Liberals losing ground: "It's really a pre-emptive action against what we expect the Liberals will do in the second half of the campaign and that is to launch a barrage of negative advertising,' said Geoff Norquay, Mr. Harper's former director of communications and one-time senior advisor to former prime minister Brian Mulroney.
'What could be more timely with the income trust scandal just getting nicely under way now? I mean, there is yet another RCMP investigation of this government going on right now,' Mr. Norquay said"
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Friday, December 30, 2005
City 'exaggerated' need to keep records secret
City 'exaggerated' need to keep records secret: "Many of the city's statements are generalizations which it applies to the information in question without distinguishing between those parts of the information which, if disclosed, could reasonably be expected to result in harms and those parts that are innocuous and/or already available or well-known to the public,' he wrote."
Monday, December 19, 2005
Whistleblower joins Tory ticket
Whistleblower joins Tory ticket: "OTTAWA -- Former Groupaction vice president Jean Lambert, one of the original whistleblowers in the sponsorship scandal, will be running for the Conservatives in a bid to become member of parliament for the Eastern Townships riding of Shefford.
Lambert, 49, is the second sponsorship scandal whistleblower to become a candidate for the Tories. Allan Cutler, the civil servant who blew the whistle on questionable practices within the civil service concerning the sponsorship program, is also running for the Conservatives in the riding of Ottawa South.
Lambert said Friday he was proud of the role that he played in bringing the sponsorship scandal to light."
Lambert, 49, is the second sponsorship scandal whistleblower to become a candidate for the Tories. Allan Cutler, the civil servant who blew the whistle on questionable practices within the civil service concerning the sponsorship program, is also running for the Conservatives in the riding of Ottawa South.
Lambert said Friday he was proud of the role that he played in bringing the sponsorship scandal to light."
Voter cyiisim -How do you believe them?
Osprey Media Group Inc. - Brantford Expositor: "While he may vote Conservative, Walton doesn't see much difference in how different parties would distribute federal resources. He thinks voters are weary of the constant stream of promises from political leaders.
I think people are getting a little tired of their making a new promise every day.'"
I think people are getting a little tired of their making a new promise every day.'"
Saturday, December 17, 2005
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Harper by default
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Harper by default: "It was not an inspired performance -- not by any of the four -- and there was certainly no knockout blow delivered.
But, since we can't believe essentially anything Martin promises based on his party's literally scandalous track record; since we can't take Layton's bombastic socialism with much more than a grain of salt; and since Duceppe has merely bystander status outside Quebec -- we'd give the first English debate to Harper, purely on points. "
But, since we can't believe essentially anything Martin promises based on his party's literally scandalous track record; since we can't take Layton's bombastic socialism with much more than a grain of salt; and since Duceppe has merely bystander status outside Quebec -- we'd give the first English debate to Harper, purely on points. "
Friday, December 16, 2005
winnipegsun.com - Manitoba - What's the problem?
winnipegsun.com - Manitoba - What's the problem?: "'When did we lose our freedom in this country?' said Corlett, who says he just wants to get better and return to work. 'Why do they have to control us?'
Corlett needs an MRI so his doctor can make a diagnosis and decide whether he needs surgery or not.
In the meantime, he can't even lift his arm, much less work on airplanes.
'I can't work because they don't have work for a one-armed person,' said Corlett.
Like many patients who will use The Maples clinic, Corlett didn't have to pay out-of-pocket for his MRI. Instead, his insurance company did. Like many Manitobans, Corlett has private disability insurance and it's in his insurance company's best interest to get him an MRI as quickly as possible so he can be treated and return to work.
In fact, the insurance company was planning to fly him to Calgary for an MRI until The Maples announced it would be providing MRIs.
'Why do I have to go to Calgary when we've got one in Winnipeg?' said Corlett.
Precisely.
How can government possibly have a problem with this? Government sends Workers Compensation Board patients to clinics for preferential treatment.
Why can't a private insurance company send one of its clients to a clinic, too?
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a recent Quebec case that government cannot prevent people from buying private insurance and using it to obtain medical services if government is not providing that service in a timely fashion.
Clearly, the Manitoba government is not providing elective MRIs in a timely fashion.
So I'd say The Maples clinic has the blessing of Canada's top court.
Besides, if people like Corlett aren't getting their MRIs in Manitoba, they'll go out-of-province for them and they'll take their "
Corlett needs an MRI so his doctor can make a diagnosis and decide whether he needs surgery or not.
In the meantime, he can't even lift his arm, much less work on airplanes.
'I can't work because they don't have work for a one-armed person,' said Corlett.
Like many patients who will use The Maples clinic, Corlett didn't have to pay out-of-pocket for his MRI. Instead, his insurance company did. Like many Manitobans, Corlett has private disability insurance and it's in his insurance company's best interest to get him an MRI as quickly as possible so he can be treated and return to work.
In fact, the insurance company was planning to fly him to Calgary for an MRI until The Maples announced it would be providing MRIs.
'Why do I have to go to Calgary when we've got one in Winnipeg?' said Corlett.
Precisely.
How can government possibly have a problem with this? Government sends Workers Compensation Board patients to clinics for preferential treatment.
Why can't a private insurance company send one of its clients to a clinic, too?
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a recent Quebec case that government cannot prevent people from buying private insurance and using it to obtain medical services if government is not providing that service in a timely fashion.
Clearly, the Manitoba government is not providing elective MRIs in a timely fashion.
So I'd say The Maples clinic has the blessing of Canada's top court.
Besides, if people like Corlett aren't getting their MRIs in Manitoba, they'll go out-of-province for them and they'll take their "
winnipegsun.com - Election News - Voters don't trust politicians: poll
winnipegsun.com - Election News - Voters don't trust politicians: poll: "OTTAWA -- A whopping 76% of Canadian voters believe politicians are blowing smoke and making lofty election promises they don't intend to keep, according to a Leger Marketing/Sun Media poll.
