The simple reality in Ottawa is that the Conservatives have 143 seats and the Coalition has 114. No matter how you slice it, the opposition has significantly more seats than the government if the Coalition governs. We have never has this situation in before in Canadian history. It is not like it is even close.
Ed Broadbent has been working hard to make the case that the coalition is only the NDP and the Liberals. While this may be formally true, it is not the defacto reality. It is because of this dramatic difference that really the coalition has to defacto include the Bloc in the coalition and it is this defacto situation that is pissing off so many people in Canada. To most Canadians the idea of the Bloc in government, the party almost all Canadians consider seperatists, is simply unacceptable.
Dion and Layton have made the issue of seperation and western alienation front and centre issues in federal politics in Canada by cutting a formal deal with the Bloc.
As much as am a huge fan of electoral reform in the form of STV, I also understand that most Canadians believe only Harper won the election and that only Harper is entitled to be PM. The public wants the parties to work with the government and to keep them in check, they are not looking for a new election or a new government.
Friday, December 5, 2008
New Polls on Voter Federal Vote Intention
Ipsos, Ekos, Leger and Strategic Counsel have all released polls of voter intention. The results show a significant shift in where people are at in some parts of the country.
Nationally the results of all the polling is as follows with the + or - from the election
The Green support is higher than is likely in an election because people seem to be willing to say Green in polls and then either vote differently or do not vote.
The boost for the Conservatives is dramatic and significant and seems to be drawing in equal numbers from the NDP and the Liberals.
The Liberals seem to be down one in ten voters and the NDP is down almost one in five.
In Quebec the polling results almost mirror the last election. The Conservatives and NDP are marginally down and theBloc and Liberals marginally up, but in general very little change.
The results in Ontario show a dramatic change, the most dramatic in the country. Ontario also has the most reliable regional results.
In the west the polling numbers show the Conservatives up consistently in all provinces with the NDP taking the hit and the Liberals holding their ground. In an election I see the Conservatives taking thee seats from the Liberals and six from the NDP.
Atlantic Canada has the thinest set of numbers out there in the polls so my confidence in them is not very strong. The trend shows the Conservatives up, Liberals even and the NDP down.
If these numbers were to hold in a federal election we would see a house that looks something like this:
Basically an election now would result in a comfortable majority for the Conservatives, leave the Bloc where it is and see the NDP and Liberals lose about an equal number of seats.
Nationally the results of all the polling is as follows with the + or - from the election
- Conservatives 43.7% +6.0
- Liberals 24.2% -2.1
- NDP 14.8% -3.4
- Greens 7.9% +1.1
- Bloc 9.4% -0.6
The Green support is higher than is likely in an election because people seem to be willing to say Green in polls and then either vote differently or do not vote.
The boost for the Conservatives is dramatic and significant and seems to be drawing in equal numbers from the NDP and the Liberals.
The Liberals seem to be down one in ten voters and the NDP is down almost one in five.
In Quebec the polling results almost mirror the last election. The Conservatives and NDP are marginally down and theBloc and Liberals marginally up, but in general very little change.
The results in Ontario show a dramatic change, the most dramatic in the country. Ontario also has the most reliable regional results.
- Conservatives - 49.5% +10.3
- Liberals - 27.5% -6.3
- NDP - 13.6% -4.6
- Green - 9.4% +1.4
In the west the polling numbers show the Conservatives up consistently in all provinces with the NDP taking the hit and the Liberals holding their ground. In an election I see the Conservatives taking thee seats from the Liberals and six from the NDP.
Atlantic Canada has the thinest set of numbers out there in the polls so my confidence in them is not very strong. The trend shows the Conservatives up, Liberals even and the NDP down.
If these numbers were to hold in a federal election we would see a house that looks something like this:
- Conservatives - 183
- Liberals - 56
- Bloc - 49
- NDP - 18
- Ind - 2
Basically an election now would result in a comfortable majority for the Conservatives, leave the Bloc where it is and see the NDP and Liberals lose about an equal number of seats.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
How Strong is the Unity on the Coalition Side?
