Our position in this election is we're not going to run deficits Stephen Harper, October 7 2008

During the recent federal election I posted a detailed analysis of federal government finances comparing this fiscal year to all years prior this decade. In addition to discovering that the federal government already had been running an operational deficit of between 13 and 23 billion dollars, and that such a deficit was virtually unheard of during this decade, I also observed Harper and Flaherty dancing around the issue as the election ground on:

Stephen Harper has repeatedly claimed his management is one of prudence, that his government is running a surplus, and on Tuesday he specifically said his government would not run a deficit (Reuters, Oct. 7 2008), after having danced around that issue of late (Calgary Herald, Oct. 6 2008).

Now the election is over, the hidden agenda, or hidden deficit, has come out of its cave:

• Harper mulls running deficit to stimulate economy, as G20 summit ends (Sheldon Alberts, Canwest News, November 15 2008)
• Expect deficit, Tories warn (The Gazette, Canwest News, November 19 2008)
• Flaherty to Stay as Canada Finance Minister, Hints at Deficit (Bloomberg, October 29, 2008)

Today Parliament's independent Budget Officer cites certain Conservative government policies as fundamental causes underlying the impending federal deficit Harper and Flaherty now say is inevitable, even though just a few short weeks ago during the election they claimed would never, ever, happen.

• Tories blamed for coming deficits: GST cut, spending driving Canada into red, Budget officer Kevin Page warns (David Akin, Canwest News, November 20 2008)
• Ottawa's '09 deficit may hit $14B (Les Whittington, The Star)
• Policies, not crisis seen causing Canada deficit (Louise Egan, Reuters, November 20, 2008)

We could be looking at a bugetary deficit of as much as 14 billion dollars. Kevin Page, Parliamentary Budget Officer, November 20, 2008

The report straight from the horse's mouth: Economic and Fiscal Assessment (Parliamentary Budget Office, Ottawa, Canada, November 20, 2008 - www.parl.gc.ca/pbo-dpb)

As the Harper government has been known to "disappear" documents, and parliamentary officers, it doesn't like, I've attached the above noted assessment to this post for future research purposes.

National News Watch has obtained leaked copies of policy proposal documents to be distributed to delegates next week at the Conservative Party of Canada's second policy convention.

As is my custom, you'll find them all attached to this post, along with CPC constitutional amendments obtained from the party's web site, for future reference.

It should be noted that Harper's illegal election had an impact on the internal workings of the Conservative Party as it resulted in the choice of policy and constitutional resolutions to be debated in open session to be made by a small number of people that constitute the party's National Council.

More to the point why, any rational observer will wonder, would Conservative members bother paying up big dollars to travel to a convention in Winnipeg only to spend their weekend locked in a convention centre discussing policies that their Leader doesn't feel obligated to abide by?

Conservative Party spokesman Ryan Sparrow played down the potential impact of the convention resolutions on government decisions. "They're just like any other consultation you would have with any stakeholder group," he said, confirming the government will not be bound by the Winnipeg decisions. (Globe and Mail)

Stephen Harper has repeatedly ignored or made decisions completely contradictory to party policy in the past. Members are fooling themselves if they believe their prescriptions hold any sway over the PM, for in Stephen Harper's eyes party members, like all Canadians, are merely obstacles to be overcome.

We'll return to the Conservative policy fest over the coming week as there is much more to review and say.

National News Watch has obtained a draft policy resolution document which I've attached to this post for posterity. Many proposed amendments are of a Milquetoast nature, although some will raise a few eyebrows:

• Ottawa Centre decides its ok to do away with support for whistleblower legislation in policy 3, Public Service Excellence
• Change "all votes free" to "most votes free" (policy 7, Free Votes); given their record on making everything a confidence motion, its clear Harper has never followed the spirit of the party's policy anyway
• Policy 39, International Trade, has a new section proposed by Caucus Committee which is destined to give sovereigntists carte blanche to worry about continentalist plans for a North American Union, as "impediments to the efficient flow of goods, services, and people at border crossing points" can mean anything.
• Policy 44, Alternative Energy and Transitional Fuels, contains amendments proposed by National Policy Committee which take the decidedly un-conservative approach of selecting market winners (picking hydrogen). Most "conservatives" believe government has no business picking winners. Given that a similar rewording proposed by the Charlottetown EDA also explicitly notes adding hydrogen as a fuel, one wonders if there's a hydrogen lobby at work here. Kings-Hants at least is brave enough to propose that Canadians need to be encouraged to reduce their energy consumption. Crowfoot appeases the agri-lobby by suggesting targets for bio-fuel blends with petroleum products be set.
• Of particular note to B.C. and Atlantic provinces are amendments to proposal 46, Offshore Oil and Gas Development, which strikes environmental assessment as a goal. Presumably the oil and gas lobby doesn't believe consultations and assessments are important, perhaps because prior consultations in B.C. have produced overwhelming opposition to oil and gas exploration in our coastal and off-shore waters.
• Under policy 72, Aboriginal Affairs Principles, Ottawa West-Nepean would like to see a Conservative government refuse to negotiate aboriginal "land claims where the rule of law is not respected". Quite probably these EDA folks are oblivious to the fact that Harper broke his own electoral law in calling the last election. Where's the motion on that?
• No group proposed actually strengthening policy 81, Firearms. They could have, for example, removed the section which calls for the repeal of Canada's gun registry. In doing so they'd be agreeing with a majority of senior law enforcement officials across the country.

Of course there's far more meat for chewing on if you look at the policies in total rather than just at the amendment proposals.

FFF - Flaherty's Fiscal Fumbles - destined to become a regular feature. Today's instalment: Flaherty's moves have only enabled more corporate tax avoidance.

Recently a $13 billion dollar deal concluded, allowing Teck to buy the remaining shares of Fording Canadian Coal Trust. Despite all the talk of the on-going credit crunch, the overly generous moves by the Bank of Canada and Flaherty's Ministry of Finance have made it possible for banks to work with Teck to obtain the necessary financing and conclude the deal.

No new jobs will be created through this transaction. There is no net benefit to Canada.

Yet Canadian taxpayers are footing a big chunk of the bill, by providing a taxpayer-backed credit backstop, and through being shafted as Teck avoids paying a $4 billion dollar tax bill as a result of this transaction.

While this exercise in tax avoidance plays out under our very noses, lets think back to the last time tax avoidance was a subject in vogue in Conservative politics in Canada.

On October 31st, 2006 Jim Flaherty, then and now the Conservative Minister of Finance, announced that Income Trusts would in the future be subjected to new taxation. The move was particularly controversial as the Conservatives had campaigned only months earlier in part on a promise to leave the income trust sector alone.

The aftermath, dubbed the Halloween Massacre, saw the income trust market plummeting on the news, erasing billions in market value in the weeks to follow. Small and large investors alike, including many of Canada's pension plans, were significantly impacted by the on-going turmoil. Now more than two years later, many still feel betrayed.

Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty's volte-face on trusts was defended as a sign their government was serious about fairness in taxation. Flaherty said trust conversion was "a growing trend to corporate tax avoidance". From a CBC News article:

By some estimates, the federal and provincial governments stand to lose as much as $1 billion annually in tax revenue to trusts. There are now more than 250 income trusts in Canada.

Trust conversions are increasing in popularity because trusts do not pay corporate tax. Instead, they pay out most of their income in distributions to unitholders, who then pay tax on those distributions.

Flaherty said that situation could not be allowed to continue. "This trend has caused me growing concern," he said. "It's not right and it's not fair."

Bringing both pieces of the puzzle together:

• In October 2006 Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty closed what he called a "loophole" that companies could exploit to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, a loss to taxpayers controversially estimated at the time at $1 billion a year.
• In fall 2008 that same finance minister, backed by Stephen Harper appointed Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of Canada, enabled Teck Cominco to avoid paying $4 billion in corporate taxes.

Flaherty's Fiscal Fumble has cost Canadian taxpayers at least $4 billion in avoided corporate taxes plus we are even footing part of the bill which makes this deal possible in the first place.

The deal smells so bad that even those in financial circles are fuming about it.

Separated at birth double feature: Peter Van Loan and Peter Pettigrew aka "Scabbers" the rat. (With apologies to J.K. Rowling) and Stephen Ledrew and a Toad (With apologies to Mother Nature)

A series on back-stabbing party insiders could go on for, well, years. While I have no intention of going all the way down that path at present, today I did want to mention in brief two individuals from either side of the red/blue divide.

First lets cast our eyes to the Liberals and consider Stephen LeDrew, the former Liberal Party of Canada president who famously called Prime Minister Jean Chretien's reformation of electoral finance laws "dumb as a sack of hammers". With utter predictability LeDrew recently has been out attacking his party and its leader once again. Talk about has-beens and the pot calling the kettle black!