The poll of 2,013 Canadians conducted from December 9-13 says 17% of respondents believe politicians plan to implement the pledges they make.
The most cynical voters are in Quebec and Ontario, where 78% of respondents said they don't trust the leaders to keep their promises. "
It appears that we Canadians are not stupid ,complacent believers in our political leaders -just cynical. That is not surprising based on our "Political non performance and lack of delivery. PR
The poll of 2,013 Canadians conducted from December 9-13 says 17% of respondents believe politicians plan to implement the pledges they make.
The most cynical voters are in Quebec and Ontario, where 78% of respondents said they don't trust the leaders to keep their promises. "
It appears that we Canadians are not stupid ,complacent believers in our political leaders -just cynical. That is not surprising based on our "Political non performance and lack of delivery. PR
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Green deserves day
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Green deserves day: "It's a mockery of democracy to include the Bloc, which has no relevance to most Canadians, and exclude the Greens, a national party that has piqued the interest of younger voters who already feel alienated by our current political process."
Good point-Just how democratic are we really ? Not allowing a registered national party to speak , one with 6% of the national vote -is neither democratic or nor wise. They have a right to be heard not censored by mediia default. PR
Good point-Just how democratic are we really ? Not allowing a registered national party to speak , one with 6% of the national vote -is neither democratic or nor wise. They have a right to be heard not censored by mediia default. PR
Thursday, December 15, 2005
1885 tax becomes an issue in 2006
1885 tax becomes an issue in 2006: "The Tories, Mr. Harper noted in a statement, have 'long recognized the terrible historical wrong of the Chinese head tax. It is time for Parliament and the Government of Canada to recognize this grave injustice and to apologize for it.'"
He's unbelievable- out PM
Sympatico / MSN - Partner content
Paul Martin -Unbelievable and no real substance? PR
This is what happens when you follow Paul Martin around for even a little while on the campaign trail. You hear no end of grand pronouncements. Sweeping commitments. Stirring appeals. And then you take a short stroll and peek behind the curtain and you discover that Oz the Great and Terrible is barely there. All that's there is a guy putting on airs. I have spent most of a year steering clear of the Prime Minister whenever I decently could, given the unfortunate reality of my employment as an Ottawa political columnist, because I took an early dislike to his huffing and puffing and I did not want to torment him or bore my readers. Last week was a bit of a reunion. I was quickly reminded how easy Paul Martin is to like and how hard he is to believe.
Paul Martin -Unbelievable and no real substance? PR
This is what happens when you follow Paul Martin around for even a little while on the campaign trail. You hear no end of grand pronouncements. Sweeping commitments. Stirring appeals. And then you take a short stroll and peek behind the curtain and you discover that Oz the Great and Terrible is barely there. All that's there is a guy putting on airs. I have spent most of a year steering clear of the Prime Minister whenever I decently could, given the unfortunate reality of my employment as an Ottawa political columnist, because I took an early dislike to his huffing and puffing and I did not want to torment him or bore my readers. Last week was a bit of a reunion. I was quickly reminded how easy Paul Martin is to like and how hard he is to believe.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
A viewpoint from the right on liberal gun contol
Martin's promise to confiscate all handguns opens up intriguing possibilities
The trouble with making policy predictions in Canada is that no matter how obvious the prediction is, a loud liberal chorus will shout it down as ridiculous.
And when the prediction comes true, all earlier denials are simply forgotten.
Last week, for example, all the much-derided predictions of gun owners over the past ten years came true.
We knew they would and they did, when Paul Martin promised to solve Toronto's "national" gun-crime crisis by confiscating virtually all half-million registered legal handguns across the country.
So it's true. The reason for gun registration from the start was future confiscation.
Repeated previous denials by the likes of then-Minister of Gunnery Anne McLellan are now officially expunged.
The only fig leaf this leaves to cover the Liberals' shame (if they are still capable of feeling such a thing) is to insist that they will allow provinces to opt in or out of the confiscation as they wish.
Now this is an interesting idea.
When challenged in court by the provinces in 1996, Ottawa justified the registry by insisting it falls in the category of criminal legislation, which is federal.
If not, it would be a regulation of civil property -- a provincial jurisdiction.
That's what the provinces argued it was. But the judges (federally appointed) sided with Ottawa, as they usually do.
So to be absolutely clear, back in 1996 it was firmly established that regulating guns is a federal criminal law jurisdiction.
Are the Liberals now saying provinces may opt in and out of federal criminal laws? Apparently they are.
I have two questions.
What provision in our Constitution allows Ottawa to amend the Constitution at will by reassigning one of its "exclusive" powers to the provinces?
And does it work the other way around? Could a province, say, decide not to enforce the gun registry sections of the Criminal Code? Or is this power of unilateral, arbitrary amendment reserved to the federal government?
Martin's election promise emphasizes once again that Canadian gun control is entirely about politics, not law and order. This is a matter of record, not opinion.
The Liberal government was warned in 1993 by John Tait, chief Justice bureaucrat at the time, that a universal gun registry would be expensive, ineffective, and a source of political outrage.
That outcry from angry white males was exactly what the Liberals wanted, of course, and now they're doing it again. They probably have no intention of following through after the votes have been counted.
If I owned a pistol, I'd ignore this ban whether it passes or not.
As Alberta MLA Ted Morton has pointed out, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled against categorical government bans on anything -- as we saw with tobacco advertising, child pornography and private health care.
In fact this election promise opens up all kinds of potential litigation against the gun registry in general -- starting with Ottawa's novel idea that the criminal law can be different in one province than another.
The Klein government would be doing Harper and the national Conservative party a favor (for a nice change) if it announced immediately that it will challenge this law in court if it is ever passed in Parliament.
