the short term, aside from a handful of smaller measures such as allowing businesses to deduct 100 per cent of the cost of a computer from their taxes.

With reports from Tara Perkins, Steven Chase, Kevin Carmichael and The Canadian Press

[240glt]

Bottom line is that the libs, even with a big bounce with the turfing of Dion, are not in the position to have an election. Iggy has no choice but to support the cons, and he knows that the coalition was dead almost as soon as it was unveiled.

The cons are on their way out though... nothing that is going on right now will be good for the government, I expect the libs to hammer the cons on their handling of the economy (which is undoubtedly going to get worse).. I expect a lib minority government within 2 years, unless they do something to screw themselves up.

[Spocket]

^That seems like a reasonabe prediction.
The Cons can't do what they want to do and the Liberals are finally starting to put some distance between themselves and the NDP. Now that Dion's gone it's probably only a matter of time.

Anyway, what I can't seem to find anywhere is a breakdown of exactly where this money is going. They mention a project in my area but I have no idea what the cash is actually paying for. The link to the budget doesn't get into the specifics I'm interested in.

Anybody know where to find more detailed information on what the cash is buying for us ? Google isn't returning very good results.

[shreddog]

^That seems like a reasonabe prediction.
The Cons can't do what they want to do and the Liberals are finally starting to put some distance between themselves and the NDP. Now that Dion's gone it's probably only a matter of time.

Anyway, what I can't seem to find anywhere is a breakdown of exactly where this money is going. They mention a project in my area but I have no idea what the cash is actually paying for. The link to the budget doesn't get into the specifics I'm interested in.

Anybody know where to find more detailed information on what the cash is buying for us ? Google isn't returning very good results.
To my knowledge currently there is no absolute list on what infra spending will be done. Rather, there are "to be considered lists" but in the end, it is up to the cities and provinces to access the matching Federal funds. Right now, talk about any one specific project (at a city) is pretty much best guesses.

As for the budget in detail, did you the full index (http://www.budget.gc.ca/2009/plan/topics-sujets-eng.asp)?? <<lots of detail in there

As for the budget itself, perhaps I'm drunk (or it's just the lasting effects), but overall I think the Cons did as best as they could AND Misha and the Libs responded in the most politically mature way possible.

Yes, we'd of all liked to see a quadbillion dollars put into subways and supertalls for every burg in Canada, but the truth was that this budget needed to be something to everyone since it's main goal is to reduce fear. Due to the neo-liberal policies worldwide of the past 30 years, globalisation has gotten us to the point that there was absolutely nothing that our gov't could do to get us out of recession if the rest of the world was still in one.

Personally I think any attempt to have done so would have been the most assinine thing possible (yes, I'm looking at you Taliban Jack!!). Instead, we have to wait until the Yanks, the Chinese and Euros get their economies back upright, at which time our very small one will take off again.

Until that time, the role of our gov't should be to address our fears that we'd all be living in sod huts by summer (yes, I'm still looking at you Jacko!!) and ensure that the right "things" are in place when the rest of the world's economy finally turns. While I personally don't think taxes are too high (and I pay ALOT every year) I don't mind that most of the tax cuts will benefit the lower end of the bracket. If it turns out that the cuts were too much, well they can always be raised.

I guess the only real complaint I have is that I would have liked to seen some important long term "structural" improvements in the areas of education/training and productivity enhancement. That said, what is in the budget certainly is a step in the right direction.

Final rant - whenever I see dipsh!t$ like May, Layton or the "Duce" spewing about how bad the budget is, I have this pathological desire to cram all 320 pages of it down their throat. We should introduce a new law in this country that states that leaders of opposition parties cannot diss any proposed budget UNLESS they can provide their own alternative. I'd love to see what Jacko or Lizzie would have actually done since it is so F'ng easy just to throw stones!

/Mega rant!

[MrOilers]

Any bets as to how long before Harper tells Ignatieff to blow it out his ass and another election is called? Hopefully it will last a year.

