"Choice is always the perfect gift" pr
The Perfect Gift for Mother's Day: Child Care Choice
Provincial child care policies vary widely across the Prairies. In particular, Saskatchewan and Manitoba actively discourage for-profit child care centres by denying them access to government subsidies and grants. Alberta treats both for-profit and non-profit centres equally. Because of these policies, Saskatchewan has just one commercial daycare in the entire province. Only five percent of the child care centres in Manitoba are for-profit. Alberta has a majority of for-profit centres. Saskatchewan also has the lowest level of child care coverage in the country. Manitoba and Alberta are both near the national average. Evidence suggests that Alberta has been better able to meet rising demand for new child care spaces than either Saskatchewan or Manitoba. Further evidence suggests that Alberta is more efficient in turning government funding into new daycare spaces. Alberta is able to create twice as many spots per $1,000 in government expenditure than Manitoba, and three-times as many spots as Saskatchewan.
Media Release for Little Crèche on the Prairies - a new Policy Series Paper by Research Associate Peter Shawn Taylor
Friday, May 08, 2009
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Fwd: Food for thought - see the Austrian model on government intervention
Can you spend your way out of a depression ? Is the new deal (Government pump priming) really a bad deal? This is a provocative and apparent politically incorrect view of lessons that could or should be learned from the past Sieg
If Keynesian and monetarist theories cannot cope with the historical evidence, does the Austrian theory fare better? In the Austrian view, depressions come about because expansion of bank credit results in malinvestments. Because these need to be liquidated, the government should follow a "do nothing" policy that allows the market to return to normal conditions. When this policy was followed, recovery from depression took no more than a few years, in the 1873 depression, in contrast to the total failure to recover during the New Deal. The results were even better in the 1920–1921 depression, when both Wilson and Harding slashed government spending: "the 1920–1921 depression was so short-lived that most Americans today are unaware of its existence." (p. 71)
Did FDR Make the Depression Great?
Mises Daily by David Gordon | Posted on 5/5/2009 12:00:00 AM
[The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal. By Robert P. Murphy. Regnery, 2009. 199 pages.]
Robert Murphy demonstrates in this excellent book a penetrating ability to explain the essence of fallacious economic doctrines. As he notes, three theories offer competing explanations of the Great Depression: the Keynesian account, which stresses a lack of aggregate demand; Milton Friedman's monetarism, which ascribes the severity of the early years of the Depression to a drastic cut in the money supply by the Fed; and, of course, the Austrian theory that Murphy himself favors.
Herbert Hoover, though not under Keynes's influence, defended a version of the first theory. If wages were not kept high, purchasing power would be insufficient to restore prosperity. Accordingly, Hoover encouraged businesses to refrain from wage cuts.
Murphy quickly exposes the fallacy of this view:
High wages do not cause prosperity, they are rather an indication of prosperity. Ultimately, it doesn't matter how many green pieces of paper employers hand out to workers. Unless workers first physically produced the goods (and services), there will be nothing on the store shelves for them to buy when they attempt to spend their big fat paychecks. (p. 35, emphasis in original)
But, it may be countered, is not the level of production and employment determined by aggregate demand? Granted that prosperity requires real goods, will not businessmen decide how much to produce based on what they think they will be able to sell? If so, is not the problem in a depression that, forecasting that future demand will be low, they cut back production?
Murphy once more locates the fundamental fallacy. The problem in a depression is not that production is in general too low; it is rather that resources have not been put to their best uses and need to be shifted:
By focusing on aggregate monetary conditions such as "total wage payments," Hoover completely overlooked the fact that real, physical resources had to be rearranged in order to correct the imbalances in the economy. It wasn't that "business" was producing too much, but rather that some sectors were producing too much, while other sectors were producing too little, in light of the economy's supplies of resources, the skills and desires of its workers, and the tastes of its consumers. (p. 37)
Once more, Murphy holds that we need to concentrate on the physical goods rather than on total monetary demand.
The only way to rectify the situation — to transform the economy into a sustainable configuration — was to shuffle workers and resources. Some enterprises had to be shut down immediately, releasing their workers and freeing up the raw materials they would have consumed had they remained in business… But in a market economy, workers are free to choose their occupations, and the owners of raw materials can sell their property to whomever they desire. Yet with that freedom comes the unfortunate necessity of prolonged spells of unemployment and "idle resources," when the workers and raw materials are searching for a new home in the complex economy. (pp. 37–8)
Murphy dispatches the monetarist view with similar directness and ease. Here, if anything, his remarks are of even more vital significance, since Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke firmly embraces the monetarist account of the Great Depression.
He finds a simple way to illustrate the fallacy of the mainstream analysis of deflation. According to this view, if people anticipate falling prices, they will refrain from spending. Because they expect prices to fall, they think that that will do better to consume later. But this drop in consumption causes a further price fall, and the whole cycle repeats. Prices may spiral uncontrollably downward.
Murphy responds in this way:
One could construct an analogous argument for the computer industry, in which the government passes regulation to slow down improvements in operating systems and processing speed. After all, how can computer manufacturers possibly remain viable if consumers are always waiting for a faster model to become available? … The solution to this paradox, of course, is that consumers do decide to bite the bullet and buy a computer, knowing full well that they would be able to buy the same performance for less money, if they were willing to wait… (There's no point in holding out for lower prices but never actually buying!) (pp. 68–9)
Murphy's ingenious response can also be applied to combat George Akerlof's famous lemons model of the used-car market. Akerlof argued that because of asymmetric information, owners of good used cars would tend to be driven from the market. But, contrary to what his model suggests, good used cars do get sold. In like fashion to Murphy, one can say that just because owners of good cars may not be able to obtain as high a price as they would like, it does not follow that they will refuse to sell at all.
It might be helpful to add the "real balance effect" to Murphy's account. As prices fall, the value of money rises. People's demand to hold money can then be satisfied with less money. This in part explains why people will eventually spend, even when they expect prices to continue to fall.
Keynesians will object that even if spending does eventually revive, the process takes too long. People cannot be expected to wait until the market rights itself. But this is to ignore Murphy's vital point. The process of adjustment is just what is needed: a depression is exactly a situation in which bad investments are liquidated and resources moved elsewhere.