Link Byfield is chairman of the Edmonton-based Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy, and an Alberta senator-elect.
Interesting points made -lets see first we confiscate all the registered guns from the law abiding - give total freedom to the non-registered criminal elements -and then hire only politically correct "our special law enforcers " to ensure our "Liberally determined political peace - hmmmm - sounds like Orwell's 1984 to me . PR
The trouble with making policy predictions in Canada is that no matter how obvious the prediction is, a loud liberal chorus will shout it down as ridiculous.
And when the prediction comes true, all earlier denials are simply forgotten.
Last week, for example, all the much-derided predictions of gun owners over the past ten years came true.
We knew they would and they did, when Paul Martin promised to solve Toronto's "national" gun-crime crisis by confiscating virtually all half-million registered legal handguns across the country.
So it's true. The reason for gun registration from the start was future confiscation.
Repeated previous denials by the likes of then-Minister of Gunnery Anne McLellan are now officially expunged.
The only fig leaf this leaves to cover the Liberals' shame (if they are still capable of feeling such a thing) is to insist that they will allow provinces to opt in or out of the confiscation as they wish.
Now this is an interesting idea.
When challenged in court by the provinces in 1996, Ottawa justified the registry by insisting it falls in the category of criminal legislation, which is federal.
If not, it would be a regulation of civil property -- a provincial jurisdiction.
That's what the provinces argued it was. But the judges (federally appointed) sided with Ottawa, as they usually do.
So to be absolutely clear, back in 1996 it was firmly established that regulating guns is a federal criminal law jurisdiction.
Are the Liberals now saying provinces may opt in and out of federal criminal laws? Apparently they are.
I have two questions.
What provision in our Constitution allows Ottawa to amend the Constitution at will by reassigning one of its "exclusive" powers to the provinces?
And does it work the other way around? Could a province, say, decide not to enforce the gun registry sections of the Criminal Code? Or is this power of unilateral, arbitrary amendment reserved to the federal government?
Martin's election promise emphasizes once again that Canadian gun control is entirely about politics, not law and order. This is a matter of record, not opinion.
The Liberal government was warned in 1993 by John Tait, chief Justice bureaucrat at the time, that a universal gun registry would be expensive, ineffective, and a source of political outrage.
That outcry from angry white males was exactly what the Liberals wanted, of course, and now they're doing it again. They probably have no intention of following through after the votes have been counted.
If I owned a pistol, I'd ignore this ban whether it passes or not.
As Alberta MLA Ted Morton has pointed out, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled against categorical government bans on anything -- as we saw with tobacco advertising, child pornography and private health care.
In fact this election promise opens up all kinds of potential litigation against the gun registry in general -- starting with Ottawa's novel idea that the criminal law can be different in one province than another.
The Klein government would be doing Harper and the national Conservative party a favor (for a nice change) if it announced immediately that it will challenge this law in court if it is ever passed in Parliament.
Link Byfield is chairman of the Edmonton-based Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy, and an Alberta senator-elect.
Interesting points made -lets see first we confiscate all the registered guns from the law abiding - give total freedom to the non-registered criminal elements -and then hire only politically correct "our special law enforcers " to ensure our "Liberally determined political peace - hmmmm - sounds like Orwell's 1984 to me . PR
winnipegsun.com - Election News - Beer, popcorn is for Liberals
winnipegsun.com - Election News - Beer, popcorn is for Liberals: "The beer and popcorn comments didn't surprise me, though.
That's what the group of Liberals in Ottawa represent.
They think they know how to spend your money better than you do. Which is why Social Development Minister Ken Dryden said earlier this month that stay-at-home parenting and home-based child care 'is not child care.'
Only government-sanctioned child-care centres offer real child care, according to Dryden. And if you want child-care support from the government, you have to choose child-care centres, the Liberals insist.
They're not about to hand you a cheque for $1,200 so you can blow it on beer and popcorn. Or coats and cars. "
Do you not get tired of having the self interest groups or hypocrites in Ottawa spending your beer and popcorn money ( high taxes) for their favourite boondoogle projects. It is outrageous to think that parents can not manage their lives without a champaign childcare monopoly run by the special childcare think police. The arrogance is just overwhelming. PR
That's what the group of Liberals in Ottawa represent.
They think they know how to spend your money better than you do. Which is why Social Development Minister Ken Dryden said earlier this month that stay-at-home parenting and home-based child care 'is not child care.'
Only government-sanctioned child-care centres offer real child care, according to Dryden. And if you want child-care support from the government, you have to choose child-care centres, the Liberals insist.
They're not about to hand you a cheque for $1,200 so you can blow it on beer and popcorn. Or coats and cars. "
Do you not get tired of having the self interest groups or hypocrites in Ottawa spending your beer and popcorn money ( high taxes) for their favourite boondoogle projects. It is outrageous to think that parents can not manage their lives without a champaign childcare monopoly run by the special childcare think police. The arrogance is just overwhelming. PR
Monday, December 12, 2005
winnipegsun.com - Winnipeg News - Seeking only justice
winnipegsun.com - Winnipeg News - Seeking only justice: "'Canada is great at creating victims. We have more victims than we do criminals.'
'The federal government is turning Canadians into victims one family at a time.' "
Interesting story about a new class action that is trying to get justice and accountabilty from the Federal government. Those that believe they have been wronged should join the "class" - It is great that there are people in Canada that believe the courts can make a difference.Use them if you have the courage of conviction, the time and the money. PR
'The federal government is turning Canadians into victims one family at a time.' "
Interesting story about a new class action that is trying to get justice and accountabilty from the Federal government. Those that believe they have been wronged should join the "class" - It is great that there are people in Canada that believe the courts can make a difference.Use them if you have the courage of conviction, the time and the money. PR
winnipegsun.com - Canada News - Canada high on corruption barometer
winnipegsun.com - Canada News - Canada high on corruption barometer: "OTTAWA -- An international group that tracks global graft says Canadians believe political parties are the most corrupt institution in the country. ( Another dubious first for Canada-PR)
The dubious distinction was awarded to Canada by Transparency International. The Berlin-based group made the determination in its latest global corruption barometer.