Although with this "Liberal-style" budget from the Conservatives and all the flip-flopping by Harper and Ignatieff, I'm not even sure if I know which damn party I should be supporting anymmore, but whatever party I support it sure won't be Layton's.

This "vanilla" budget isn't anything worth calling an election over, though.

[lubicon]

To my knowledge currently there is no absolute list on what infra spending will be done. Rather, there are "to be considered lists" but in the end, it is up to the cities and provinces to access the matching Federal funds. Right now, talk about any one specific project (at a city) is pretty much best guesses.

As for the budget in detail, did you the full index (http://www.budget.gc.ca/2009/plan/topics-sujets-eng.asp)?? <<lots of detail in there

As for the budget itself, perhaps I'm drunk (or it's just the lasting effects), but overall I think the Cons did as best as they could AND Misha and the Libs responded in the most politically mature way possible.

Yes, we'd of all liked to see a quadbillion dollars put into subways and supertalls for every burg in Canada, but the truth was that this budget needed to be something to everyone since it's main goal is to reduce fear. Due to the neo-liberal policies worldwide of the past 30 years, globalisation has gotten us to the point that there was absolutely nothing that our gov't could do to get us out of recession if the rest of the world was still in one.

Personally I think any attempt to have done so would have been the most assinine thing possible (yes, I'm looking at you Taliban Jack!!). Instead, we have to wait until the Yanks, the Chinese and Euros get their economies back upright, at which time our very small one will take off again.

Until that time, the role of our gov't should be to address our fears that we'd all be living in sod huts by summer (yes, I'm still looking at you Jacko!!) and ensure that the right "things" are in place when the rest of the world's economy finally turns. While I personally don't think taxes are too high (and I pay ALOT every year) I don't mind that most of the tax cuts will benefit the lower end of the bracket. If it turns out that the cuts were too much, well they can always be raised.

I guess the only real complaint I have is that I would have liked to seen some important long term "structural" improvements in the areas of education/training and productivity enhancement. That said, what is in the budget certainly is a step in the right direction.

Final rant - whenever I see dipsh!t$ like May, Layton or the "Duce" spewing about how bad the budget is, I have this pathological desire to cram all 320 pages of it down their throat. We should introduce a new law in this country that states that leaders of opposition parties cannot diss any proposed budget UNLESS they can provide their own alternative. I'd love to see what Jacko or Lizzie would have actually done since it is so F'ng easy just to throw stones!

/Mega rant!


I can think of another place I would like to shove it!

[SteelTown]

^^ March for a Spring election.

[240glt]

Final rant - whenever I see dipsh!t$ like May, Layton or the "Duce" spewing about how bad the budget is, I have this pathological desire to cram all 320 pages of it down their throat. We should introduce a new law in this country that states that leaders of opposition parties cannot diss any proposed budget UNLESS they can provide their own alternative. I'd love to see what Jacko or Lizzie would have actually done since it is so F'ng easy just to throw stones!

And you link to the Green Party in your sig because why ? Sheesh.

Regardless, The budget wil have some muted effect on the Canadian economy but the cons got the deficit ball rolling years ago with the GST cuts, and followed up with the personal and corporate tax cuts. They were headed for a deficit even if the economy had stayed on an even keel, to the tune of about 14 bil to my calculations.

Mark my words, two years or less.

[amor de cosmos]

too bad debate in Canada isn't more like Kentucky Fried Movie:
53rulZDkzF0

[cornholio]

Ignatieff played this well.
He doesnt need the NDP or PQ anymore because he is going to get plenty of his own amo for the next election in the coming months.
He has the Cons in a corner and I would be surprised if they last a year, personally I would think the libs will want to oust them out before the economy starts turning. That means likely sometime between the last quarter of this year and the first quarter of next year.

[shreddog]

And you link to the Green Party in your sig because why ? Sheesh.
Guilty as charged, though to my defense I've been involved with the Greens for well over 15 years, long before the LB era. Currently I'm still filling an executive role in the S AB ops of the party and I've crossed paths with her more than once since I have passionately argued that we (the Greens) need to produce a shadow budget rather than blow hot air. Looking forward, I hope to change the party from within since I know I can't do that to the Libs or Cons.

