By-Elections, By the Numbers

Yesterday's four federal by-elections produced mixed results across the board, but there are several prevailing themes to be noted here. The Liberals easily won, as expected, in Toronto Centre and Willowdale giving Bob Rae (more on him later) and Martha Hall-Findlay, respectively, their seats in the House of Commons. In Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River (DMCR), a geographically huge riding in northern Saskatchewan, Conservative Rob Clarke trounced a Dion appointee, Joan Beatty, by just over 1700 votes after Liberal internal polling saw the riding as a 'tie'. They may want to check those numbers again. As for Vancouver-Quadra, a traditional Liberal stronghold in its own right, the Liberal candidate, Joyce Murray, beat Conservative Deborah Meredith by only 151 votes. A win is a win, but when the Liberal candidate won in the last general election by over 12000 votes, this by-election win seems a bit hollow. The gains made by the Conservatives in this affluent, multi-cultural, urban riding show the party's growing strength amongst Canadians who want lower taxes, a cleaner environment, and a strong government in Ottawa.

The raw numbers for headlines are that the Liberals won three seats and the Conservatives won one. If you go inside the numbers, however, several facts present themselves:

1) The Liberals held all four of these seats before last night and emerged only holding three so they did in fact lose a seat in the House.
2) Two of the Liberal wins were by star candidates in stronghold ridings. Anything less than a 40% Liberal share of the vote would be unacceptable. Indeed, both candidates were above 60%.
3) Stephane Dion is still winless with handpicked candidates running in by-elections. As was the case in Outremont last fall, Dion's strategy fell flat with opposition from both inside the Liberal party and, of course, the good voters of DMCR. His judgment ought to be called into question by the party as he has cost the Liberals precious seats in Opposition.
4) Sticking with Stephane, now that Bob Rae is in caucus, Dion will be surrounded by ambitious, if not hawkish, colleagues who want his job. If Dion cannot rally party support and start to make some serious gains in the House or in by-elections to come, he may find himself out of the leadership before the next general election.
5) Finally, briefly, the NDP performed miserably in all four by-elections and, in fact, was locked in tight races with the Green Party in the urban ridings. The party that once was on the fringe of Canadian politics has indeed arrived and will chip votes away from the NDP in future elections. A welcomed sight for those who want to see fewer NDPers in the House. Not bad for a "nuisance" party, as Hamilton Mountain's NDP MP calls them (yes, Chris Charlton actually said that).

Stephane Dion called yesterday a "great day for Liberals". He couldn't be more wrong. Yesterday was a great day for Bob Rae, who can now keep a watchful eye on Dion in the House and plot another leadership run. It was also a great day for Conservatives as they gained a seat, but also put the Liberals on notice in Vancouver-Quadra and I would expect that, given the strong result, Deborah Meredith will be back for another shot at it in the next election because she will probably win. If winning two seats that your party was expected to take and barely squeaking out a victory in another is a "great day", the Liberals have obviously peaked and have nowhere to go but down.

Another sobering note for the Liberals, despite their wins yesterday, is that the Conservative Party is showing consistent strength with the voters and recent controversies have done little to break the government's momentum. Today's Globe and Mail/Strategic Council Poll shows the Conservatives with 38% support and the Liberals at 27%. If an election were held today, the Conservatives would be very close to winning a majority government, something that Canada needs during the current economic uncertainty. Yesterday's by-elections may embolden Stephane Dion to topple the government, but he should think twice, and maybe three times, before making that move. The hollow Liberal victories will not carry over to a general election.

RESP Bill: Governing from the Opposition Benches

Don't feel stupid if you don't know what I'm talking about here. In fact, the way the Liberals, Bloc, and NDP forced the new Registered Education Savings Plan proposal through the House of Commons last week left many people dumbfounded and wondering just what the bill was all about. By attempting to govern from the opposition benches, the Liberals, Bloc, and NDP are circumventing not only the privilege of the Finance Minister to set budgetary policy, but are also going against the Constitution and the will of the people who voted them into Opposition in the first place.

Liberal MP Dan McTeague (Pickering-Scarborough East), he of the gas price crusade, introduced a bill last Thursday afternoon as a Private Members matter. With the support of his Liberal caucus, the Bloc, and NDP, the bill passed as those three parties combined have a numerical advantage over the minority Conservative government. The bill, at its core, is designed to allow Canadians who want to contribute to a RESP to receive an income tax deduction for up to $5,000 for each child based on the contribution level. Don't forget, this is on top of the regular tax shelter that Canadians receive for investing in an RESP. Financially, this plan is costly. Even Liberal estimates are around $900 million but a more realistic figure is probably closer to $1.5 billion because, frankly, what Canadian wouldn't mind taking advantage of keeping some of their money from the government at tax time? The RESP system is already a tax shelter for Canadians, the McTeague bill just creates another opportunity to duck the tax man.