Murphy uncovers another flaw in the conventional assault on deflation. Money that is not spent need not be hoarded, as the opponents of deflation implicitly assume:
Many analysts who are terrified of deflation stress that in an environment of falling prices, cash stuffed under the mattress earns a positive return. This observation is certainly true, but nonetheless cash lent out earns an even greater return. Falling prices, then, encourage consumers to devote more of their income to savings, which in turn lowers interest rates and allows businesses to borrow and invest more. (p. 69)
As the author abundantly shows, historical evidence strikes decisive blows against both the Keynesian and monetarist theories. On the Keynesian account, increased spending, by reviving aggregate demand, will restore good times. If so, why did Hoover and Roosevelt's massive spending leave America mired in depression? To call Hoover a big spender may surprise many readers, but Murphy notes that there is no room for doubt:
Hoover's response to the stock market crash was an enormous increase in government spending, with the budget exploding by 42 percent over his first two years … it is true that Hoover blinked and tried to tame the unprecedented (at the time) peacetime deficits. But this was only after the "stimulus" approach failed horribly. (p. 48)
Keynesians will reply that government spending should have been even greater; but this is to add an epicycle to shore up a failed theory.
Murphy turns the tables on Milton Friedman, who emphasized statistical evidence, by showing that monetarism fails to explain the data.
So we see that immediately following the stock market crash, the Fed began flooding the market with liquidity and in fact brought its rates down to record lows…. If the ostensible cause of the Great Depression — the one factor that set it apart from all previous depressions — was the Fed's unwillingness to provide sufficient liquidity, then how could it possibly be that the Fed's record rate cuts proved inadequate to solve "the problem?" (pp. 76–7)
Even if this is true, though, could not Friedman still say that the massive decline in the money supply in the early 1930s exacerbated the severity of the depression? Murphy, following Murray Rothbard, denies this:
Between 1839 and 1843 the money supply fell by 34 percent and wholesale prices fell by 42 percent. If the monetarists are right, and it was the Fed's refusal to counteract the falling money supply in the early 1930s that gave us the Great Depression, then the 1839–1843 period should have been devastating. Yet Murray Rothbard (relying on Peter Temin's historical research) reports otherwise. (p. 71)
If Keynesian and monetarist theories cannot cope with the historical evidence, does the Austrian theory fare better? In the Austrian view, depressions come about because expansion of bank credit results in malinvestments. Because these need to be liquidated, the government should follow a "do nothing" policy that allows the market to return to normal conditions. When this policy was followed, recovery from depression took no more than a few years, in the 1873 depression, in contrast to the total failure to recover during the New Deal. The results were even better in the 1920–1921 depression, when both Wilson and Harding slashed government spending: "the 1920–1921 depression was so short-lived that most Americans today are unaware of its existence." (p. 71)
Murphy treats in thorough fashion the multifarious New Deal measures and their manifest failures. I shall confine myself to noting his searing condemnation of Roosevelt's gold policy.
Ordering the public to turn over its gold — under penalty of a $10,000 fine and up to ten years in prison — was a clear-cut robbery.… Yet insidious as the explicit confiscation was, the cancellation of gold clauses in contracts was in a way a more fundamental violation of property rights … the private sector had no choice but to use unbacked green pieces of paper as the foundations of its transactions. Americans were now entirely at the mercy of those controlling the printing press. (pp. 128–29)
Murphy carries forward his discussion to the World War II period. Here he has been greatly influenced by Robert Higgs's challenge to the conventional view that the war ended the Depression. (He also makes excellent use of Higgs's "regime uncertainty" in his account of New Deal failure.) He contends that the follies of central planning extend to the conduct of war. Private enterprise could have handled production of military goods better than controls actually did.
It is a simple fact of engineering that the enormous production of tanks, airplanes, and other wartime goods in the 1940s necessitated a sharp curtailment in civilian consumption. Even so, the government did not need to impose direct rationing and other controls on the home front. Instead, the government could have simply raised taxes and issued new bonds in order to purchase its desired products from military contractors and other firms… Individual businesses, seeking only to maximize profit, would have been led by an Invisible Hand to retool away from civilian production and cater instead to the overall war effort. (pp. 158–59).
Murphy's argument recalls Mises's suggestion that the French would have fared much better in the war had they relied on private firms to procure armaments.[1]
In these days of massive government bailouts and intervention, the lessons of the Great Depression and New Deal have much more than historical significance. Murphy concludes on a melancholy note:
President Obama's stimulus package and other "remedies" will not cure our economic woes any more than the New Deal cured the Great Depression. The real question is whether Barack Obama's New Deal, building on the old one, will finally sink the American economy into the sands. (p. 177).
If enough people read Murphy's hard-hitting book, we can strangle in its cradle Obama's prescription for economic disaster.
David Gordon covers new books in economics, politics, philosophy, and law for The Mises Review, the quarterly review of literature in the social sciences, published since 1995 by the Mises Institute. He is author of The Essential Rothbard, available in the Mises Store. Send him mail. See his article archives. Comment on the blog.
You can subscribe to future articles by this author via this RSS feed.
--
backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
www.backtoeden.bravehost.com
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care
land claims and just more Bull
What a unprofessional waste of resources - score 0 for the taxpayers, 0 for the Indians, and millions for the lawyers running this charade PR
"It's a witch hunt" Calnan says he did not leak confidential information
Posted By Michael-Allan Marion Expositor Staff Posted 8 hours ago
City Coun. James Calnan says those branding him as an information leaker are part of a "witch hunt" to make him a scapegoat for a failed strategy to deal with the fallout of unresolved native land claim issues.
"It's a witch hunt. You decide who the witch is and burn him," Calnan, accompanied by peace advocate Jan Vandersteldt, said Tuesday in a hastily called news conference at the foot of the monument to Joseph Brant in Victoria Park.
He said opponents who are after him would rather attack him with an investigation into an alleged leak from a closed-door council meeting more than two months ago than admit that an expensive legal fight by the city to obtain an injunction against Six Nations activists is doomed to failure.
In the news conference, Calnan related his anger over attacks against him from council colleagues and others as the dispute over land claims and native protests drags on.