Regardless, The budget wil have some muted effect on the Canadian economy but the cons got the deficit ball rolling years ago with the GST cuts, and followed up with the personal and corporate tax cuts. They were headed for a deficit even if the economy had stayed on an even keel, to the tune of about 14 bil to my calculations.

Mark my words, two years or less.
Obviously you didn't like the GST cuts - and I won't argue that, however, when the Libs next get in, they can always raise the taxes again! Looking back though, those actions were a direct result of Harpo's dogma; cut taxes, get everyone used to paying less taxes, run a small surplus or deficit and cry "oh no!!!!" and cut government spending << which is his ultimate goal.

BTW, "two years or less" for what?? Election, back to surplus, attack by reptilian overlords??

[trueviking]

Although with this "Liberal-style" budget from the Conservatives



my math shows that 10 of the last 10 liberal budgets ended with large surplusses....8 of the last 10 conservative budgets ended in massive deficits.

might be time to reconsider your stereotype.

[Spocket]

^Totally correct. It's at times like this that we need the Liberals in charge. They're simply better at running the economy .

[amor de cosmos]

I wonder what Jack Layton thinks of this, or if Bob Rae is still "Mr Coalition" :P
Former NDP finance minister gives thumbs up to Conservative budget
Updated Wed. Jan. 28 2009 5:06 PM ET
Bill Doskoch, ctvtoronto.ca

A former Ontario NDP finance minister lambasted for running a deficit to fight the recession in 1991 has given a thumbs-up to a Conservative federal deficit budget authored by a disciple of the "Common Sense Revolution."

Floyd Laughren told ctvtoronto.ca on Wednesday that he thinks the budget of federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is "on the right track.

"My only caution would be that they concentrate on infrastructure and not program spending, because it's the program spending that gets you into structural deficits," he said.

The NDP formed a majority government, taking office in October 1990. Laughren, appointed deputy premier and finance minister, delivered his first budget on April 29, 1991.

"We had a choice to make this year -- to fight the deficit or fight the recession. We are proud to be fighting the recession," Laughren told Queen's Park.

That deficit came in at just under $10 billion. However, he said the budget would be balanced by fiscal 1997-98.

To say there was a backlash would be putting it mildly.

"I've still got some scars," he said ruefully.

Some in the media referred to Laughren as "Pink Floyd."

Laughren said that as the recessionary bite on Ontario took a big chomp out of revenues and caused social assistance costs to surge.

"There were a number of reasons for that. It was the beginning of free trade ... and there were a lot of adjustments being made and restructuring in the economy. So it really hit hard in Ontario because of our manufacturing," he said.

"I could remember going to federal-provincial finance ministers' meetings and they all looked at me like I was from some other planet. And here I was running these big deficits and they didn't get it. They just assumed it was a typical left-wing spending spree," Laughren said.

In his own party's caucus, some on the left said they should just tax corporations to balance the books, he said.

But corporate tax revenues had plunged by about two-thirds. "There was nothing to tax there. It would have been really stupid," Laughren said.

Laughren said he remembers Progressive Conservative leader Mike Harris and his caucus yelling at him, "'You don't have a revenue problem. You have a spending problem.' To them, that's what was causing the deficit."

Jim Flaherty wasn't in that caucus. He didn't enter elected Ontario politics until 1995, when Harris came to power on the strength of his "Common Sense Revolution." That manifesto, which Flaherty helped author, promised deep cuts in both spending and taxes. Harris would name Flaherty as finance minister in 2001.

Laughren said the number of entitlements in the system make it tough to arbitrarily slash spending.

However, in a 1994 Toronto Star article, economist Warren Jestin said Ontario had been spending more than $1.20 for every dollar in revenue collected, which he said was the worst record of any province.