(The former president of the Liberal Party of Canada and failed Toronto mayoralty race candidate has something of a toad-like smile, don't you think?)

While considering LeDrew's constant attacks on leaders of his party I jumped aboard a train of thought which led me directly to another party's back-stabber in chief, Conservative MP Peter Van Loan, who in this last parliament finally achieved a position of recognition as Government Leader of the House of Commons. Mr. Van Loan you'll agree bears a striking resemblance to J.K. Rowling's infamous double crosser, Peter "Scabbers the rat" Pettigrew.

While the Liberal's LeDrew is stabbing the backs of both current and past leaders, we have to go back a few years and remember Van Loan had been pushing for Progressive Conservative Party of Canada leader Joe Clark to be replaced.

Clark won the challenge and instead Van Loan was pushed out. Van Loan and other unnamed party sources would continue to attack Clark over the years until Clark's eventual retirement from the Leader's office. Many of these unnamed sources saw Clark as blocking their primary agenda of moving forward with reunification with Preston Manning's western-based Reform party which later became the Day and Harper-led Canadian Alliance. Reunification or merger would, they hoped, bring back the Progressive Conservative party of old to a position of power.

They were both right and wrong. Certainly the new Conservative Party is more muscular than either the Reform/Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative parties were on their own (post Mulroney), yet the new merged alliance is nothing at all like the Progressive Conservative party of old (under any leader, MacKay doesn't count). Some claim this to be a good thing; I am not one of them.

This is an update to the news Conservative Garry Lunn has been the beneficiary of suspicious third party advertising.

Galloping Beaver digs a little deeper into the story first reported in the Tyee, drawing lines between the third-party advertisers and Calgary based oil and gas giant EnCana Corp. This puts lie to the claim by Stephen Harper that his changes to the Elections Act have limited corporate influence in our electoral process - changes to the Elections Act have merely forced corporate influence further underground.

I'll add that newly minted west-coaster Gwyn Morgan, the former CEO of EnCana, was also a financial backer of Stephen Harper and at least one other cabinet minister. As one of his first acts following the 2006 election, Harper attempted to get Morgan nominated as chair of the federal government's public appointments board. Opposition parties nixed that.

It is my earnest submission that signing the Kyoto Protocol would go down in history as one of the most damaging international agreements ever signed by a Canadian Prime Minister. Gwyn Morgan, former CEO EnCana Corp

Yet Gwyn Morgan's influence on the national stage has remained constant. Currently Morgan writes a regular column for the business pages of the Globe and Mail. His former company, EnCana, of which he was the driving force and founding CEO, is lobbying for opening B.C. coastal waters to increased oil tanker traffic (Oil, Water, Salmon Do Not Mix). The company plans to build a bi-directional "gateway" (a term David Emerson uses frequently) pipeline to the coast from Alberta.

Morgan was also one of the principal forces behind the Alberta oil and gas community's fight against Kyoto, a passion he shared with then Opposition Leader Stephen Harper. (Harper: Past, Present, Future Inaction on Climate Change)

Having lost the battle for the environment at the federal level, coastal oil and gas development, pipeline terminals, and tanker traffic needs to become a front of mind issue-and in a hurry-such that it becomes one of the major ballot questions in the upcoming provincial election.

British Columbians don't want to see more oil and gas development at the expense of real progress in building alternative sources of energy for our province. We certainly do not want to see oil and gas exploration on our coastal waters, nor tankers plying our dangerous but incredibly beautiful and productive coasts. Gordon Campbell has tried to innoculate himself against criticism from environmentalists by adopting a carbon tax (a policy, if not an implementation, which I support) yet with his other hand behind his back he is enabling everything which British Columbians have repeatedly spoken against.

Record low voter turnout, blindness to the important issues - we get the government we deserve

Someone has launched a program of automated phone calls allegedly impersonating the NDP in Saanich-Gulf Islands. Gary Lunn's campaign denies involvement yet questions remain unanswered.

The Tyee has further details on last night's story about alleged impersonation of the NDP being a factor in today's vote. Garry Lunn's campaign denies any involvement. Calls made into the riding urged voters to cast their ballot for a candidate which had earlier been forced to drop out of the race.