"I've been taking kicks on this for the last year," he said of his opposition to the "collective idiocy" behind the city's confrontational position and its marginalization of him.
"I'm tired of this bullshit."
Monday, May 04, 2009
Ontario's New tax hike
Nothing is as it seems -doing something about it counts -enough is enough
You are about to become the victim of the largest tax hike in our
history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
your family.
pass it on- awareness is the beginning of real accountability
history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
your family.
-----
As a concerned taxpayer I feel it is important to have you all
understand what the new HST or "blended tax?"means to Ontarians. It
amazes me that this announcement has slipped by without a ripple, and
yet when I tell people about the impact to them they are all shocked.
The intended purpose is to blend the GST and the PST into one tax.This
will cut down the paperwork burden for Ontario businesses and, in
theory, lessen staff by merging both departments. This could be a noble
attempt to cut costs. There is just one problem. Rather than just
blending the products and services that now charge both taxes, the
provincial government has decided that it will apply this new tax to
almost all goods and services that you do not pay PST on now!
You are about to become the victim of the largest tax hike in our
history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
your family.
Gasoline
Home heating fuel
Water
Hydro
Used cars
Government and city services
Any service you now use for your home or business such as repairs,
professional services of any kind, construction materials etc.
These are just a few.
See this article about how the 1000.00 BRIBE they are offering will not
even cover ½ of the increased cost to the average family. This tax hits
Ontarians hard, but ESPECIALLY the low income ones! They will have an 8%
increase in everyday life, and yet you will not see their benefits or
salaries rise.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/269917
Actually almost everything currently without PST in your life except
children's clothing, prescriptions, diapers, and feminine hygiene
products will now cost you 8% more. Oh and here is a kicker. The fuel
tax will slide with the increasing cost of that fuel.
Our premier is counting on taxpayers to do what they always do when a
new tax is added. Nothing! It is very important that you start to
research and discuss this with your friends and family. It is not too
late to stop this if you are willing to do something as send an email to
the premier asking him either to a) stop the tax grab all together or b)
do what was originally intended and blend the tax on the products that
now have both taxes and not to extend the new tax to everything else. If
you just sit there remember you lose the right to complain about taxes
ever again. Get UP and start telling everyone about this injustice and
we can stop this today. Don't think your email will not count. Most MP's
get 10 emails, they consider it a catastrophe!
Send your objection to:
www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp
<http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com:
Ontario's new tax hike
As a concerned taxpayer I feel it is important to have you all
understand what the new HST or "blended tax?"means to Ontarians. It
amazes me that this announcement has slipped by without a ripple, and
yet when I tell people about the impact to them they are all shocked.
The intended purpose is to blend the GST and the PST into one tax.This
will cut down the paperwork burden for Ontario businesses and, in
theory, lessen staff by merging both departments. This could be a noble
attempt to cut costs. There is just one problem. Rather than just
blending the products and services that now charge both taxes, the
provincial government has decided that it will apply this new tax to
almost all goods and services that you do not pay PST on now!
You are about to become the victim of the largest tax hike in our
history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
your family.
Gasoline
Home heating fuel
Water
Hydro
Used cars
Government and city services
Any service you now use for your home or business such as repairs,
professional services of any kind, construction materials etc.
These are just a few.
See this article about how the 1000.00 BRIBE they are offering will not
even cover ½ of the increased cost to the average family. This tax hits
Ontarians hard, but ESPECIALLY the low income ones! They will have an 8%
increase in everyday life, and yet you will not see their benefits or
salaries rise.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/269917
Actually almost everything currently without PST in your life except
children's clothing, prescriptions, diapers, and feminine hygiene
products will now cost you 8% more. Oh and here is a kicker. The fuel
tax will slide with the increasing cost of that fuel.
Our premier is counting on taxpayers to do what they always do when a
new tax is added. Nothing! It is very important that you start to
research and discuss this with your friends and family. It is not too
late to stop this if you are willing to do something as send an email to
the premier asking him either to a) stop the tax grab all together or b)
do what was originally intended and blend the tax on the products that
now have both taxes and not to extend the new tax to everything else. If
you just sit there remember you lose the right to complain about taxes
ever again. Get UP and start telling everyone about this injustice and
we can stop this today. Don't think your email will not count. Most MP's
get 10 emails, they consider it a catastrophe!
Send your objection to:
www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp
<http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp
Today, smack dab in the middle of a tsunami of horrible economic news, the Ontario provincial Liberal government has introduced what many will see as a massive tax grab, just when we all can least afford it.
On Canada Day, July 1st, 2010, Ontarians can not only celebrate the birth of their nation, they can also celebrate a new harmonized sales tax system that will pump up the coffers of our provincial government and empty out the pockets of taxpayers.
But don't worry people ... we have elected a compassionate and magnanimous crew down at Queen's Park. They've announced that over a two year period, you'll be receiving three rebate cheques that will total $1,000 as a hand up from your elected officials to help offset the costs you "might" incur due to the sales tax harmonization.
What, pray tell, might those extra costs that you "might" incur be on? That KFC Wrapper you pick up for lunch; your morning cup 'o joe at Timmy's; that newspaper you read; that vet bill you willingly pay for your beloved pet; your prescription drugs; the gas you put in your car; the oil or gas you have delivered to your home to keep you and your family warm; etc. etc.
$166 a year to drink coffee and eat snacks at work;
$156 a year to drive your car;
$72 a year extra to heat your home;
$55 a year to get your hair cut, go out and see a movie and send your clothes to the cleaners;
$33 a year to read The Star;
$50 a year to to prevent pregnancy (The Pill);
These are but a few that I've worked out as a starting point. As you can see, in year 1, we're already over $500 (remember the bribe the Liberals are giving us, that $1,000 rebate cheque spread over two years). As I said, this is only just a starting point and I've used very conservative figures like $20 a month for haircuts, $20 a month for dry cleaning and $10 a month for movies.
Thinking about selling your home? Add about $2,000 to your closing costs.
