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.

Twas the night before the vote, and all through the land, electors dreamed that Vancouver would elect trustees and councillors with the vision to cope with the challenges ahead. Come on Vancouver, forget that boring mayoralty race and focus on school board. You know you want to. [sarcasm off]

Vancouver school board and education issues in the news, for your pre or post voting pleasure:

Fight Victoria, urge parents at school board debate: Parents expressed anger and frustration at the chronic delays in seismic school upgrades at a school board candidates debate last night in Vancouver, urging the panel to fight Victoria on what many see as a forced choice between school space, and school safety. (Colleen Kimmett, The Tyee, Friday November 14, 2008)

Child Care Bottleneck a Hot Voter Issue: Wait lists are long but empty classrooms stay off limits for care. Stressed parents are fuming. (Charles Campbell, The Tyee, Friday November 14, 2008) See also:

• After-school care in Vancouver hits crisis point (Charles Campbell, The Georgia Straight, August 21, 2008)

NPA makes education promises ahead of election (Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun, Wednesday, November 12, 2008)

Opposition candidates attack NPA school trustees: Two of the city's three major political civic parties have released their platforms for the Nov. 14 school board election. Vision released its school board platform Monday morning and COPE released a sprawling platform last week. The NPA says its positions will be released any day. (Cheryl Rossi , Vancouver Courier, Wednesday November 5, 2008)

NPA school trustee candidates out of touch with what is really happening in Vancouver schools, teachers say: Vancouver teachers are surprised at the lack of knowledge among the NPA candidates for school board trustee about the current realities of Vancouver public schools. (CNW Newswire, Wednesday November 8, 2008)

Vision platform to limit class size, advertising in schools (Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun, Monday, November 03, 2008)

Secret Vancouver school report on closures released, but heavily censored: A confidential report on the future of Vancouver public schools has been released more than a year after it was presented to trustees during an in camera meeting, but it's so heavily edited that it reveals little. (Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun, Tuesday, October 28, 2008)

Construction for both new schools and structural upgrades is one of the big issues facing Vancouver parents and other school community stakeholders, as almost one hundred

Fixing leaky schools: The province has settled with boards of education over the repair of leaky buildings. It was a long time coming, Wendy Stueck writes, and the work is only beginning. School boards have been looking for some way to recoup costs of repairs that in some cases amount to millions of dollars. The problems, similar to those that emerged with condominiums, involve "water ingress" or leaks, and affect schools built between 1985 and 2000. (Wendy Stueck, The Globe and Mail, Saturday November 15, 2008) See also:

• Recently constructed Dickens Elementary in Vancouver had its own construction issues; apparently either the designers or contractors got building elevations incorrect and as a result the middle block, which connects the classroom block to the gymnasium block, has what may prove to be an expensive flaw. The roof deck in the middle has a significant slope that leads directly to a glass wall and entry way on the classroom block. Some have expressed concerns that significant rain or snowfall could lead to future water ingress issues.
• Taxpayers' bill soars for leaky school: British Columbia is spending $2 million to repair an Abbotsford school built to great acclaim in 2000 as the province's first and only experiment with a public-private partnership (P3) for school construction. (Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun, Monday November 10, 2008)

Platforms for COPE [HTML], NPA [MS Word], Vision [PDF] can be found at the aforementioned links and are also attached for future reference (Note for the MS Word challenged: I've provided here a PDF version of the NPA document).

Should Vancouverites cast votes for candidates who remain in hiding or mute in the audience?

The NPA appears to have decided all they needed to do to quash the "skipping out" complaints was to show up in force last night and... sit in the audience. A fairly full suite of incumbent and would be NPA trustee candidates, plus at least a handler and supporter or two, turned out last night.

Unfortunately, and I mean that with sincerity, we heard nothing from those new to this process. Le Gallais and Singh were in the audience as was Clarence Hansen; I don't recall seeing Woo, Holden or Nance but they may have been there, mute in the audience (not for the first time).

Hansen, Denike, and Gibson we already well know. It's the rest that need to earn our votes and in my opinion they have failed to do this. That's not a partisan swipe but fair comment on the process. How are we to understand how these newcomers would act as stewards of the district without having meaningful interaction from them?

I don't elect slates, I want to elect capabilities.