As is usually the case, the wealthy benefit the most from this RESP proposal because they contribute the most to their children's education savings plan as a way to avoid paying taxes. The country's revenue is projected to fall as the economy slows in the next couple of years and McTeague's plan would drive government spending into deficit territory and that is unacceptable. While the Liberals may be famous for 'tax and spend' policies, this 'no tax and spend' plan is fiscally irresponsible and will hurt the country in the long run. Even the Canadian Taxpayers Federation disagrees with the McTeague bill, and they've been the most vocal supporters for lower taxes for years.

Politically, there are two ways to look at this plan. The government spin from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is that this proposal is a "tax cut for the wealthy" and "runs the risk of putting the balanced budget of our government into a Liberal deficit". His assessment is bang-on, but I bring a different look to it. What McTeague did was unconstitutional. He violated the government's right and privilege to set budget and monetary policy. The bill also shows that the Opposition is trying to govern from its side of the House and that is not their job. Opposition MP's are in opposition for a reason: their party was not elected as the government. Their job is to oppose the government, not set its policy. Additionally, for the other Opposition parties to go along with this proposal is simply for political reasons. The NDP cannot say they support giving the rich a tax break with a straight face. Jack Layton and his caucus ought to be embarrassed for capitulating to the whims of Liberals after spending weeks attacking them in the House. Their agenda is simply to bring down the government and if they want an election, so be it. I'm sure they will enjoy losing several of their seats (including Hamilton Mountain) over issues such as this. Similarly for the Bloc, this RESP proposal does nothing to support their policies except to harm the Canadian state.

In essence, what I'm saying here is that the Opposition parties have abandoned their own good judgment and moral authority in attempting to govern from their side of the House on this issue. Canadians don't vote members into Opposition because they want them to govern. The RESP plan is a political ploy and nothing more. Accordingly, the government has said that they will write this bill into a budget amendment, automatically making it a confidence motion. If the Liberals continue to support this bill, they will go against their earlier plan to vote for the budget, a glaring contradiction and damaging to any election chances. The NDP, having already said they will vote against the budget, will support the RESP bill, continuing their contradictory plan of supporting a tax break for the rich. The Liberals attempt to govern from Opposition will ultimately keep them from governing at all under the incompetent Stephane Dion (who, conveniently, wasn't in the House when the vote was taken but was obviously aware of it) and further demonstrate that the only party capable of managing the nation's finances is the Conservative Party.

Rolling Up the Rim to Win...

It's been a big week here at 'A Swing from the Hammer', starting with my outstanding Letter to the Editor on Monday, continuing with the NDP response on Wednesday. Couple that with a busy stretch of school work and you've got a spent Alex. That said, there are only 4 weeks of school left, then exams, then onto June 12th convocation. Bring it on.

In other news, the annual rite of passage, Tim Hortons 'Roll Up the Rim to Win' contest is in full-swing. While I'm still waiting for the cup that wins me a GPS system, I'd just like to point out that as of 10:42 Friday evening, my winning percentage is a robust 60%. That's right: 3 for 5. At this rate, I win more than the Toronto Maple Leafs (not that it's particularly difficult to do that).

Quiet weekend on the politics front as there are no major announcements coming up and no confidence motions that could torpedo the government. A brief reprieve then.

Enjoy the pummeling of snow we're supposed to get this Saturday.

-AB

'The Letter' Fallout

Before I get into the substance of my article, a couple of things to take care of...

1) The genius that was my letter to the editor was all mine, I repeat, all mine.

2) I have received unanimous support across the board, from people of all parties, about the letter's contents. Even a staunch NDP supporter was impressed with the quality of my argument and the points I raised.

With that out of the way, I also want to thank the Hamilton Spectator for placing me 'above the fold' as the lead letter on Monday. Always good to get that exposure.

In today's Spectator, there is a rebuttal from none other than Chris Charlton, MP, Hamilton Mountain (or at least someone from her office). Interesting that there would finally be a comment attributed to her about the budget seeing as she didn't have anything to say last Wednesday when all local MP's (even her NDP colleagues) offered their thoughts. I've posted a link to the letter below for reference.

http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/LettertotheEditor/article/334947

Now, allow me to rebut this sorry rebuttal...