We didn't do it. I hope nobody's thinking it's us. If they were, I'd be quite upset. Byng Giraud, Campaign Co-Manager for Garry Lunn

The automated telephone calls made to electors in Saanich-Gulf Islands are said to have stated the following:

Support Julian West of the NDP. Everyday families need to know they have someone in Ottawa fighting for them. Stephen Harper is the wrong kind of strong. Wrong on the economy, wrong on health care and wrong on the environment. Stéphane Dion has been his best friend over the last year and now wants to impose a second carbon tax on British Columbia. Jack Layton and the NDP won't let that happen. Let's put the priorities of the kitchen table first. Tomorrow vote Julian West of the NDP. Alleged impersonation of NDP campaign

I've written about Giraud before in context with the David Emerson affair. Giraud has acted as a lobbyist and power broker in conservative politics for some time. Currently he is Vice-President, Policy and Communications, for the Mining Association of B.C.. His candidate, Garry Lunn, as a sitting Minister of Natural Resources is in a position to directly respond to issues of specific concern to Giraud and the association he represents. He is therefore highly motivated to see Lunn re-elected, although that certainly doesn't mean he has knowledge of or any culpability in connection with the alleged fraud.

I accept that there could be an innocent explanation for this. While the NDP has discounted the possibility of their accidental involvement, its at least a possibility they had something preprogrammed which never was cancelled. Remote, but possible. There could be other parties or individuals behind this. Or it could be someone connected or supportive of the Garry Lunn campaign. After all, the stakes in this riding are higher than most.

The best we can do is ask questions and hope that Elections Canada and police investigate fully. Here are some sample questions they ought to ask:

1. Do any current or past members of the Conservative Saanich-Gulf Islands Electoral District Association (SGI EDA) have present or past connections with demon dialing services?
2. Will the SGI EDA pass on the names of those member(s) who have present or past connections with demon dialing services to the appropriate authorities, unbidden? If asked? Will they investigate on their own accord?

I have great respect for certain members of that EDA; these are people who would never knowingly be involved with such a deception. Yet my confidence in these individuals does not mean there isn't a rogue person or persons working undemocratically, and potentially illegally, under the radar without the knowledge of the EDA.

Harper Conservatives steal another page from Australian electoral playbook

Harper Conservatives are not only plagiarizing speeches from the Aussies, supporting the Iraq War like the Aussies, now we see evidence Harper's gang are lifting their election tactics straight out of the Australian handbook:

Click to visit video site

It should be noted that the Aussie election advertisement was part of a failed attempt by Howard to hold onto power - his party not only lost the election to the Labour Party but Howard himself lost his own seat, making him only the second Australian prime minister in history to exit with such ingnominy.

Full points to the Liberal war room which has been doing a bang up job at unearthing these Howard-Harper relationships, rightfully highlighting that Harper's bunch are yet another bunch neoconservative war-mongering ideologues.

Update: The deeply conservative Liberal Party of Australia (yes, I know its hard to keep track of who is who in the zoo and what side of the political spectrum they are on - just know that Aussie "Liberals" are basically the same as Bush Republicans and Harper Conservatives) has an on-line election reminder on their home page pointing back to the Conservative Party of Canada.

Aussie and Canadian conservatives in bed together

Criminal sabotage targeting only homes and vehicles belonging to St. Paul's area Liberal supporters this weekend was preceded by a similar attack on Liberal supporters in Guelph several weeks ago.

Its been brought to my attention that criminal attacks on Liberal supporters this weekend in the riding of St. Paul's are similar in nature to attacks made on August 30th during the then underway by-election in Guelph which was to elect a replacement for retiring Liberal member of parliament, Brenda Chamberlain.

Vandalism citing C-68

Brake lines cut and graffitti sprayed during Guelph by-election campaign (August 30, Guelph Mercury):

GUELPH — Vandals spray-painted the word "scum" in blood-red letters on the front wall of Frank Maine's Sherwood Drive home and lives were endangered when four vehicles had their brake lines cut overnight yesterday.

Maine was not the only Liberal party supporter whose property was stained with anti-Liberal graffiti, in what Guelph Police are calling "numerous cases of malicious damage and mischief incidents" throughout the city.

On top of brake lines being cut, two other vehicles had graffiti scratched into them. At least 10 homes were attacked, including Maines' next-door neighbour and others in the northeast Guelph neighbourhood. Some homes in the city's south end where also struck.