Thinking about buying a new one? In 2008, the Toronto Real Estate Board said that the average house price was about $404,000. If you were thinking about buying a newly built home for about that much (by the way, best of luck finding one for that price!) you would pay an additional $8,000 in taxes. If you had the gall to up the ante and buy a brand spanking new home for $500,000, instead of it costing you $500K that brand new home would cost you $540,000. In other words, you'd have to pay the full 8% PST, or an additional $40,000.
So tell me, why aren't you bowing down and scrapping your forehead off the floor at the feet of Dalton McGuinty et al thanking them so much for that extra $1,000 rebate cheque (which, by the way also is only for the first two years after implementation, after that its all gravy for the government)? I know my forehead will be clean, and come Oct. 2011 when the next provincial government election happens, I will remember this and remind as many other Ontario voters as I can, thank you very much.
But don't worry people ... we have elected a compassionate and magnanimous crew down at Queen's Park. They've announced that over a two year period, you'll be receiving three rebate cheques that will total $1,000 as a hand up from your elected officials to help offset the costs you "might" incur due to the sales tax harmonization.
What, pray tell, might those extra costs that you "might" incur be on? That KFC Wrapper you pick up for lunch; your morning cup 'o joe at Timmy's; that newspaper you read; that vet bill you willingly pay for your beloved pet; your prescription drugs; the gas you put in your car; the oil or gas you have delivered to your home to keep you and your family warm; etc. etc.
$166 a year to drink coffee and eat snacks at work;
$156 a year to drive your car;
$72 a year extra to heat your home;
$55 a year to get your hair cut, go out and see a movie and send your clothes to the cleaners;
$33 a year to read The Star;
$50 a year to to prevent pregnancy (The Pill);
These are but a few that I've worked out as a starting point. As you can see, in year 1, we're already over $500 (remember the bribe the Liberals are giving us, that $1,000 rebate cheque spread over two years). As I said, this is only just a starting point and I've used very conservative figures like $20 a month for haircuts, $20 a month for dry cleaning and $10 a month for movies.
Thinking about selling your home? Add about $2,000 to your closing costs.
Thinking about buying a new one? In 2008, the Toronto Real Estate Board said that the average house price was about $404,000. If you were thinking about buying a newly built home for about that much (by the way, best of luck finding one for that price!) you would pay an additional $8,000 in taxes. If you had the gall to up the ante and buy a brand spanking new home for $500,000, instead of it costing you $500K that brand new home would cost you $540,000. In other words, you'd have to pay the full 8% PST, or an additional $40,000.
So tell me, why aren't you bowing down and scrapping your forehead off the floor at the feet of Dalton McGuinty et al thanking them so much for that extra $1,000 rebate cheque (which, by the way also is only for the first two years after implementation, after that its all gravy for the government)? I know my forehead will be clean, and come Oct. 2011 when the next provincial government election happens, I will remember this and remind as many other Ontario voters as I can, thank you very much.
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com:
Friday, May 01, 2009
Councillors zero in on '10 budget
CITY HALL: Cap on spending, salary hikes proposed
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION, EXPOSITOR STAFF
City councillors say they must act now to protect taxpayers through a deepening recession by ordering staff to bring in a 2010 budget with no tax increase.
They are also giving administrators marching orders to win collective agreements from unions that carry no wage increases throughout the life of any contract.
Union leaders have been told that negotiations about to begin have been postponed until council has its strategy in place.
Councillors agreed on those directives Thursday evening while they huddled with senior staff in a special finance committee session in the public library, and plotted a strategy to combat recessionary pressures on next year's budget.
As they alternated between open and closed-door sessions, several councillors said they are under no illusions that it will be tough to keep the lid on a cauldron of public demands that normally increase budgets.
They also conceded they have an enormous task on their hands to persuade public sector unions to fall in line on salaries.
"This should not be seen as a punitive measure," said Mayor Mike Hancock, anticipating an early angry response from the unions to council's strategy.
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION, EXPOSITOR STAFF
City councillors say they must act now to protect taxpayers through a deepening recession by ordering staff to bring in a 2010 budget with no tax increase.
They are also giving administrators marching orders to win collective agreements from unions that carry no wage increases throughout the life of any contract.
Union leaders have been told that negotiations about to begin have been postponed until council has its strategy in place.
Councillors agreed on those directives Thursday evening while they huddled with senior staff in a special finance committee session in the public library, and plotted a strategy to combat recessionary pressures on next year's budget.
As they alternated between open and closed-door sessions, several councillors said they are under no illusions that it will be tough to keep the lid on a cauldron of public demands that normally increase budgets.
They also conceded they have an enormous task on their hands to persuade public sector unions to fall in line on salaries.
"This should not be seen as a punitive measure," said Mayor Mike Hancock, anticipating an early angry response from the unions to council's strategy.
Good start to the process lets help them with their resolve Pr
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Buyer Beware -- Caveat Emptor: APPEALS TO REASON ..
Buyer Beware -- Caveat Emptor: APPEALS TO REASON ..
an interesting blog promoting fair taxation practises
an interesting blog promoting fair taxation practises
For 13 years now, Irvin Leroux has been in tax hell
Tax Mistake - Couple
For 13 years now, Irvin Leroux has gone back and forth with the Canadian Government in a bitter fight over his taxes. The Canada Revenue Agency insisted he owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes. Irvin Leroux disagreed. So he fought ...and fought. But as the battle continued, his bill got bigger, climbing to one-million-dollars in back taxes, penalties and interest.
The story begins back in 1992. Mr. Leroux developed some land he owned in Valemount, British Columbia. He removed trees, sold the timber ... created lots for a subdivision and built an R-V park. The plan was that the business would support him and his wife, Jill Moore, in their retirement.
But the couple's never-ending fight over taxes ruined those plans. And even though the Canada Revenue Agency eventually admitted it made a mistake, the battle isn't over. Irvin Leroux and Jill Moore joined Anna Maria from Vancouver.
Revenue Canada made a mistake and now refuses to pay damages - is it time to make those responsible accountable? PR
For 13 years now, Irvin Leroux has gone back and forth with the Canadian Government in a bitter fight over his taxes. The Canada Revenue Agency insisted he owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes. Irvin Leroux disagreed. So he fought ...and fought. But as the battle continued, his bill got bigger, climbing to one-million-dollars in back taxes, penalties and interest.