Canada's standing was determined based on a public opinion poll taken in the months after Auditor General Sheila Fraser accused the Liberal government run by Jean Chretien last year of 'breaking every rule in the book' with the sponsorship scandal.
The survey was taken before the Gomery inquiry heard sensational allegations of Liberal party operatives stuffing their pockets with wads of cash while others were accused of pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars for little or no work. "
The dubious distinction was awarded to Canada by Transparency International. The Berlin-based group made the determination in its latest global corruption barometer.
Canada's standing was determined based on a public opinion poll taken in the months after Auditor General Sheila Fraser accused the Liberal government run by Jean Chretien last year of 'breaking every rule in the book' with the sponsorship scandal.
The survey was taken before the Gomery inquiry heard sensational allegations of Liberal party operatives stuffing their pockets with wads of cash while others were accused of pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars for little or no work. "
Liberals red-faced over campaign claim "Liberal popcorn and beer-eh"
Liberals red-faced over campaign claim: "The federal Liberals scrambled Sunday to control the damage from their first serious gaffe of the election campaign after a top aide to Paul Martin suggested Canadian parents could blow any extra child-care money they get from Ottawa on beer and popcorn. "
" With such a low opinion of parents or taxpayers-there is just nothing to do but let Father Martin and the liberal family to decide how to use and spend your money. S.O.S -QJ
" With such a low opinion of parents or taxpayers-there is just nothing to do but let Father Martin and the liberal family to decide how to use and spend your money. S.O.S -QJ
Saturday, December 10, 2005
RED HERRING | Clean Energy Tops $42B
RED HERRING | Clean Energy Tops $42B: "For clean energy IPOs and secondary offerings, New Energy estimates that current annualized public market fundraisings have reached $4.2 billion.
Wind energy leads the way in clean energy IPOs and secondary offerings at $1.5 billion from 2001 to 2005, followed by solar with $1.4 billion. Fuel cells were $496 million, while biofuels reached $254 million.
New Energy believes the volume of clean energy investment is large, growing, and diversified by asset class, geography, and technology. However, the firm cautions that the investment volume is far from the volume and profile needed to match the growth in global energy use."
Wind energy leads the way in clean energy IPOs and secondary offerings at $1.5 billion from 2001 to 2005, followed by solar with $1.4 billion. Fuel cells were $496 million, while biofuels reached $254 million.
New Energy believes the volume of clean energy investment is large, growing, and diversified by asset class, geography, and technology. However, the firm cautions that the investment volume is far from the volume and profile needed to match the growth in global energy use."
Friday, December 09, 2005
Governments kill people too
Sympatico / MSN : News : CTV.ca: "Martin proposes sweeping ban on handguns
CTV.ca News Staff
Liberal Leader Paul Martin is proposing a sweeping ban on handguns to combat growing gun-related violence in Canada's cities.
'Handguns kill people -- that's why they exist, and they're taking too many Canadian lives,' said Martin during his 'safer communities announcement' at a school near Toronto's violence-plagued Jane and Finch area this morning."
Interesting that we have learned nothing from the gun registry - This is a good idea but how do you execute it? PR
CTV.ca News Staff
Liberal Leader Paul Martin is proposing a sweeping ban on handguns to combat growing gun-related violence in Canada's cities.
'Handguns kill people -- that's why they exist, and they're taking too many Canadian lives,' said Martin during his 'safer communities announcement' at a school near Toronto's violence-plagued Jane and Finch area this morning."
Interesting that we have learned nothing from the gun registry - This is a good idea but how do you execute it? PR
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
A liitle political humour from my favourite teachers
It is election time! No politician is immune.
Where is my donkey? Gomery!
A young man named Paul bought a donkey from an old farmer for $100.00. The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day. When the farmer drove up the next day, he said, "Sorry son, but I have some bad news...the donkey ison my truck, but he's dead."Paul replied, "Well then, just give me my money back."The farmer said, "I Can't do that. I went and spent it already."Paul said, "OK then, just unload the donkey anyway".The farmer asked, "What are ya gonna do with him?"Paul said, "I'm going to raffle him off."To which the farmer exclaimed, "You can't raffle off a dead donkey!"But Paul, with a big smile on his face, said, "Sure I can. Watch me. I justwon't tell anybody that he's dead."A month later the farmer met up with Paul and asked, "What happened with that dead donkey?"Paul said, "I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars a piece and made a profit of $698.00."Totally amazed, the farmer asked, "Didn't anyone complain that you had stolen their money because you lied about the donkey being dead?"And Paul replied, "The only guy who found out about the donkey being deadwas the raffle winner, when he came to claim his prize. So I gave him his$2 back plus $200 extra, which is double the going value of a donkey, so he thought I was a great guy."
Paul grew up and eventually became the Prime Minister of Canada, and no matter how many times he lied or how much money he stole from Canadian voters, as long as he gave them back some of the stolen money, most of them thought he was a great guy . ( This seems to be particularly true in Ontario.)
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
FCPP Publications :: Empowering Healthcare Consumers
FCPP Publications :: Empowering Healthcare Consumers: "An old friend of the Frontier Centre flew into Winnipeg in the middle of November and left behind more than the winter�s first blizzard. Johan Hjertqvist�s seminar here laid out the basics of what his Belgium-based organization calls the EuroHealth Consumer Index. An ambitious attempt to benchmark the relative sensitivity of countries to healthcare consumers� need for information, it may well represent the wave of the future.