How can a responsible voter become aware of a candidate's capabilities if the candidate hides from the public? Should a two paragraph party-supplied bio be enough? No.

(Tangential rant: We don't even know what the writing skills of the MIA candidates are, as the biography for most NPA candidates appears to have been written by a single person - note the style similarity and consistent use of the third person.)

A scant bio on the the city and party web sites isn't enough to provide voters with sufficient information to elect someone to be responsible for the management of a board of education that touches 55,000 children and 100,000 (one in six) Vancouverites. Should we be voting for candidates we know very little about, thus giving them the management responsibility for a budget of almost half a billion dollars?

No, I don't believe we should.

I have routinely voted for a mix of candidates from all parties, including the NPA, picking and choosing who best should take on responsibility. I certainly will not be casting a ballot for candidates that refuse to speak out in public, or, having done so once and failed, aren't brave enough to use another public opportunity to perhaps better express themselves.

There is no point in electing weak representatives to School Board. Their hands are already bound by the nature of the co-governance relationship all school boards share with the Ministry of Education. I would hope Vancouver voters don't further hamstring the School Board by electing members who are not strong enough to speak with courage of their convictions and past experiences and how they will apply those abilities to the task of continually improving our local school system.

If trustee candidates aren't strong enough to brave an evening with some parents, how in the world are they going to be strong enough to take on the (often thankless) job?

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.

Held at Bayview Community School in the picturesque west side neighbourhood of West Point Grey, last night's forum for school board trustee candidates was well attended by the public and by many trustee candidates. Regrettably for all involved not a single NPA candidate or incumbent trustee showed up.

Last night was not the first time the NPA muzzled candidates.

According to organizers of the meeting, despite having long planned to participate, the NPA pulled their participation citing concerns over the format which allowed for a five minute opening statement by a representative from each party. The NPA is said to oppose having a productive town-hall style forum merely because COPE and Vision together are seen as a slate, and effectively are given an extra opportunity to speak.

This complaint is of course utter nonsense. Parents and public attending these meetings don't care at all about the delivery of scripted party lines in an opening statement. What we really came to hear is how candidates answer questions and thus be forced to think on their feet. Hearing their answers is hugely instructive as to the nature of their experience and quality of their character.

Put in context, the opening statements covered only fifteen minutes of what has turned out at both DPAC hosted events this week to be more than two and a half hours of productive discussion.

The evening prior four NPA candidates--incumbent trustee Ken Denike along with hopefuls Sophia Woo, Margit Nance, and Eileen Le Gallais--turned out for a similar meeting at Van Tech on Vancouver's east side.

I attended both meetings. Having carefully watched both forums, my objective assessment is that the NPA does not wish to put its rookie candidates under the light of further scrutiny. One can naturally draw a conclusion, quite correctly in my estimation, as to why.

At the Van Tech debate on Wednesday incumbent trustee Ken Denike took most of the questions and was seen to be urging his co-candidates to take questions from time to time, often without success. Some, not all, responses provided by the NPA rookies could be at best described as... disappointing. At worst? Ill-informed.

Margit Nance, judging by how little we heard from her, is capable of speaking for herself but repeatedly chose not to. We'll never know, before election day at least, if she can acquit herself well or not.

Eileen Le Gallais should have said less. Notably her suggested solution for the interlinked problems of class composition and chronic underfunding of special education positions was to draft volunteers, in some cases from within the ranks of senior school grades. Le Gallais left the distinct impression that her years of experience in education are rooted in yesteryears, and that her thinking has not advanced with the times. Sophia Woo had nothing remarkable to say during her infrequent times at the microphone. The public has an interest in hearing more, not less, from these and other candidates.

The point of this post is not to rail on about individuals or one party but to illustrate why the NPA pulled out which had nothing to do with "format" but everything to do with the performance of their own candidates. If NPA rookie trustee candidates are unwilling to stand up to public scrutiny, they certainly should not be entrusted with the job of standing up for our children!

After over two and a half hours of questions and answers, we mostly heard from Ken Denike and barely heard anything from the three rookie NPA candidates sitting on stage. At least one other NPA rookie trustee candidate, Lakhbir Singh, was in the building but did not participate.

There was a subtle difference in how each meeting was moderated. At Van Tech a representative from each party was given opportunity and time to respond to questions. Some parties took advantage of their time to pass the microphone to another representative to complete an answer. The NPA did not take advantage of this possibility to include more voices than Denike's.