As outlined in Tuesday's federal budget, the feds will be spending about $1.15 for every dollar in revenue.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090128/laughren_budget_090128/20090128

[MrOilers]

my math shows that 10 of the last 10 liberal budgets ended with large surplusses....8 of the last 10 conservative budgets ended in massive deficits.

might be time to reconsider your stereotype.

*sigh*

I'm sick of this overgeneralization and oversimplification.

Fact #1: Mulroney's PC government (not the modern-day Conservative party, by the way) inherited a massive deficit and debt accrued by the Liberals in the 1970s.

Fact #2: There was a recession in teh 1980s, and surplus budget was a hell of a challenge for ANY government to make. The PC party was in power at the wrong time for them to make any headway and look good.

Fact #3: When the Liberals took power in the early 1990s they inherited the benefits of both NAFTA and the GST (both implemented by Mulroney's government), which resulted in billions of additional revenue that Mulroney's government never really got to see the benefits from. The Liberals DID balance the books, but due in no small part to the "progressive" acts of Mulroney's government. I think Mulroney takes a lot of heat (like every Prime Minister does), but I think that he really did this country a lot of favors that paid off in the long-term which the Liberals take credit for.

Fact #4: This current recession is due to the economic crash around rest of the world, and less to do with Canada's governing party. (Another Conservative government in the wrong place at the wrong time, in my opinion)

Fact #5: This new deficit budget was made with the intent of satisfying the Liberals as a direct result of this "coalition" nonsense last November. There's no two ways about it. If the Liberals hated it, they would say so and would put up a fight against it.


Another opinion of mine is that surpluses are okay, but BIG surpluses are bad - it shows that the goverment is simply taking more from the people than it needs.

[trueviking]

sigh....like fish in a barrel.

1. more than 3/4 of the federal debt was created under mulroney...it was at about 150b when he came in and 550b when he left....for all intents and purposes, its a tory debt....at least the vast majority of it is.

2. mulroney didnt have a recession for all 8 years of his government...it happened in the last few years... yet he ran huge deficits for all 8 of them...in fact they grew every single year.

3. mulroney had 4 years worth of revenues from the gst and grew the deficit every single year....i can show you, if i need to that it was not until government spending was reduced by the liberals in the 5th year that the deficit was reduced and then eliminated....government revenues did not increase for the liberals in their first few years as you claim...the deficit was reversed by lower programme spending.....done by the liberals....again, if you need the numbers, i will provide them.

4. the first quarterly deficit came early last year...well before the current global downturn....programme spending grew by more than 30 billion and government revenues were cut to the bone in the first 3 years of this government.....yes, this is a global issue,but the conservatives governed as if a downturn would never happen....it was irresponsible....just maintaining liberal level spending would have allowed this budget to be deficit free....they were likely going to run a deficit even without the crash.....they didnt cause the downturn but they certainly caused the deficit.

5.this is a conservative budget...you cant blame the opposition parties for it...i havent heard harper say anything like his hands are tied and what he is doing is forced on him.....if he is doing this for selfish political reasons and not because he believes it is best for the country, then that is even worse.

[MrOilers]

*Sigh*

Once again, you are oversimplifying the story...

It was very tough for the Conservatives to reign in any spending in the 1980s with the Liberal Senate (especially at the beginning), which I believe was the #1 reason forced Mulroney & Co. to continue running deficits. That is a HUGE detail. By the time the recession hit, they were screwed no matter what.

Spending cutbacks by the Liberals in the 1990s was the only truly positive thing they did (in my opinion), and I did vote for them because the PCs failed to do it. The PCs really screwed up after the GST came in and were spanked for it, but I don't give the Liberals any more credit beyond that.

As for the current government spending... hindsight is 20/20, and I don't believe the Martin-less Liberals would have kept a surplus going any better than the Conservatives would, either. However, I LOVE tax cuts. Thus, I recently voted Conservative. And if Harper's government did as you suggested, I would be inclined to give them my utmost support. It would be interesting to see what would've happened if they had won a majority last October. But that didn't happen, so I don't think about it.