The story begins back in 1992. Mr. Leroux developed some land he owned in Valemount, British Columbia. He removed trees, sold the timber ... created lots for a subdivision and built an R-V park. The plan was that the business would support him and his wife, Jill Moore, in their retirement.
But the couple's never-ending fight over taxes ruined those plans. And even though the Canada Revenue Agency eventually admitted it made a mistake, the battle isn't over. Irvin Leroux and Jill Moore joined Anna Maria from Vancouver.
Revenue Canada made a mistake and now refuses to pay damages - is it time to make those responsible accountable? PR
Arbitrary Tax mistakes
This is a CBC investigative report that is disturbing and needs redress by all Canadians pr
For 13 years now, Irvin Leroux has gone back and forth with the Canadian Government in a bitter fight over his taxes. The Canada Revenue Agency insisted he owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes. Irvin Leroux disagreed. So he fought ...and fought. But as the battle continued, his bill got bigger, climbing to one-million-dollars in back taxes, penalties and interest.
The story begins back in 1992. Mr. Leroux developed some land he owned in Valemount, British Columbia. He removed trees, sold the timber ... created lots for a subdivision and built an R-V park. The plan was that the business would support him and his wife, Jill Moore, in their retirement.
But the couple's never-ending fight over taxes ruined those plans. And even though the Canada Revenue Agency eventually admitted it made a mistake, the battle isn't over. Irvin Leroux and Jill Moore joined Anna Maria from Vancouver.
Listen to Part Two: Click link to hear radio interview
Part 3: Tax Mistake - Reporter
In our last half-hour, we spoke to Irvin Leroux and his wife Jill Moore. They walked us through the last 13 years of their life and their battle with the Canada Revenue Agency. It began with an audit in 1996 that found that Mr. Leroux owed $50,000 dollars. Five more audits and ten years later, the bill stood at a million dollars.
Eventually, the Canada Revenue Agency admitted it had made a mistake. But in the process, Mr. Leroux lost his business, his home and his savings. He and his wife are still fighting for compensation.
The CBC's Kathy Tomlinson has been investigating the couple's story
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Tax Action: 22 Years of Pork
Little wonder the federal government is borrowing $93-million a day. Through extensive research, the CTF brings public exposure to unnecessary spending. Until expenditures like these are curtailed, the federal government will never balance its books.
CONTACT YOUR MP!
It’s time to end political slush funds. www.taxpayer.com
Incredibly, Prime Minister Harper — once a staunch critic of regional development funds agencies — has committed to creating two more — one for Northern Canada and for Southern Ontario. That would bring to six the number of regional development agencies. Please join us in calling for the elimination of regional development agencies in favour of broad-based tax relief.Mail, call, or e-mail your MP to demand governments prioritize their spending.
CTF-is one of the original accountaility groups -worth a look Pr
CONTACT YOUR MP!
It’s time to end political slush funds. www.taxpayer.com
Incredibly, Prime Minister Harper — once a staunch critic of regional development funds agencies — has committed to creating two more — one for Northern Canada and for Southern Ontario. That would bring to six the number of regional development agencies. Please join us in calling for the elimination of regional development agencies in favour of broad-based tax relief.Mail, call, or e-mail your MP to demand governments prioritize their spending.
CTF-is one of the original accountaility groups -worth a look Pr
Friday, April 24, 2009
INVINCIBLE SMUGNESS
Smugness and Stupidity and Unnatural EntitlementsThanks -here is another food for thought for you from nature . There are great parallels here . You can substitute any smug group or government institution as the golden beetle with the juice and the docile and naive public( taxpayers) whose stupidity let it happen with their own resources -the public- the industrious sanguine ants.
lessons from the wild
Vernon Eaton, commenting on the book, Ways of the Ant, by John Crompton, writes: "A pleasure-mad ( or give me free goodies )society needs to take a lesson from the Sanguine ants and their affair with the Golden-Haired beetle."
"The ants' normal diet is plain, often to the point of austerity, but they love unusual and exotic tidbits and will go to any lengths to satisfy this craving. For example, the Golden-Haired beetle exudes from the base of its golden hairs some secretion which ants find irresistible. So it is allowed to do anything it likes, even lay its own eggs, which soon turn to grubs. So besotted and obsessed do the worker ants become that they feed the beetle with food intended for their own infants, and even with food reserved for the queen."
"Worse, much worse, they allow the beetle to kill their infants and eat them. They even kill their own infants themselves and feed them to this stranger. The beetle repays them with a generous allowance of the secretion they crave…. The end is not immediate. The colony may last two years more, but the end is certain."
So how do we get the ants off the golden beetle juice before they die an unnatural death? Sieg
Here's a link to my blog: http://morleyevans.blogspot.com/2009/04/invincible-smugness.html
- MorleyWARNING! This transmission, including any attachment(s) is privileged and confidential and only intended for the individual or entity to which it is addressed above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any other publication, copying, scanning, duplication, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. Please contact our office if you experience transmission difficulty or received the transmission by mistake. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately via email morleyevans@morleyevans.com, and delete the original transmission without making a copy.
-
backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
http://www.backtoeden.bravehost.com/
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
FCPP Publications :: Moderate Taxes May Lead to Civilization
FCPP Publications :: Moderate Taxes May Lead to Civilization: "To know you're getting a good deal, one has to be able to compare services and costs and to choose other suppliers if prices are too high or services inadequate. But governments are often held hostage by monopolistic public sector unions. That has consequences. A few years back, a BC health care union went on an illegal strike for one week and caused surgeries to be cancelled at the BC Children's hospital.
Or there is this measurement. Data from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business reveals wages and benefits in the public sector are significantly higher than in similar private sector jobs: by 41.7 per cent federally, 24.9 per cent provincially, and 35.9 per cent municipally. Also, in the public health care sector, wages and benefits exceed private comparables by 19 per cent."
This is a real eye opener on why high taxes that fund high entitlement programs are bad for civilization Pr
Or there is this measurement. Data from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business reveals wages and benefits in the public sector are significantly higher than in similar private sector jobs: by 41.7 per cent federally, 24.9 per cent provincially, and 35.9 per cent municipally. Also, in the public health care sector, wages and benefits exceed private comparables by 19 per cent."