At Bayview the process started out similarly but the moderator quite adeptly recognized that time limits were not so necessary and all those who had something to add in response to a question were provided the opportunity to do so.

Yesterday many parents gave three hours of their evening and came out to Bayview on a cold and blustery night. Had the NPA bothered to repay this courtesy and join the discussion, I have no doubt whatsoever that the all trustee candidates would have found the atmosphere collegial and conducive to a substantial discussion on what turned out to be a broad array of topics.

Pulling candidates from debate is a tactic which the Conservative Party has made its signature move. By adopting this sleazy tactic, it would appear the NPA believe their best route to electoral success it to hide its candidates from public view and scrutiny.

I have never voted a "slate" in civic elections, preferring to pick and choose on my own the candidates for council, parks, and schools. Thus in the past I've cast a vote for some of the same NPA trustee candidates who now refuse to talk openly with parents. I travelled across town expecting to be able to chat with Trustee Gibson (NPA) and some of the new faces now vying to lead our board of education. I want to know where my vote is going—no party and no individual gets an automatic ✗ from me.

Anyone who knows me well understands I am a passionate believer in real democracy. Too many of our world's problems are caused, aided, and abetted by secrecy and deception. Our political process and outcomes deserve better than underhanded tactics.

The NPA school trustee candidates have one last chance to redeem themselves: Hosted by Think City, there will be a final all candidates forum held next week, Thursday November 13th from 7:00pm to 9:00pm at Laura Secord Elementary, 2500 Lakewood Avenue (in between Broadway and 12th avenue). Details and registration.

Vancouver Sun education columnist Janet Steffenhagen writes: Is the premier playing favourites?

Four more Vancouver schools have been promised benefits from the Neighbourhoods of Learning project, but other districts are still waiting to hear what's in it for them.

Last month, a ministry official wrote to the Vancouver board of education offering to include Douglas, Kitchener, Sexsmith and Secord elementary schools in the NoL program. It's not clear what that means since these four will not be part of the pilot project, but they have submitted wishlists, as requested, for ministry consideration.

For the record our school, Sir James Douglas Elementary - in Vancouver, not the identically named school in Victoria - submitted a detailed requirements gap analysis, not a "wishlist".

The analysis determined where the Ministry of Education's Ministry Area Standards (attached) fail to recognize and meet the needs of a large, middle-school like, elementary school. The school community came together to analyse what was additionally required on top of the MAS to deliver all the programming Douglas currently provides. Completely devoid of any wishlist items, the factual and unemotional document ran on some 13 pages.

Its telling of the existing B.C. Seismic Mitigation Program and school capital funding process that at no time does anyone connected with MEd or the Vancouver School Board even pretend to undertake the analysis the school community ultimately had to do themselves. Yet, unbelievably, MEd funds school replacement projects without ever having contemplated actual on the ground requirements. Local boards of education are instead forced by MEd to use a simplistic cookie-cutter approach where quite literally what defines a school project is looked up in a table based on headcount alone.

Indeed the capital funding formula and processes have been broken for many years. Notwithstanding the past, given the recent communication from MEd to the Vancouver School Board I remain hopeful that we are witnessing something of a sea change in Victoria's attitude towards funding school seismic safety upgrade and replacement projects. Yet as optimistic as I'd like to be, its impossible not to note the sudden shift in attitudes towards funding school capital projects has arrived just as a civic election is about to conclude, and a provincial election is about to start.

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.

Today and tomorrow Vancouver DPAC (District Parent Advisory Council) will host two all-candidates forums:

• East side: Vancouver Technical Secondary, 2600 East Broadway, Wednesday November 5 @ 7pm (Map)
• West side: Bayview Community School, 2251 Collingwood, Thursday November 6 @ 7pm (Map)

I'll be at Van Tech this evening; judging by the response from friends and parents I talk to at Douglas and other schools, tonight's debate ought to be well-attended. (Update: It wasn't, either by trustee candidates - several missing, or by members of the community. Here's hoping Bayview will draw a larger crowd. See you there!) Bring your questions!

Live election tracker widget:

It is a shame the White House's back-door won't be hitting Bush on his keester sooner than January.