Right now I don't like how the Conservatives have been painted into a corner by the other parties to spend like drunken sailors. Maybe some sense will come to the government with Ignatieff as Liberal leader, but I don't count on it. Both he and Harper have flip-flopped on a couple of comments they made in the last few months, and neither the Conservatives nor Liberals look like they have any really good ideas right now. Like I said, I don't know who I would support if an election were called today.

[kitchener-lrt]

Fact #2: There was a recession in teh 1980s, and surplus budget was a hell of a challenge for ANY government to make. The PC party was in power at the wrong time for them to make any headway and look good.
The party was in power at the wrong time? I don't think that it's a coincidence that the Tories are always in power when the economy gets bad.


Fact #4: This current recession is due to the economic crash around rest of the world, and less to do with Canada's governing party. (Another Conservative government in the wrong place at the wrong time, in my opinion)

Sure the recession is due in part to the economic crash around the world. The current fiscal problem in Canada is caused mainly by the Conservative Party of Canada. By cutting the GST by 2%, the government has lost around $30 Billion in revenue (numbers from a CTV article a few days ago). The deficit could be A LOT lower if the government wouldn't have slashed various forms in government revenue, and going around the country, buying votes in different ways. They could've been better prepared for this financial situation.

[MrOilers]

They could've been better prepared for this financial situation.

I am not going to argue that.


I do want to add that ALL parties buy votes - not all are bought by promising money, but they all try to get you to "buy into" their policies to win your support somehow. :tup:

[MrOilers]

I don't think that it's a coincidence that the Tories are always in power when the economy gets bad.


Why can't it be a coincidence? It's not a stretch by any means, especially with the cyclical nature of the nation's economic growth (and the cyclical nature of Liberal-Conservative-Liberal-Conservative governments we've elected). It's pretty obvious that the #1 indicator for Canada's economy is whatever happens south of the border, which has nothing to do with how we vote.

A recession can't simply be influenced by whichever party is in power (although a party CAN influence it - see Alberta's history of Provincial Conservative governments vs. Saskatchewan's histroy of Provincial NDP governments), but there are countless other factors that lead to the booms and busts of a nation's economy. I don't blame nor praise governments when economies go boom or bust.

And I think the Liberals and Conservatives are quite close to each other in terms of economic policies on many of the big issues. I've been happy with everything the Harper Conservatives have done, up until last fall. And I blame bickering in Parliament (from all sides) on that.

[trueviking]

*Sigh*

Once again, you are oversimplifying the story...

It was very tough for the Conservatives to reign in any spending in the 1980s with the Liberal Senate (especially at the beginning), which I believe was the #1 reason forced Mulroney & Co. to continue running deficits. That is a HUGE detail. By the time the recession hit, they were screwed no matter what.

Spending cutbacks by the Liberals in the 1990s was the only truly positive thing they did (in my opinion), and I did vote for them because the PCs failed to do it. The PCs really screwed up after the GST came in and were spanked for it, but I don't give the Liberals any more credit beyond that.

As for the current government spending... hindsight is 20/20, and I don't believe the Martin-less Liberals would have kept a surplus going any better than the Conservatives would, either. However, I LOVE tax cuts. Thus, I recently voted Conservative. And if Harper's government did as you suggested, I would be inclined to give them my utmost support. It would be interesting to see what would've happened if they had won a majority last October. But that didn't happen, so I don't think about it.