This is a real eye opener on why high taxes that fund high entitlement programs are bad for civilization Pr
Taxpayers' group tracks $3.9 B in western economic diversification funds - Yahoo! Canada News
Taxpayers' group tracks $3.9 B in western economic diversification funds - Yahoo! Canada News: "The taxpayer group's key findings:
-Just 51.8 per cent of taxpayer-funded loans were repaid over the 22-year period.
-Significant overlap and duplication between diversification funds, other federal departments and other governments.
-A lack of transparency, with vast sums turned over to organizations and businesses which then disburse to unnamed other groups.
-'A striking correlation' between election timing and spending spikes.
'The fact that the department funds everything from airport lighting to cemeteries doesn't help its reputation as a 'catch-all' political slush fund, either,' said Colin Craig, the taxpayer federation's Manitoba director who handled much of the data collection."
Why we need more public eyes on the spending ball Pr
-Just 51.8 per cent of taxpayer-funded loans were repaid over the 22-year period.
-Significant overlap and duplication between diversification funds, other federal departments and other governments.
-A lack of transparency, with vast sums turned over to organizations and businesses which then disburse to unnamed other groups.
-'A striking correlation' between election timing and spending spikes.
'The fact that the department funds everything from airport lighting to cemeteries doesn't help its reputation as a 'catch-all' political slush fund, either,' said Colin Craig, the taxpayer federation's Manitoba director who handled much of the data collection."
Why we need more public eyes on the spending ball Pr
Moderate Taxes May Lead to Civilization
Mark Mike's article reflects what most people suspect that improvements can be made in getting better value for their taxes = the imbalance is causing hardship
Moderate Taxes May Lead to Civilization High taxes kill it and jobs
In Brief:
"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."
When Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote his quip in 1927, taxes as a percent of the economy, both in the U.S. and Canada, were much lower than now. Without context, simplistic arguments result.
A good example of such simplification appeared recently in an anti-tax relief study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
To claim, as the CCPA dies, that some Canadians have it good because other people pay for a chunk of their government services isn't a measurement of a good deal; it's just another way of saying governments redistribute money.
"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization," said Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., an accurate observation on the surface but one often quoted without context: when Holmes wrote his quip in 1927, taxes as a percent of the economy, both in the U.S. and Canada, were much lower than now. Without context, simplistic arguments result.
A good example of such simplification appeared recently in an anti-tax relief study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The nub of the CCPA's claim is that many Canadians receive more in government benefits than they pay in taxes.
In other words, taxes redistribute income. No kidding.
The study was financed by government unions who have an interest in higher taxes and more government spending but that doesn't disqualify it; everyone has an initial bias. They key is to ask whether conclusions are fairly drawn and if something is missing in a particular claim. It is on this latter test that the tax-happy crowd are often wrong and where the CCPA study in particular fails.
The CCPA study creates a false choice: it's either taxes and civilization (and preferably high and punishing!) or no taxes and no civilization. Except that no one with a scintilla of nuance thinks that's the choice. The debate should revolve around the question of what sort of government is desirable and what's the best way to pay for that.
Assuming most of us want jobs and appreciate the role entrepreneurs play in the creation of the new companies and the employment that comes from the same, a useful question to ask is: what are the optimal taxes and tax levels for such an end, i.e., when do taxes destroy opportunity?
But the CCPA study ignores all that and also whether taxpayers receive good value. Instead, the study claims government programs are a "quiet bargain." But to claim some Canadians have it good because other people pay for a chunk of their government services isn't a measurement of a good deal; it's just another way of saying governments redistribute money.
To know you're getting a good deal, one has to be able to compare services and costs and to choose other suppliers if prices are too high or services inadequate. But governments are often held hostage by monopolistic public sector unions. That has consequences. A few years back, a BC health care union went on an illegal strike for one week and caused surgeries to be cancelled at the BC Children's hospital.
Or there is this measurement. Data from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business reveals wages and benefits in the public sector are significantly higher than in similar private sector jobs: by 41.7 per cent federally, 24.9 per cent provincially, and 35.9 per cent municipally. Also, in the public health care sector, wages and benefits exceed private comparables by 19 per cent.
The CCPA study also ignores how governments waste money. Think of $182 billion in corporate welfare over 12 years instead of provincial and business tax reductions which would have allowed allow more entrepreneurs to flourish.
There is this other omission in the CCPA's work: how various groups seek and receive tax dollars for their own agendas.
Back in the dying days of the BC NDP government in early 2001, that government awarded an untendered "contract" to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The contract was to stretch from 2001 and 2005, a four-year period to coincide with the expected term of the B.C. Liberals who were a sure bet to win the election in 2001 (and did).
Besides that tax-funded gift, the government-owned insurance company also bought 50 "subscriptions" to CCPA materials during the NDP time in office, even though the information was available free on the web. And the BC Ministry of Finance purchased an "enhanced" subscription to CCPA materials.
All told, during the NDP period, the CCPA received over $410,000 in tax-funded support from BC's taxpayers—significant for any small think tank; the CCPA also received money from the Manitoba NDP government, and later, in 2002, $900,000 from the federal government. I know all this because I filed many of the Freedom of Information requests that uncovered the BC information.
There is this other omission in the CCPA's work: how various groups seek and receive tax dollars for their own agendas.
Back in the dying days of the BC NDP government in early 2001, that government awarded an untendered "contract" to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The contract was to stretch from 2001 and 2005, a four-year period to coincide with the expected term of the B.C. Liberals who were a sure bet to win the election in 2001 (and did).
Besides that tax-funded gift, the government-owned insurance company also bought 50 "subscriptions" to CCPA materials during the NDP time in office, even though the information was available free on the web. And the BC Ministry of Finance purchased an "enhanced" subscription to CCPA materials.
All told, during the NDP period, the CCPA received over $410,000 in tax-funded support from BC's taxpayers—significant for any small think tank; the CCPA also received money from the Manitoba NDP government, and later, in 2002, $900,000 from the federal government. I know all this because I filed many of the Freedom of Information requests that uncovered the BC information.