The project�s relevance in Canada can be summed up with one person�s name: Jacques Chaoulli. The Qu�bec doctor had sued his provincial government on behalf of a patient who faced long waiting times for orthopedic surgery. In June, Qu�bec�s Supreme Court ruled that a longstanding ban on private health insurance violated the patient�s rights. Although the decision was later stayed for a year, to allow the provincial and federal governments time to respond, it threw down a gauntlet to our Medicare system. Canadians are tired of being pushed around.
Hjertqvist cited the case as one of several elements in the growing demand for consumer empowerment in healthcare, with escalating costs and unhappiness with waiting lists high on the list. As affluent boomers near the age at which they will max out our healthcare resources, they are increasingly intolerant of the system�s demand that they suffer in silence. If Dr. Mark Godley is willing to sell a private MRI scan at the Maples Surgical Clinic for $695, what exactly gives Health Minister Tim Sale the gall to tell people they can�t spend their own money, or even buy insurance coverage, to get it? Better they should wait months and have taxpayers provide it for $300?
After providing the intellectual ammunition for the 1990s revolution in healthcare delivery in Stockholm�splitting the purchaser from the prov"
The project�s relevance in Canada can be summed up with one person�s name: Jacques Chaoulli. The Qu�bec doctor had sued his provincial government on behalf of a patient who faced long waiting times for orthopedic surgery. In June, Qu�bec�s Supreme Court ruled that a longstanding ban on private health insurance violated the patient�s rights. Although the decision was later stayed for a year, to allow the provincial and federal governments time to respond, it threw down a gauntlet to our Medicare system. Canadians are tired of being pushed around.
Hjertqvist cited the case as one of several elements in the growing demand for consumer empowerment in healthcare, with escalating costs and unhappiness with waiting lists high on the list. As affluent boomers near the age at which they will max out our healthcare resources, they are increasingly intolerant of the system�s demand that they suffer in silence. If Dr. Mark Godley is willing to sell a private MRI scan at the Maples Surgical Clinic for $695, what exactly gives Health Minister Tim Sale the gall to tell people they can�t spend their own money, or even buy insurance coverage, to get it? Better they should wait months and have taxpayers provide it for $300?
After providing the intellectual ammunition for the 1990s revolution in healthcare delivery in Stockholm�splitting the purchaser from the prov"
Conservative plan - A child-care plan for all Canadian parents
Winnipegsun.com - Editorial - A child-care plan for all Canadian parents
"Parents can spend that money however they wish. You can choose the child-care option that best suits your family's needs.' The new allowance would come on top of current child benefits, including the income tax deduction for child-care expenses.
That strikes us as a far better option than the Liberals' insistence on helping fund government-approved day care centres, in that it also recognizes the value of stay-at-home parents -- parents who were left out in the Liberals' five-year $5-billion plan to subsidize day care.
Harper said his party doesn't agree with the concept of government forcing only one child-care option on parents.
'The only people who should be making these choices are parents, not politicians, not the government. "
Fantatastic -imagine giving parents the needed access to their own money to take care of their kids -rather then another liberal government monopoly in the make. This is a great choice - good thinking -revolutionary indeed by the conservatives PR That is a real empowerment and choice idea for the better.
"Parents can spend that money however they wish. You can choose the child-care option that best suits your family's needs.' The new allowance would come on top of current child benefits, including the income tax deduction for child-care expenses.
That strikes us as a far better option than the Liberals' insistence on helping fund government-approved day care centres, in that it also recognizes the value of stay-at-home parents -- parents who were left out in the Liberals' five-year $5-billion plan to subsidize day care.
Harper said his party doesn't agree with the concept of government forcing only one child-care option on parents.
'The only people who should be making these choices are parents, not politicians, not the government. "
Fantatastic -imagine giving parents the needed access to their own money to take care of their kids -rather then another liberal government monopoly in the make. This is a great choice - good thinking -revolutionary indeed by the conservatives PR That is a real empowerment and choice idea for the better.
Health fraud's new frontiers
Health fraud's new frontiers: "Health fraud's new frontiers
More on fixing the system -first step let's find out where it is bleeding-PR As usual -officials do not see a problem -speak out
Although cases of defrauding the health care system exist -- including payment claims on prescriptions that were never filled and the staging of fake auto accidents for insurance claims -- regulatory bodies that oversee health professions don't see a widespread problem.
From doctors who bill for non-existent appointments to dentists who perform major restorative work on healthy teeth and organized rings that recruit every sort of health professional, economic crime saps billions of dollars a year, by some accounts, from the over-burdened health system.
It is a little-discussed phenomenon, yet one physician was handed an 18-month jail term for bilking medicare of almost $1-million. A chiropodist purloined $900,000 from the country's biggest hospital, garnering virtually no media attention. Even the Mafia and Russian mob have their hands in the health business, police and insurance investigators say.
Ordinary Canadians ultimately pay the price as dollars are drained from the public system and private insurers pass on the extra cost through higher premiums or service cuts.
More on fixing the system -first step let's find out where it is bleeding-PR As usual -officials do not see a problem -speak out
Although cases of defrauding the health care system exist -- including payment claims on prescriptions that were never filled and the staging of fake auto accidents for insurance claims -- regulatory bodies that oversee health professions don't see a widespread problem.
From doctors who bill for non-existent appointments to dentists who perform major restorative work on healthy teeth and organized rings that recruit every sort of health professional, economic crime saps billions of dollars a year, by some accounts, from the over-burdened health system.
It is a little-discussed phenomenon, yet one physician was handed an 18-month jail term for bilking medicare of almost $1-million. A chiropodist purloined $900,000 from the country's biggest hospital, garnering virtually no media attention. Even the Mafia and Russian mob have their hands in the health business, police and insurance investigators say.
Ordinary Canadians ultimately pay the price as dollars are drained from the public system and private insurers pass on the extra cost through higher premiums or service cuts.