Reports are out that Liberal MP Frank Valeriote from Guelph is not in favour of the coalition. The Guelph Mercury is reporting this.
He is one of the MPs that I was wondering about how much he would be willing to support this coalition. He does not sound like he is any fan of the Conservatives
He is one of the MPs that I was wondering about how much he would be willing to support this coalition. He does not sound like he is any fan of the Conservatives
Toronto Maple Leafs Win Stanley Cup!
Canada was stunned Monday when it was announced that The Stanley Cup will be awarded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, possibly as early as December 6th.
The cup will be stripped from from 2008 playoff champions the Detroit Red Wings and be awarded to the Leafs, who didn't even make the playoffs.
How is this possible, Canadians ask?
Well, the Leafs have formed a coalition with eastern conference semifinalists the Montreal Canadians, and conference quarter finalists the Ottawa Senators, now outnumbering the Red Wings.
According to current Leaf coach Ron Wilson "the Red Wings have lost the confidence of the league and should hand the cup over immediately to our coalition".
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is cutting short a European trip to try to resolve the unprecedented hockey crisis that could force a second playoff series, or see an opposing team coalition take the cup.
or another version:
Having decided that the Detroit Redwings only "technically" won the 2008
Stanley Cup, the Pittsburgh Penguins, Philadelphia Flyers and Dallas
Stars have formed a coalition demanding a three-way ownership of the
league title.
Rationale for their claim revolves around their total combined scoring
in the 2008 Semi-Finals, their total share of season ticket holders
versus the Detroit Redwings and their horror at discovering the Detroit
Redwings are using a more cost effective and efficient but non-union
made Silver polish to keep the Stanley Cup gleaming.
The three teams are being assisted in their bid to overturn the
traditional results by members of the Quebec Hockey League who have no
real interest in the success of the NHL in general but sense an
opportunity to demand Zamboni's and other critical equipment be
manufactured in Quebec. Player representatives, Team Owners and Nike are
expected to submit their proposals to Don Cherry in the next few days.
Fans and ticket holders are neither being asked nor allowed a voice in
the final decision.
The cup will be stripped from from 2008 playoff champions the Detroit Red Wings and be awarded to the Leafs, who didn't even make the playoffs.
How is this possible, Canadians ask?
Well, the Leafs have formed a coalition with eastern conference semifinalists the Montreal Canadians, and conference quarter finalists the Ottawa Senators, now outnumbering the Red Wings.
According to current Leaf coach Ron Wilson "the Red Wings have lost the confidence of the league and should hand the cup over immediately to our coalition".
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is cutting short a European trip to try to resolve the unprecedented hockey crisis that could force a second playoff series, or see an opposing team coalition take the cup.
or another version:
Having decided that the Detroit Redwings only "technically" won the 2008
Stanley Cup, the Pittsburgh Penguins, Philadelphia Flyers and Dallas
Stars have formed a coalition demanding a three-way ownership of the
league title.
Rationale for their claim revolves around their total combined scoring
in the 2008 Semi-Finals, their total share of season ticket holders
versus the Detroit Redwings and their horror at discovering the Detroit
Redwings are using a more cost effective and efficient but non-union
made Silver polish to keep the Stanley Cup gleaming.
The three teams are being assisted in their bid to overturn the
traditional results by members of the Quebec Hockey League who have no
real interest in the success of the NHL in general but sense an
opportunity to demand Zamboni's and other critical equipment be
manufactured in Quebec. Player representatives, Team Owners and Nike are
expected to submit their proposals to Don Cherry in the next few days.
Fans and ticket holders are neither being asked nor allowed a voice in
the final decision.
A Proposal For an End to the Impasse in Ottawa
The Conservatives did not manage to win a majority in the last election and only gained the support of just under 38% of voters. However you cut it, this is not a majority government and ultimately has to deal with a parliament where the majority is not on the government side.