Right now I don't like how the Conservatives have been painted into a corner by the other parties to spend like drunken sailors. Maybe some sense will come to the government with Ignatieff as Liberal leader, but I don't count on it. Both he and Harper have flip-flopped on a couple of comments they made in the last few months, and neither the Conservatives nor Liberals look like they have any really good ideas right now. Like I said, I don't know who I would support if an election were called today.



these are incredibly weak arguments....the senate made mulroney spend?....seriously?...thats what you are going with...

there were quite a few opponents to increasing government spending while reducing government revenues when harper did it...it isnt hindsight.....an economic downturn shouldnt have taken them by surprise....they always happen eventually....the fact is they were not prepared for it in any way...and now we are paying for their short sightedness....they would have been close to deficit without the downturn.

if harper really beleived that this is not the right thing to do then he should propose his solution....since he hasnt you cant claim this to be an opposition budget...harper's signature in on the bottom...nobody else's....end of story.

who doesnt like tax cuts...but you have to balance them with responsible governance.....when times were good, tax cuts driven by political optics should have taken a back seat to debt repayment.

[MrOilers]

these are incredibly weak arguments....the senate made mulroney spend?....seriously?...thats what you are going with...

In the Senate, Allan MacEachen wouldn't let Mulroney's government pass anything without filibustering, blocking, and forcing the PCs to re-draft practically everything they proposed. I'm not saying it's wrong, as the Senate was pretty much the only political tool the Liberal opposition had left at the time.

But the fact that the Liberal Senate blocked NAFTA and literally forced an election over it, and Mulroney's battle with the Senate caused all kinds of Constitutional drama over the GST PROVES that mine is not a weak argument.

[amor de cosmos]

The Tory budget survived its first test on Thursday night after a Bloc Québécois motion failed to pass in the House of Commons.

The sub-amendment, considered a confidence vote but not expected to pass, would have toppled the government had it passed. It was defeated by a vote of 214 to 85.

Although the NDP supported the Bloc amendment, the Liberals joined Conservative MPs to vote it down.

The amendment would have forced the Conservative government to eliminate promised tax breaks and abandon plans for a national securities regulator.

It would also have enhanced Employment Insurance, provided direct assistance to manufacturers and forestry, and left untouched the existing pay equity and equalization formulas.

The budget is expected to pass as the Tories have agreed to an amendment proposal by the Liberals calling for regular updates to Parliament on the impact of economic stimulus projects.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/29/budget-vote.html

The NDP is trying to do to Michael Ignatieff what the Conservatives did to Stéphane Dion — convince voters he's weak, ineffectual and not a leader.

New Democrats unleashed the first in a series of radio ads Thursday lambasting the newly minted Liberal leader for propping up Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government.

The radio spots are not quite as damning as the relentless barrage of radio, TV and print ads fired at the hapless Mr. Dion, who was never able to overcome the Tory depiction of him as a spineless nerd.

But the NDP ads drip with withering scorn for Mr. Ignatieff's decision to allow the federal budget to pass, albeit with conditions.

“Some things just don't change,” intones a woman in one ad.

“Another Conservative budget rubber stamped by another Liberal leader. It's official: Michael Ignatieff failed his first big test as Liberal leader. He's thrown his lot in with Stephen Harper.”

The ad portrays NDP Leader Jack Layton as the only political leader who can be trusted to look out for average families.

“Jack Layton's the only leader strong enough to stand up to Harper.”

The two English ads are to be followed by two French radio ads next week and are part of a broader effort by Mr. Layton to portray Mr. Ignatieff as a Harper clone and the NDP as the only real national opposition to the Conservatives.

The party has rebranded its website to reflect that message: newdemocratopposition.ca.

The ads were released just one day after Ignatieff announced that Liberals will allow the budget to pass, provided the government tables three progress reports this year on the document's implementation and effectiveness. The Tories have agreed to do so.

Until Mr. Ignatieff's announcement Thursday, he was nominally a partner with Layton in an agreement to defeat the government and replace it with a Liberal-NDP coalition.

The speed with which the NDP ads hit the airwaves suggests Mr. Layton expected Mr. Ignatieff — always cool to the coalition idea — would not abide by the agreement struck by his predecessor, Mr. Dion.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090129.wPOLndp0129/BNStory/politics/

[kitchener-lrt]

Ignatieff will destroy Jack Layton politically. Jacky, the majority of Canadians want the budget to be passed. The role of the opposition is not to oppose everything the government says.