It remains irresponsible of the NDP to have voted against the budget and its contents because there are many provisions, including what I listed in my original letter, that are clearly beneficial to Hamilton. I also maintain that their opposition is unrepresentative of the constituents' views, especially when Ms. Charlton says that her office sent out a pre-budget survey. Hello, my house never received this survey and I would like to hear from people who didn't receive their's either.

Ms. Charlton's letter is loaded with the standard NDP rhetoric and short on true solutions for Hamiltonians. Consider the quote, "Working families want decent-paying jobs, access to education and training...". Well, the budget includes an extension of tax breaks to manufacturers who want to buy new, modern, 'green' equipment in order to maintain their competitive advantage and keep their employers working instead of having to cut jobs. The budget also makes a considerable investment in education and training, rolling out the new Canada Student Grant to replace the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. There is more money for students to receive and the new CSG program makes it easier for students to get that money. The previous CMSF was shown to be ineffective in encouraging more people to study at a post-secondary level and the funding formula was unpredictable at best. Hamilton's NDP MP's, in voting against this as part of the budget, are effectively saying that they do not support making it easier for students who need assistance to get it.

Yet another part of Ms. Charlton's missive, that about "concrete action on the environment" is worth taking a second look. The budget is investing $250 million for the Automotive Innovation Fund that will be used to develop new, 'greener' vehicles with high fuel efficiency. In addition, the budget commits $500 million to public transit infrastructure nationwide. Anyone with half a brain will tell you that putting more money into transit to make it more efficient and user-friendly will get people out of their cars and onto buses, subways, and light-rail. What is more concrete than taking cars off the road and lowering carbon dioxide emissions? To top it off, the NDP voted against the new 'carbon capture' program in Saskatchewan (so much for loyalty to the home province), plus a new federal program to start pricing carbon and create a carbon trading system. Quite simply, there is very concrete action on the environment in this budget, yet the NDP have voted against it.

The argument Ms. Charlton makes about the Guaranteed Income Supplement for Seniors is more NDP rhetoric. Instead of proposing a solution to low-income seniors, the NDP have just voted against raising their GIS exemption. Not to mention, the budget also lowers income tax for the lowest earners in Canada, some of which may be seniors. Rather than putting that money back in seniors' pockets, the NDP are voting against this budget and basically taking money from those who truly need it.

Interestingly, Ms. Charlton actually acknowledged a point of my letter in stating, "while the gas tax extension is welcome, it doesn't begin to address the country's $121-billion infrastructure deficit...". May as well lob a softball down the middle to hammer out of the park. Canada's cities are responsible for managing their own funds. They are the creation of provincial governments and therefore are out of federal jurisdiction. The fact that many of Canada's cities are incapable of balancing their budgets is the result of their own mismanagement. Anyone who pays attention to the plight of Toronto, Hamilton, Calgary, Vancouver, et al knows the extent of their problems and the budget addresses them by providing permanent gas tax money. Ontario cities ought to be particularly insulted by Ms. Charlton's claims considering how the Rae NDP government, in which Ms. Charlton was a civil servant and her husband was an MPP, left them near-bankrupt after 5 years of complete financial mismanagement. Canadian cities can rely on permanent gas tax money and plan for future infrastructure projects, knowing that money will be there. The NDP felt otherwise and voted against the budget.

Finally, nobody can disagree with the benefits of paying down the national debt, not even Ms. Charlton, who doesn't have it in her to admit that the budget fulfills legal obligation to pay down the debt. I indicated this in my original letter but she conveniently ignored it. Heavens the Conservatives are seen to help Canadians, right Ms. Charlton? The budget includes so many provisions that help everyday Canadians from all walks of life. Even long-haul truckers, a group that the NDP frequently court for votes, are now able to write-off up to 80% of their food receipts on the road. That is an increase from the previous 50%. It's the little things such as that which prove just how narrow-minded the NDP's interests really are. Oh, just to remind you, they voted against that proposal as well.

Canadians are overtaxed and deserve better from their government. The 2008 federal budget is smart, well-planned, and addresses the nation's real priorities, not the pet projects of the NDP. If Ms. Charlton and her caucus colleagues are that offended by what the budget does for Canadians and Hamiltonians alike, that is their decision. The voting public ought to be offended as well and will show their feelings at the ballot box when they elect a Conservative majority government.

-AB