The Coalition is fundamentally weak and flawed from the start. It has not defined any program and was not elected to enact any program. They only have 114 MPs out of 308, a very long way short of enough to govern. Their dependency on the Bloc is a problem. Their lack of any ideas for what they will actually do in government is a huge problem. They will need to have a 100% whip of all three caucuses all the time to remain in power - that is very, very hard to maintain.
I would suggest the time has come for a one year caretaker government made up of the Conservatives and the Liberals. They should agree to no dramatic policy changes, agree to a new election to be held in the fall of 2009 or spring of 2010, and they should adopt a stimulus package that is a meld of the Liberal and Conservative thoughts but they would agree to have the program in place in less than 60 days and actually have money spent for the projects before June 1st of this year. They also agree to a complete moratorium on partisan activities.
At their core, the economic programs of the Liberals and Conservatives are not dramatically different. Stephen Harper has governed much like Paul Martin was like when he was finance minister. There are still a lot of Martinites in Ottawa and they are ideologically close to Harper on economic issues.
This allows both Dion and Harper to get out of the corners they are painted into. It shows cooperation by the main parties that most Canadians support. It also allows the new leader of the Liberals to be tested at the polls within a year of coming into power.
If something like this does not happen, we are looking at an election date in the March to May time frame - before the new leader of the Liberals is selected.
The Coalition is fundamentally weak and flawed from the start. It has not defined any program and was not elected to enact any program. They only have 114 MPs out of 308, a very long way short of enough to govern. Their dependency on the Bloc is a problem. Their lack of any ideas for what they will actually do in government is a huge problem. They will need to have a 100% whip of all three caucuses all the time to remain in power - that is very, very hard to maintain.
I would suggest the time has come for a one year caretaker government made up of the Conservatives and the Liberals. They should agree to no dramatic policy changes, agree to a new election to be held in the fall of 2009 or spring of 2010, and they should adopt a stimulus package that is a meld of the Liberal and Conservative thoughts but they would agree to have the program in place in less than 60 days and actually have money spent for the projects before June 1st of this year. They also agree to a complete moratorium on partisan activities.
At their core, the economic programs of the Liberals and Conservatives are not dramatically different. Stephen Harper has governed much like Paul Martin was like when he was finance minister. There are still a lot of Martinites in Ottawa and they are ideologically close to Harper on economic issues.
This allows both Dion and Harper to get out of the corners they are painted into. It shows cooperation by the main parties that most Canadians support. It also allows the new leader of the Liberals to be tested at the polls within a year of coming into power.
If something like this does not happen, we are looking at an election date in the March to May time frame - before the new leader of the Liberals is selected.
Getting to a Conservative Majority
Can Stephen Harper manage to bring himself to a majority in the current parliament? Possibly.
Stephen Harper has 143 seats at the moment and needs 154 votes to pass any legislation, he is 11 votes short.
If he can bring the two independents on board, he is at 145 and nine short. Both of them are politically close to the government.
There are a number of Liberal MPs not happy with being in coalition with the NDP and depending on the Bloc for support. Asking some of them to cross the floor and become Conservatives or sit as nationalist Liberals against the Bloc. Say he can find six that would do this, he would get to 151 MPs, three short of a majority.
There are about 20 sitting Liberal MPs that are politically the same as the Conservatives. I have my list of the top eight most likely to consider crossing.
There are 12 Senate vacancies, what if he appoints some sitting MPs to the Senate? Harper is so far from a majority in the Senate that some more Liberals would make no difference. He could appoint four Liberals and three Bloc MPs along with five Conservatives, not MPs, to the Senate. This leaves the house with 301 MPs and he has a majority.
Another option would be the creation of a Federalist Liberal Caucus, 12 Liberal MPs that are opposed to the Bloc and willing to form their own caucus. This group could then be in a coalition with the Conservatives and allow for a stable and centrist government in Ottawa.