When groups claim that tax relief is bad for you, and that government delivery and especially non-competition are desirable, it's not just their public sector patrons who may benefit from such arguments; it may be the groups themselves.
Related Items:
More new ideas on Tax Policy
Monday, April 20, 2009
Buy local movement now on the map - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA
Buy local movement now on the map - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA: "Brant MPP Dave Levac said that the group behind the map represents an example of a grassroots movement that moved the message upward through the system.
'We've heard you and we're responding,' he said.
He delighted the gathering by announcing that the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs has approved a $45,000 grant toward the project's $90,000 budget.
'This is not simply a whim, it's a science,' Levac said of the map and other features in the ongoing project to promote local agriculture. 'It's also tourism and an economy that we've lost track of and we have to get it back.'
Sandra Vos, co-ordinator of the Bountiful Brant project and vice-president of the Brant County Federation of Agriculture, thanked Levac for the province's support.
Excellent example of a green project that is win -win -win . Congratulations to all who made this a reality for Brant - PR "
'We've heard you and we're responding,' he said.
He delighted the gathering by announcing that the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs has approved a $45,000 grant toward the project's $90,000 budget.
'This is not simply a whim, it's a science,' Levac said of the map and other features in the ongoing project to promote local agriculture. 'It's also tourism and an economy that we've lost track of and we have to get it back.'
Sandra Vos, co-ordinator of the Bountiful Brant project and vice-president of the Brant County Federation of Agriculture, thanked Levac for the province's support.
Excellent example of a green project that is win -win -win . Congratulations to all who made this a reality for Brant - PR "
Brantford.com - Local Brantford News, Brantford Restaurant Listings, Events, Hotels, Attractions, Shopping, Movies, Bars, Clubs, Nightlife, City Guides, Harmony Square, blogs - Sent Using Google Toolbar
Local Brantford News,The membership of the Brant Conservative Party
Electoral District Association has chosen a new executive and board.
Following a report from MP Phil McColeman at the association's annual
meeting at the Bodega Inn recently, Craig Surette was announced as
president, Dave Smith (1st vice-president), Bill Harding (2nd
vice-president), Singe Ludlow (secretary) and Barb Herron (financial
agent). Elected as directors by the 423 members were Gordon Brain,
Lorie Dixon, Stephane Gagnon, Sabih Uddin, Ennio Trignani, Greg Josey,
Karen George, Bill Jones, Mike Quattrociocchi and Kevin Magee
Electoral District Association has chosen a new executive and board.
Following a report from MP Phil McColeman at the association's annual
meeting at the Bodega Inn recently, Craig Surette was announced as
president, Dave Smith (1st vice-president), Bill Harding (2nd
vice-president), Singe Ludlow (secretary) and Barb Herron (financial
agent). Elected as directors by the 423 members were Gordon Brain,
Lorie Dixon, Stephane Gagnon, Sabih Uddin, Ennio Trignani, Greg Josey,
Karen George, Bill Jones, Mike Quattrociocchi and Kevin Magee
A novel idea:employees have to perform to keep their jobs
Dan Ferris on ExxonMobil's extraordinary employee pay structure Monday, April 20, By Dan Ferris in Extreme Value:
ExxonMobil filed its proxy statement with the SEC last week. It's a better read than you might guess. For example, I bet you didn't know ExxonMobil executives get none of the safety net provisions that are standard among public companies' compensation packages:
- No employment contracts; all employment is "at will."
- No severance agreements.
- No change of control provisions. Equity compensation must be held beyond retirement, which can be forfeited "in case of detrimental activity, unapproved early termination, or material negative restatement of financial or operating results."
Without executive safety nets, employees have to perform to keep their jobs. If they don't perform, they risk forfeiting substantial amounts of equity compensation if they get fired. Even if they don't get fired, a restatement of results is enough to wipe out a large portion of their pay, perhaps a fourth or more. Executives have to get results that stick. I realize ExxonMobil's executive compensation program has a mediocre reputation. I think it's important ExxonMobil doesn't have the standard safety nets and encourages its employees to be risk-averse and take long-term outlooks. The oil business is plenty risky. Avoiding unnecessary risk is what leads ExxonMobil to its strong contrarian business strategy. I believe that's the only way to make money in natural resources.
" This is food for thought for those that want to improve results and outcomes. The Ferris review of Exxon indicates that entitlements ,such as safety nets, do not necessarily improve performance but could actually hinder results " Pr
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Air Safety Round Table to Voice Concerns Over Airline Deregulation
Air Safety Round Table to Voice Concerns Over Airline Deregulation
Few Canadians realize that Transport Canada is attempting to pass legislation that would make air carriers responsible for managing and inspecting their own safety systems, with minimal government involvement or oversight. This type of deregulation flies in the face of all the lessons learned from previous airline tragedies and is opposed by industry experts, unions and pilots as a dangerous strategy which is likely to have tragic consequences.
" This is a citizen watchdog note from FAIR click the link if you would like to participate " Pr
Few Canadians realize that Transport Canada is attempting to pass legislation that would make air carriers responsible for managing and inspecting their own safety systems, with minimal government involvement or oversight. This type of deregulation flies in the face of all the lessons learned from previous airline tragedies and is opposed by industry experts, unions and pilots as a dangerous strategy which is likely to have tragic consequences.
" This is a citizen watchdog note from FAIR click the link if you would like to participate " Pr
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Tax info online - Chatham Daily News - Ontario, CA
Tax info online - Chatham Daily News - Ontario, CA: "Tax info online
Posted By DAILY NEWS STAFF
Posted 5 hours ago
" making the system more user friendly and convenient-another first for chatham -thumbs up" -PR
The municipality says its online property tax service has simplified the process for those seeking information.
Sixty-six per cent of all property tax certificates are now delivered 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on the municipal website at www.chatham-kent.ca.
Chief administrative officer Rob Browning credited staff for the initiative, which has been in place for eight months.
'This service makes Chatham-Kent a national leader in this kind of customer service,' he said in a release. 'Municipal employees saw an opportunity to combine financial systems with information technology and come up with a major improvement.'