Monday, December 05, 2005
Harper mulls income-splitting among tax cuts as campaign enters Week 2
Well we can certainly buy into the concept of bloated government at 40.5% of the GDP- that is too high and costs too much of our money- PR Anything to reduce our tax burden is the right direction
Harper mulls income-splitting among tax cuts as campaign enters Week 2: "Harper, a trained economist, is itching to fix a bloated system he says is way out of whack.
'There's been overwhelming evidence . . . that Canadians were being massively overtaxed, resulting in huge unnecessary surpluses that were only having the effect of causing the government to be badly managed.'
'That's not the purpose of government - to turn a huge profit.'
'When government is rolling in money, it tends to get very inefficient, full of scandals, full of mismanagement.' "
Sunday, December 04, 2005
FCPP Publications :: Big Ideas Should Shape the Campaign
WE COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THIS POSITION -PR
Big ideas should shape the campaign -fundamental reforms to reduce the size of governement is needed
In Brief:
The federal election provides an opportunity to consider fundamental reforms to government.
Ensuring Canada's competitiveness means looking at smarter tax and spending policies.
Tying public sector expansion to growth and inflation would free up billions of dollars for tax cuts.
Complex problems need structural repair, not more money.
Fundamental reforms to reduce the size of government is needed
"Every mile is two in winter," said a long-dead British poet. His words will resonate with campaign troops dragged out in the depths of January for a new federal election. But cold air also sharpens the mind. Let's hope that it will turn voters away from nasty rhetoric and towards some fundamental thoughts on policy reform needed in Ottawa.
Canada moves into the election in surprisingly strong fiscal shape, but it would be naïve to ignore some powerful forces that loom on the policy horizon. These forces are disrupting major portions of the Canadian economy and will require some heavy lifting in response.
Compared to the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush government or the paralyzed German coalition, Canada shines like a star, the only G7 country with a fiscal surplus and declining debt. But, domestically, things look much murkier. During the 17 months of minority government, when not engrossed in the Gomery inquiry, our politicians have lurched around with hasty spending programs. Only on the eve of an election did we see a patchwork of tax reductions, heavily weighted, of course, to the distant future in 2010 -- an eternity in politics.
Consider that the Chinese will be exporting cars to Canada soon at $7,000 a pop, one example of the huge pressure they will place on our entire manufacturing sector. Brain work like legal and accounting services is trickling over to India, which does it overnight for a tenth of the local cost. Meanwhile, Canadian taxes, which discourage investment and retard productivity, generally top the range compared to competing jurisdictions.
World-flattening forces that are speeding up international trade are placing unsustainable pressure on Canada's wealth-creating private sector. At some point, the private sector will no longer be able to foot the bill for the increasingly obsolete policy models that riddle the public sector. How long, for example, can our politicians pour billions into the black hole of unreformed health care, a low-performing monopoly that resists measurement and simple accountability, with little or nothing to show for it? We must break away from the simplistic tendency to throw money at complex problems and avoid structural reforms.
Consider what our competitive position would be had federal spending held constant in line with population growth plus inflation. We would have had $17.1 billion available now for federal tax cuts, enough either to cut corporate taxes by 50 per cent, personal income taxes by 20 per cent, or chop the GST to four per cent. Instead, we spray piles of cash at the usual hodgepodge of programs, particularly health care, which suffer from flawed design more than a shortage of resources.
Or consider the research that estimates the optimal size of government—the size where economic growth is maximized—is 30 per cent of the economy. The size of government now is 40.5 per cent. To put in perspective how difficult it will be to get that number down, consider that the $17 billion mentioned above tax would reduce the government size by only one per cent to 39.5 per cent. Not so much, but a critical move in the right direction as the Chinas and Indias of the world gear up to eat our lunch. Reducing the size of government relative to the economy will not only stimulate much higher rates of economic growth, it will ultimately deliver more revenue to our treasury.
Let's consider where the forces of globalization will force the policy revamp to go. The public sector will have to retreat from the in-house production of commercial services and buy them instead from competing suppliers. The efficiencies will be substantial. We will also see a much needed "sorting out" of the roles of different levels of government. The feds should abandon areas where they have minimal competence and no jurisdiction in our constitution. This means getting out of daycare, infrastructure programs and various social transfers, plus egregiously counter-productive regional subsidy programs, including equalization.
These delay and retard policy innovation, while preserving an oversized, low-performance public sector that delivers so little while keeping spending and taxes counterproductively high. Ontario and Alberta have both twigged to the fact that the "haves" simply pay "have-nots" to stay poor. In the brave new world of China and India, this simply will no longer be on.
Finally, while these changes will be fought tooth and nail by the many interest groups that drive our public policy, somehow we will have to implement two basic reforms. First, in light of the vote-buying scandal, a fundamental redesign of government to install firewalls between politicians and the administration of government programs, like the system functioning superbly in New Zealand. Second, we need an economic constitution which prevents the type of spending frenzy recently witnessed in Ottawa.
Don't hold your breath this election. But the train of better policy is coming, folks. Our political parties had better to get in front of it before it runs them over.
Big ideas should shape the campaign -fundamental reforms to reduce the size of governement is needed
In Brief:
The federal election provides an opportunity to consider fundamental reforms to government.
Ensuring Canada's competitiveness means looking at smarter tax and spending policies.
Tying public sector expansion to growth and inflation would free up billions of dollars for tax cuts.
Complex problems need structural repair, not more money.
Fundamental reforms to reduce the size of government is needed
"Every mile is two in winter," said a long-dead British poet. His words will resonate with campaign troops dragged out in the depths of January for a new federal election. But cold air also sharpens the mind. Let's hope that it will turn voters away from nasty rhetoric and towards some fundamental thoughts on policy reform needed in Ottawa.