Stephen Harper has 143 seats at the moment and needs 154 votes to pass any legislation, he is 11 votes short.
If he can bring the two independents on board, he is at 145 and nine short. Both of them are politically close to the government.
There are a number of Liberal MPs not happy with being in coalition with the NDP and depending on the Bloc for support. Asking some of them to cross the floor and become Conservatives or sit as nationalist Liberals against the Bloc. Say he can find six that would do this, he would get to 151 MPs, three short of a majority.
There are about 20 sitting Liberal MPs that are politically the same as the Conservatives. I have my list of the top eight most likely to consider crossing.
There are 12 Senate vacancies, what if he appoints some sitting MPs to the Senate? Harper is so far from a majority in the Senate that some more Liberals would make no difference. He could appoint four Liberals and three Bloc MPs along with five Conservatives, not MPs, to the Senate. This leaves the house with 301 MPs and he has a majority.
Another option would be the creation of a Federalist Liberal Caucus, 12 Liberal MPs that are opposed to the Bloc and willing to form their own caucus. This group could then be in a coalition with the Conservatives and allow for a stable and centrist government in Ottawa.
Some thoughts on the coalition
In general the details of what the coalition will be doing as a government is very thin on the ground. It feels like they will be flying by the seat of their pants and this is a problem because there is very little unity between the partners on most issues and I can see huge NDP resistance to a lot of the normal Liberal governance positions. When Harper came into power in 2006 he a five clear and achieveable policy agenda points, this is a clear model for a minority government. The problem for Harper came when he managed to do everything within the first year.
The coalition will suffer from enacting a program that the public did not have a chance to vote for. In many ways, a coalition government is more like a caretaker government until there is an election.
Debt and Deficit
Nationally we are looking at a budget deficit in the next year no matter who is government because no one has the guts to make the cuts needed to balance the budget. The question is how serious will it be?
My estimate is that we are looking at at $5 to $10 billion dollar shortfall in a 'status quo' situation. With the Conservatives I believe this can be held to the lower end.
With the coalition there are plans for a lot more spending, estimates floating around of the number is about $30 billion. Given the time it takes for the federal government to do most things, my estimate is that most of this $30 billion will be spent after the 2009/10 budget year. For the next budget year I estimate the coalition will leave us with a shortfall of $20 billion in 2009/10, $25 billion in 2010/11 and $10 billion in 2011/12. A total increase in national debt of $55 billion. I am assuming the coalition will take some actions to increase government revenues, more on that lower down.
Taxes
This will more than a 10% increase in the national debt of Canada. This increase in debt has several significant problems for the country. First off it means we will have an extra $2.5 billion in debt charges for decades. We have been working hard to reduce the national debt and this has meant the money we spend to service the debt has been falling and allowing for more money for programs. Another problem is that if the government has to borrow $50 billion to operate, it has to get this money from the public. Taking $50 billion out of the capital markets in Canada to allow government to operate means less money for private purposes. The way this will play out is through higher interest rates for mortgages and business loans, something in the order of an extra $3 billion a year in borrowing costs.
How will the coalition deal with the budget shortfall? I can see several taxes that the coalition may introduce, incerase the GST and bring in the carbon tax.
Returning the GST to 7% could bring in about $12 billion in more revenues per year. Doing this is politically dangerous as there are few taxes people dislike more than the GST. Retailers will scream because it will dampen demand. It will also cause a sudden increase in inflation which has direct implications on the process of interest rates being set by the Bank of Canada.
The carbon tax does make fiscal sense if it is applied like has been done in BC. It has to be part of tax shifting so as to send signals to the market. The danger is if a carbon tax is enacted without being revenue neutral. I do not see the coalition going ahead with this because the BC NDP is opposed to a carbon tax and is headed into an election here where this will be a major issue.
There have been no other signals of higher taxes from Dion.
