'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