Canada moves into the election in surprisingly strong fiscal shape, but it would be naïve to ignore some powerful forces that loom on the policy horizon. These forces are disrupting major portions of the Canadian economy and will require some heavy lifting in response.
Compared to the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush government or the paralyzed German coalition, Canada shines like a star, the only G7 country with a fiscal surplus and declining debt. But, domestically, things look much murkier. During the 17 months of minority government, when not engrossed in the Gomery inquiry, our politicians have lurched around with hasty spending programs. Only on the eve of an election did we see a patchwork of tax reductions, heavily weighted, of course, to the distant future in 2010 -- an eternity in politics.
Consider that the Chinese will be exporting cars to Canada soon at $7,000 a pop, one example of the huge pressure they will place on our entire manufacturing sector. Brain work like legal and accounting services is trickling over to India, which does it overnight for a tenth of the local cost. Meanwhile, Canadian taxes, which discourage investment and retard productivity, generally top the range compared to competing jurisdictions.
World-flattening forces that are speeding up international trade are placing unsustainable pressure on Canada's wealth-creating private sector. At some point, the private sector will no longer be able to foot the bill for the increasingly obsolete policy models that riddle the public sector. How long, for example, can our politicians pour billions into the black hole of unreformed health care, a low-performing monopoly that resists measurement and simple accountability, with little or nothing to show for it? We must break away from the simplistic tendency to throw money at complex problems and avoid structural reforms.
Consider what our competitive position would be had federal spending held constant in line with population growth plus inflation. We would have had $17.1 billion available now for federal tax cuts, enough either to cut corporate taxes by 50 per cent, personal income taxes by 20 per cent, or chop the GST to four per cent. Instead, we spray piles of cash at the usual hodgepodge of programs, particularly health care, which suffer from flawed design more than a shortage of resources.
Or consider the research that estimates the optimal size of government—the size where economic growth is maximized—is 30 per cent of the economy. The size of government now is 40.5 per cent. To put in perspective how difficult it will be to get that number down, consider that the $17 billion mentioned above tax would reduce the government size by only one per cent to 39.5 per cent. Not so much, but a critical move in the right direction as the Chinas and Indias of the world gear up to eat our lunch. Reducing the size of government relative to the economy will not only stimulate much higher rates of economic growth, it will ultimately deliver more revenue to our treasury.
Let's consider where the forces of globalization will force the policy revamp to go. The public sector will have to retreat from the in-house production of commercial services and buy them instead from competing suppliers. The efficiencies will be substantial. We will also see a much needed "sorting out" of the roles of different levels of government. The feds should abandon areas where they have minimal competence and no jurisdiction in our constitution. This means getting out of daycare, infrastructure programs and various social transfers, plus egregiously counter-productive regional subsidy programs, including equalization.
These delay and retard policy innovation, while preserving an oversized, low-performance public sector that delivers so little while keeping spending and taxes counterproductively high. Ontario and Alberta have both twigged to the fact that the "haves" simply pay "have-nots" to stay poor. In the brave new world of China and India, this simply will no longer be on.
Finally, while these changes will be fought tooth and nail by the many interest groups that drive our public policy, somehow we will have to implement two basic reforms. First, in light of the vote-buying scandal, a fundamental redesign of government to install firewalls between politicians and the administration of government programs, like the system functioning superbly in New Zealand. Second, we need an economic constitution which prevents the type of spending frenzy recently witnessed in Ottawa.
Don't hold your breath this election. But the train of better policy is coming, folks. Our political parties had better to get in front of it before it runs them over.
Saturday, December 03, 2005
Parties must get serious about tax relief
Parties must get serious about tax relief: "Parties must get serious about tax relief
Both the Liberals and Conservatives have promised voters tax cuts should they be elected in the Jan. 23 election. Yet neither party's cuts even come close to offering the level of relief Canadians need. Even after the Liberals' promised income tax reductions or the Tories' GST cut, the average Canadian's taxes would still be one-third higher than the average American's and nearly 10% higher than the average for taxpayers in all industrialized nations. The full cost of Ottawa's addiction to high taxes is made clear in a new study by Global Insight, a Toronto-based economics research firm: slower economic growth. "
Both the Liberals and Conservatives have promised voters tax cuts should they be elected in the Jan. 23 election. Yet neither party's cuts even come close to offering the level of relief Canadians need. Even after the Liberals' promised income tax reductions or the Tories' GST cut, the average Canadian's taxes would still be one-third higher than the average American's and nearly 10% higher than the average for taxpayers in all industrialized nations. The full cost of Ottawa's addiction to high taxes is made clear in a new study by Global Insight, a Toronto-based economics research firm: slower economic growth. "
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Honesty on health care
Excellent -this is a solid approach to saving our public health system- ensure preformance with meaningful benchmarks-QJ
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Honesty on health care: "Conservative Leader Stephen Harper announced his party's wait time 'guarantee' yesterday. It's not really a guarantee. It's more like a benchmark or a target for provinces to follow. But within the government monopoly system that we have in Canada, it's not a bad approach to take.
Harper says maximum wait times for medically necessary services should be established across Canada.
Failure to provide the service -- be it for hip surgery or MRI scans -- within that established timeframe would mean patients could demand government send them out of province to receive the treatment.
The cost of sending patients to other provinces or the U.S., Harper says, would be an incentive for provinces to meet their targets.
It's not a real guarantee because patients would have no recourse if care weren't provided within the maximum wait time. "
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Honesty on health care: "Conservative Leader Stephen Harper announced his party's wait time 'guarantee' yesterday. It's not really a guarantee. It's more like a benchmark or a target for provinces to follow. But within the government monopoly system that we have in Canada, it's not a bad approach to take.
Harper says maximum wait times for medically necessary services should be established across Canada.
Failure to provide the service -- be it for hip surgery or MRI scans -- within that established timeframe would mean patients could demand government send them out of province to receive the treatment.