[Spocket]

^^

The Conservatives may not be great money managers but based on their history in provincial politics, the NDP is infinitely worse. It must be nice in a way for Layton to be secure in the knowledge that he'll never get enough votes to have to prove he has a clue.

[wild wild west]

I'll tell you, the last two Prime Ministers have made Jean Chretien look like a freaking financial genius in comparison. Yikes, I can't believe I said that.

Re: Jack Layton, he needs to go if the NDP is ever to get even 20% of the vote. He's taken the NDP too far to the left to ever have a hope of reaching official opposition status. In spite of Stephane Dion's disastrous campaign, he still only managed 18% of the vote in the last election. Going on about "Big Oil" and talking about "the kitchen table" can only take a guy so far. And on the rare occasion he says something intelligent or witty ("where's your platform? Under your sweater?"), he wrecks it by repeating it over and over with his weasel grin of self-satisfaction.

[trueviking]

In the Senate, Allan MacEachen wouldn't let Mulroney's government pass anything without filibustering, blocking, and forcing the PCs to re-draft practically everything they proposed. I'm not saying it's wrong, as the Senate was pretty much the only political tool the Liberal opposition had left at the time.

But the fact that the Liberal Senate blocked NAFTA and literally forced an election over it, and Mulroney's battle with the Senate caused all kinds of Constitutional drama over the GST PROVES that mine is not a weak argument.

didnt nafta and the gst both pass into legislation?...not to draw this out, but i am not sure how the senate could be the cause budget deficits....i have to admit that i dont remember much about it, but wasnt the mulroney senate spat a short lived battle over the conservatives wanting to borrow money?...i dont really see that you can pin 8 years of multi billion dollar deficits on this issue....they never actually stopped any legislation.

[kitchener-lrt]

I'll tell you, the last two Prime Ministers have made Jean Chretien look like a freaking financial genius in comparison. Yikes, I can't believe I said that.

Re: Jack Layton, he needs to go if the NDP is ever to get even 20% of the vote. He's taken the NDP too far to the left to ever have a hope of reaching official opposition status. In spite of Stephane Dion's disastrous campaign, he still only managed 18% of the vote in the last election. Going on about "Big Oil" and talking about "the kitchen table" can only take a guy so far. And on the rare occasion he says something intelligent or witty ("where's your platform? Under your sweater?"), he wrecks it by repeating it over and over with his weasel grin of self-satisfaction.

We don't often agree on politics, but I'm with you here :tup: .

[e909]

I don't get it.

People in here want the following:
1) Increased infrastructure spending
2) Massive stimulus for the economy
3) Lower taxes (this is probably the least agreed upon aspect)
4) Balanced Budget
:koko:
The Conservatives, and rightly so, proposed a steady as she goes approach to the recession with modest spending, and they were almost turfed out of office for it. So increased spending is what we get.

I think the Conservatives made some attempts to test the water for decreased spending back in 2006/07. They cut funding to some arts programs, heritage programs, etc and there was fierce opposition and media campaigns against such miniscule cuts. The Liberals in the 90s absolutely wrecked havoc on departments, programs, etc with decreased spending. Hell, they even cut funding to Status of Women Canada more than Harper did!

I agree with what the Liberals did in the 90s, but there certainly hasn't been an appetite for decreased spending in Ottawa.

The increased revenue in the 90s had everything to do with the structural changes Mulroney made. In 1987, Mulroney was able to balance the operating budget (costs that don't include debt interest). In the short four years after Mulroney left office, Federal Government revenues were up almost $50billion a year, balancing the budget. This wasn't magic created by Jean Chretien or Paul Martin, it was increased revenues from NAFTA and the GST.

[Spocket]

I don't get it.

People in here want the following:
1) Increased infrastructure spending
2) Massive stimulus for the economy
3) Lower taxes (this is probably the least agreed upon aspect)
4) Balanced Budget
:koko:


Not exactly.
At this point I don't think anybody really wants lower taxes. No thinking person does anyway.