Anyone can buy a one-year $100 subscription to access general property tax information. Of the customers, 49 per cent are law firms, 43 per cent are realtors and eight per cent are financial firms.
A $40 charge is applied for each official statement of taxes.
The municipality stated it is the only Ontario jurisdiction to offer an online, self-service, real-time delivery, tax certificate program.
For more information, visit www.chatham-kent.ca/taxesor call 519-360- 1998."
Posted By DAILY NEWS STAFF
Posted 5 hours ago
" making the system more user friendly and convenient-another first for chatham -thumbs up" -PR
The municipality says its online property tax service has simplified the process for those seeking information.
Sixty-six per cent of all property tax certificates are now delivered 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on the municipal website at www.chatham-kent.ca.
Chief administrative officer Rob Browning credited staff for the initiative, which has been in place for eight months.
'This service makes Chatham-Kent a national leader in this kind of customer service,' he said in a release. 'Municipal employees saw an opportunity to combine financial systems with information technology and come up with a major improvement.'
Anyone can buy a one-year $100 subscription to access general property tax information. Of the customers, 49 per cent are law firms, 43 per cent are realtors and eight per cent are financial firms.
A $40 charge is applied for each official statement of taxes.
The municipality stated it is the only Ontario jurisdiction to offer an online, self-service, real-time delivery, tax certificate program.
For more information, visit www.chatham-kent.ca/taxesor call 519-360- 1998."
Looking for a few good men and women -the governance process
golden opportunity Posted By BRUCE CORCORAN
Chatham-Kent is looking for a few good men and women. Six to be exact.
Hopefully the decision process will be a nightmare, for all the right reasons.
The municipality is seeking six Chatham-Kent residents to form a governance task force to help with the corporate review process.
Think of it, these six lucky individuals will have a say in how to improve how the municipality operates. From ward boundaries to the size of council, this task force will have a say, but subject to council's ultimate approval, however.
Judging by how many people take issue with the day-to-day operations, from tree cutting on streets such as Victoria Avenue in Chatham, to the equipment supplied to councillors and top administrators, to the condition of our roads and bridges, plus a host of other areas, including our property taxes, thousands of Chatham-Kent residents will be signing up to have their say.
That would be wonderful, albeit a nightmare for Chatham-Kent administration personnel who will be tasked to sift through the list of applicants for the volunteer positions.
What shouldn't occur is a light list of people interested in the position. So many people have spoken up over the years, either by letters to the editor, open protest, by delegation to council, or in countless coffee shops across the municipality, it's time to put up or shut up.
How the six positions will be formed -- and ultimately council would like to see one from each ward -- is somewhat flawed, but not much can be done about it. Administration will choose the volunteers through a blind or anonymous process.
This isn't as simple as picking bingo numbers. Qualifications must be examined, and the best people picked for the task force. Unfortunately, even with names deleted from the process, the qualifications and backgrounds listed could very well give away the identities of many potential candidates. This isn't Toronto and its massive population; this is Chatham-Kent, municipality of 106,000. And when breaking down into wards, the population pools shrink even further.
As a result, it's possible past history with a nameless but obvious applicant could cloud administration's judgment. But there isn't much that can be done to get around this, other than to trust in the selection process.
Despite facing the potential hurdle of being known to administrative personnel making the selections and the reality council has the final say on any recommendations made by the task force, the opportunity to provide such important input should be too great a draw to avoid for our outspoken citizens. If you care about your community and think you know of ways to improve how the folks at the Civic Centre run things, get involved; apply.
Forms must be submitted by April 30. For more information, call Dawna Urquhart at 519-352-8401, ext. 3011, or e-mail CKcao@chatham-kent.ca.
"The natives are getting restless and want to be more involved in the spending-governance . Getting them involved in the process makes sense -and more eyes on the ball can only help the public accountability and governance process . This is a model that should be endorsed in every community by the Taxpayers " PR
Chatham-Kent is looking for a few good men and women. Six to be exact.
Hopefully the decision process will be a nightmare, for all the right reasons.
The municipality is seeking six Chatham-Kent residents to form a governance task force to help with the corporate review process.
Think of it, these six lucky individuals will have a say in how to improve how the municipality operates. From ward boundaries to the size of council, this task force will have a say, but subject to council's ultimate approval, however.
Judging by how many people take issue with the day-to-day operations, from tree cutting on streets such as Victoria Avenue in Chatham, to the equipment supplied to councillors and top administrators, to the condition of our roads and bridges, plus a host of other areas, including our property taxes, thousands of Chatham-Kent residents will be signing up to have their say.
That would be wonderful, albeit a nightmare for Chatham-Kent administration personnel who will be tasked to sift through the list of applicants for the volunteer positions.
What shouldn't occur is a light list of people interested in the position. So many people have spoken up over the years, either by letters to the editor, open protest, by delegation to council, or in countless coffee shops across the municipality, it's time to put up or shut up.
How the six positions will be formed -- and ultimately council would like to see one from each ward -- is somewhat flawed, but not much can be done about it. Administration will choose the volunteers through a blind or anonymous process.
This isn't as simple as picking bingo numbers. Qualifications must be examined, and the best people picked for the task force. Unfortunately, even with names deleted from the process, the qualifications and backgrounds listed could very well give away the identities of many potential candidates. This isn't Toronto and its massive population; this is Chatham-Kent, municipality of 106,000. And when breaking down into wards, the population pools shrink even further.
As a result, it's possible past history with a nameless but obvious applicant could cloud administration's judgment. But there isn't much that can be done to get around this, other than to trust in the selection process.
Despite facing the potential hurdle of being known to administrative personnel making the selections and the reality council has the final say on any recommendations made by the task force, the opportunity to provide such important input should be too great a draw to avoid for our outspoken citizens. If you care about your community and think you know of ways to improve how the folks at the Civic Centre run things, get involved; apply.
Forms must be submitted by April 30. For more information, call Dawna Urquhart at 519-352-8401, ext. 3011, or e-mail CKcao@chatham-kent.ca.
"The natives are getting restless and want to be more involved in the spending-governance . Getting them involved in the process makes sense -and more eyes on the ball can only help the public accountability and governance process . This is a model that should be endorsed in every community by the Taxpayers " PR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)