The cost of sending patients to other provinces or the U.S., Harper says, would be an incentive for provinces to meet their targets.
It's not a real guarantee because patients would have no recourse if care weren't provided within the maximum wait time. "
Friday, December 02, 2005
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Tory GST plan puts Martin on the spot
Good point -cut both -we are overtaxed PR
Winnipegsun - Editorial - Tory GST plan puts Martin on the spot
"Martin says he'll leave the GST as it is, and instead focus on cutting personal taxes. 'I believe that's fairer, I believe it's more sensible.' Hmmm. Funny but we would have sworn that just a year-and-a-half ago the PM was dead set against just such tax relief when it was proposed by Harper during the last election campaign.
The fact is we're overtaxed in every area imaginable, and that's what has allowed the feds to ring up massive surpluses year after year. Martin needs to understand that Canadians are fed up with paying and paying and paying and then being offered token relief from a government that hopes we'll forget whose money they're spending in the first place.
Tax cuts shouldn't be on an either/or basis. Cut the GST. Cut income taxes.
Let us decide for ourselves how to spend our cash. "
Winnipegsun - Editorial - Tory GST plan puts Martin on the spot
"Martin says he'll leave the GST as it is, and instead focus on cutting personal taxes. 'I believe that's fairer, I believe it's more sensible.' Hmmm. Funny but we would have sworn that just a year-and-a-half ago the PM was dead set against just such tax relief when it was proposed by Harper during the last election campaign.
The fact is we're overtaxed in every area imaginable, and that's what has allowed the feds to ring up massive surpluses year after year. Martin needs to understand that Canadians are fed up with paying and paying and paying and then being offered token relief from a government that hopes we'll forget whose money they're spending in the first place.
Tax cuts shouldn't be on an either/or basis. Cut the GST. Cut income taxes.
Let us decide for ourselves how to spend our cash. "
Hated tax made and killed careers
A real issue becomes clear -no waffling - the conservative promise to reduce it to 5% - good move to but more money in your pocket PR>
The promise places the Liberals in a difficult position. The party rolled into office 12 years ago on a promise to "replace" the GST, but never delivered on the pledge.
The promise was spelled out in the party's campaign bible of promises -- the Red Book. Who co-wrote the Red Book? Paul Martin -- then a relatively unknown opposition MP, and later the finance minister who apologized for the fact the Liberals could not replace the tax.
Now, as Prime Minister, Mr. Martin's back is against the wall, trying to explain why the Conservatives' proposed GST reduction is bad public policy.
In the 16 years since the tax was first proposed by Brian Mulroney's Tories, the GST has haunted both parties, like an albatross they could not shake.
The impetus for the tax came in 1986, when the United States launched tax reform.
Here in Canada, it was difficult for exporters to compete with their U.S. counterparts. The problem was the 13.5% manufacturers' sales tax (MST). It was a hidden tax built into the price of an item, and tended to favour imported goods over exports. In 1989, Mr. Mulroney proposed to replace it with the GST. Initially pegged at 9%, it would be added at the cash register. It was a public relations disaster.
All 10 premiers opposed the tax. Lobby groups railed against it. One poll showed 80% of Canadians objected.">Hated tax made and killed careers: "The promise places the Liberals in a difficult position. The party rolled into office 12 years ago on a promise to 'replace' the GST, but never delivered on the pledge.
The promise was spelled out in the party's campaign bible of promises -- the Red Book. Who co-wrote the Red Book? Paul Martin -- then a relatively unknown opposition MP, and later the finance minister who apologized for the fact the Liberals could not replace the tax.
Thursday, December 01, 2005
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Focus on corruption
winnipegsun.com - Editorial - Focus on corruption: "With the Gomery report still fresh in voters' minds, Harper has an unprecedented opportunity to remind Canadians repeatedly about the arrogance and dishonesty of the Liberal government.
He must do so with a focused campaign that hones in on the irrefutable proof of Liberal corruption over many years.
In fact, there are only three main messages Harper must drive home to the Canadian electorate. First, he must keep the issue of corruption central to this campaign. Second, he must clearly explain how his party will be different, and how it will spend our money more responsibly. And third, and perhaps most crucial, he must convince Canada -- especially Ontario -- he is not the bogeyman many believe him to be. That is just the product of a Liberal spin machine in overdrive"
He must do so with a focused campaign that hones in on the irrefutable proof of Liberal corruption over many years.
In fact, there are only three main messages Harper must drive home to the Canadian electorate. First, he must keep the issue of corruption central to this campaign. Second, he must clearly explain how his party will be different, and how it will spend our money more responsibly. And third, and perhaps most crucial, he must convince Canada -- especially Ontario -- he is not the bogeyman many believe him to be. That is just the product of a Liberal spin machine in overdrive"
Advisor.ca - Daily News Goodale listened-No more double taxation on income trusts
Advisor.ca - Daily News: "According to the minister, the tax changes will eliminate the double taxation of dividends. The tax reduction will take the form of an enhanced dividend 'gross-up' and tax credit to make the total tax on dividends received from large Canadian corporations to make it more comparable to the tax paid on distributions of income trusts.
'Reducing the tax individuals pay on dividends will encourage savings and investment and will help establish a better balance between the tax treatment of large corporations and that of income trusts,' said Minister Goodale. 'This action will benefit Canadians and result in bottom-line tax savings for them.'
As a result of this surprise announcement the Canada Revenue Agency will resume providing advance tax rulings on flow-through entity structures"
'Reducing the tax individuals pay on dividends will encourage savings and investment and will help establish a better balance between the tax treatment of large corporations and that of income trusts,' said Minister Goodale. 'This action will benefit Canadians and result in bottom-line tax savings for them.'
As a result of this surprise announcement the Canada Revenue Agency will resume providing advance tax rulings on flow-through entity structures"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)