The Liberals know how to cut corners and shave off expenses. Whether they're the reason our debt ballooned in the 80's and 90's is open for debate apparently but we have to give credit where credit is due. When it comes to balancing the books and robbing Peter to pay Paul , the Liberals are king.

I don't know that the Conservatives really did all that bad a job with this budget. Even the Liberals themselves seem to recognize that deficit spending was a pill we'd have to swallow in light of the global economic bust. What I think we're debating here isn't so much how much we're spending but how we're spending it. I would have preferred to have seen a greater share of the budget spent on infrastructure as a two-pronged approach to shoring up the works while creating jobs. That's just me I suppose but it seems to be an unmentioned but universally understood idea.

[e909]

Not exactly.
At this point I don't think anybody really wants lower taxes. No thinking person does anyway.

The Liberals know how to cut corners and shave off expenses. Whether they're the reason our debt ballooned in the 80's and 90's is open for debate apparently but we have to give credit where credit is due. When it comes to balancing the books and robbing Peter to pay Paul , the Liberals are king.

I don't know that the Conservatives really did all that bad a job with this budget. Even the Liberals themselves seem to recognize that deficit spending was a pill we'd have to swallow in light of the global economic bust. What I think we're debating here isn't so much how much we're spending but how we're spending it. I would have preferred to have seen a greater share of the budget spent on infrastructure as a two-pronged approach to shoring up the works while creating jobs. That's just me I suppose but it seems to be an unmentioned but universally understood idea.
I agree infrastructure spending should be in order, and I think $12bn is a decent start but probably not enough.

I wish that the municipalities would have been more fair with their "shovel ready" list. Some of those included Edmonton/Calgary LRT lines that wouldn't have a shovel in the ground for 5-10 years. And the same goes for a lot of the other projects. It's much better to spend this money and get a huge bang for your buck this year to try to kickstart some money flowing around again.

[Canadian Mind]

the amount of spending is fine, infact i was expecting a bit more spending, and less lost on tax cuts.

GST should have never been dropped, else we'd have an extra 12 billion to play with, and income tax should have been maintained.

What I do liek the idea of is tax credits for things like home renovations, but at the same time, alot of people wouldn't have the money to begin with for home renovations, so there should be legislation put forth that whatever make work projects that would qualify a person for tax credits should also be automatically approved for loans by the bank.

My Moms house in BC could easily have 10 000 put into it, but a bank would never approve me for that much of a personal loan, even though I am in the military with a steady monthly paycheque of 3200. And because I am in the military, my payments to the bank are guarunteed. If I don't pay them the military will, then will hang my ass for having to do so.


As for shovel in-the-ground projects, I'm not familiar with projects across canada, but I know in Vancouver Evergreen Skytrain Line is basically ready to go, and in BC they can always kickstart the nextphase of the TCH expansion through Kicking Horse Pass. both those should produce a few hundred million or even a billion dollars worht of work.

And why not take the opportunity to build social housing? Not to the scale of Harlem in New York, but the occasional 5-15 story development in already established neighbourhoods would provide construction workers jobs, and housing for those who can no longer afford it.

[manny_santos]

didnt nafta and the gst both pass into legislation?...not to draw this out, but i am not sure how the senate could be the cause budget deficits....i have to admit that i dont remember much about it, but wasnt the mulroney senate spat a short lived battle over the conservatives wanting to borrow money?...i dont really see that you can pin 8 years of multi billion dollar deficits on this issue....they never actually stopped any legislation.

It's very easy for the Senate to do this. It's a basic part of Canada's political process.

I'd rather keep Jack on as NDP leader. The party will slide into the oblivion it deserves faster.

[SteelTown]

I created a chart to show how much each city will collect from the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund ($4 billion) and Social Housing ($1 billion), which must be spent within 2 years.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a382/hammer396/infrastructure.jpg

The second Infrastructure column is doubled the amount from the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, Premier Dalton McGuinty already said he'll double the funding from the Feds. I'm not sure about other provinces matching the fund.