It appears only residents with Liberal Frank Valeriote byelection signs on their lawns were victimized, and some graffiti was decidedly pro-New Democratic Party. NDP candidate Tom King angrily denounced the vandalism, and likened it to an act of hate. Valeriote called it "voter intimidation."

All parties need to condemn these attacks immediately and all parties need to work pro-actively with police to identify the perpetrators as quickly as possible before a) someone is hurt, and b) to prevent Canada's electoral system from resembling that of Russia's.

Criminals lurk here

Hopefully these two very similar and nearby incidents are the act of a single person or group and police are able to quickly make arrests. The pro-NDP graffiti seems to me to be an obvious attempt at misdirection, a feint to put police onto the wrong track. Still, all avenues should be pursued, as I'm reminded of the chaps who flung dung at David Emerson's constituency office in 2006 (Brothers arrested in smelly protest). While they weren't tied to any party, their actions cast a cloud over all legitimate opposition to Emerson's defection.

Perhaps a more telling clue to the Guelph attacks appears further along in the above noted article:

A Liberal MP in the '70s and a Guelph city councillor in the '90s, Maine woke up yesterday morning to find the damage, which also included the graffiti writing "C-68 sucks." In Canadian legislation, Bill C-68 refers both to the country's gun control laws and to the first version of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

There are in fact three different bills labelled C-68 in Canadian parliamentary history, only one of which ever received Royal Assent, passed during a Liberal goverment:

1. C-68 An Act to support development of Canada's Pacific Gateway - 38th Parliament, 1st Session (October 4, 2004 - November 29, 2005). Status: First Reading
2. C-68 An Act in respect of criminal justice for young persons and to amend and repeal other Acts - 36th Parliament, 1st Session (September 22, 1997 - September 18, 1999). Status: First Reading
3. C-68 An Act respecting firearms and other weapons - 35th Parliament, 1st Session (January 17, 1994 - February 5, 1996). Status: Royal Assent

If the reference is to the Firearms Act, this would tend to implicate Conservative Party supporters, particularly those who originated from the Reform or Canadian Alliance parties. Some may recall the constant and strident opposition to Bill C-68 from those parties and sympathetic supporters. One Canadian Alliance MP, Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville - SK), made opposition to C-68 his personal mission, and continues to do so to this day as a Conservative Party member of parliament.

Rest assured Garry Breitkreuz will never betray the firearms community. We have been united in our 12-year fight to repeal Bill C-68. I will never give up and I hope you will stay with us until it’s dead and gone. Garry Breitkreuz

As an aide in understanding where Mr. Breitkreuz expects the Conservative Party to head on gun control legislation, he helpfully quotes Stephen Harper and his former boss, Preston Manning, in one paragraph:

“I was and still am in total agreement with the statement made in the House of Commons by former Reform Leader Preston Manning on June 13, 1995: ‘Bill C-68, if passed into law, will not be a good law. It will be a bad law, a blight on the legislative record of the government, a law that fails the three great tests of constitutionality, of effectiveness and of democratic consent of the governed. What should be the fate of a bad law? It should be repealed…’ C-68 has proven to be a bad law and has created a bureaucratic nightmare for both gun owners and the government. As Leader of the Official Opposition, I will use all the powers afforded to me as Leader and continue our party's fight to repeal Bill C-68 and replace it with a firearms control system that is cost effective and respects the rights of Canadians to own and use firearms responsibly.” Stephen Harper, Canadian Alliance leadership candidate, January 2002

Opposing firearms legislation has always been a hallmark of the Reform / Canadian Alliance now Conservative Party. This policy has always been a sop to their mostly rural voting base. Most urban voters would like to see the Firearms Act contain ever more tight restrictions on firearms use and ownership, and firearm bans made even more sweeping.

Harper delivers speech in 2002 containing plagiarism from materials right-wing think tank first authored in 1998

Click to enlarge

Unearthed by another independent researcher, today we see once more that Harper has repackaged the words of right-wing thinkers who went before him. This time they are the words of Craig Docksteader, currently the operations manager for a right-wing think tank, the Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy.

While I'm sure Mr. Harper has some original ideas all of his own, voters ought to question the false centrist image the Conservative Party has tried to cultivate for Mr. Harper and his party, given Harper's propensity to quote the words or mimic the policies of right wing thinkers like George W. Bush, John Howard, Mike Harris and even Craig Docksteader.

Plagiarism isn't the key fault here, its the fact that Harper endorses such people and their policies without reservation that is the real issue voters should face.

< Read Harper: Caught in the act III