Afghanistan and relations with the US
Will the coalition take Canada out of Afghanistan? If they do, this will be a direct snub to the new American president and risks his goodwill around trade issues. Obama is keen on the way in Afghanistan and needs allies there. He is looking towards Canada as being a core partner.
At the same time there will be a push in the US to get Canada to make trade concessions. I can see a major assault on the automotive industry in Canada. Congress may require US companies to make more of their cars in the US if they get bail out money.
Canadian Wheat Board
The coalition is talking about support for the Canadian Wheat Board and supply management. This is going to be unpopular on the praries among most people, it will be seen as an intervention by an eastern government in the western economy. I am not sure why they would raise this issue, there is no political or economic advantage in doing so.
The Environment
I thought this was an issue near and dear to Dion, but it is almost completely missing from the program of the coalition. The only thing mentioned is a cap and trade emissions system.
The coalition will suffer from enacting a program that the public did not have a chance to vote for. In many ways, a coalition government is more like a caretaker government until there is an election.
Debt and Deficit
Nationally we are looking at a budget deficit in the next year no matter who is government because no one has the guts to make the cuts needed to balance the budget. The question is how serious will it be?
My estimate is that we are looking at at $5 to $10 billion dollar shortfall in a 'status quo' situation. With the Conservatives I believe this can be held to the lower end.
With the coalition there are plans for a lot more spending, estimates floating around of the number is about $30 billion. Given the time it takes for the federal government to do most things, my estimate is that most of this $30 billion will be spent after the 2009/10 budget year. For the next budget year I estimate the coalition will leave us with a shortfall of $20 billion in 2009/10, $25 billion in 2010/11 and $10 billion in 2011/12. A total increase in national debt of $55 billion. I am assuming the coalition will take some actions to increase government revenues, more on that lower down.
Taxes
This will more than a 10% increase in the national debt of Canada. This increase in debt has several significant problems for the country. First off it means we will have an extra $2.5 billion in debt charges for decades. We have been working hard to reduce the national debt and this has meant the money we spend to service the debt has been falling and allowing for more money for programs. Another problem is that if the government has to borrow $50 billion to operate, it has to get this money from the public. Taking $50 billion out of the capital markets in Canada to allow government to operate means less money for private purposes. The way this will play out is through higher interest rates for mortgages and business loans, something in the order of an extra $3 billion a year in borrowing costs.
How will the coalition deal with the budget shortfall? I can see several taxes that the coalition may introduce, incerase the GST and bring in the carbon tax.
Returning the GST to 7% could bring in about $12 billion in more revenues per year. Doing this is politically dangerous as there are few taxes people dislike more than the GST. Retailers will scream because it will dampen demand. It will also cause a sudden increase in inflation which has direct implications on the process of interest rates being set by the Bank of Canada.
The carbon tax does make fiscal sense if it is applied like has been done in BC. It has to be part of tax shifting so as to send signals to the market. The danger is if a carbon tax is enacted without being revenue neutral. I do not see the coalition going ahead with this because the BC NDP is opposed to a carbon tax and is headed into an election here where this will be a major issue.
There have been no other signals of higher taxes from Dion.
Afghanistan and relations with the US
Will the coalition take Canada out of Afghanistan? If they do, this will be a direct snub to the new American president and risks his goodwill around trade issues. Obama is keen on the way in Afghanistan and needs allies there. He is looking towards Canada as being a core partner.
At the same time there will be a push in the US to get Canada to make trade concessions. I can see a major assault on the automotive industry in Canada. Congress may require US companies to make more of their cars in the US if they get bail out money.
Canadian Wheat Board
The coalition is talking about support for the Canadian Wheat Board and supply management. This is going to be unpopular on the praries among most people, it will be seen as an intervention by an eastern government in the western economy. I am not sure why they would raise this issue, there is no political or economic advantage in doing so.
The Environment
I thought this was an issue near and dear to Dion, but it is almost completely missing from the program of the coalition. The only thing mentioned is a cap and trade emissions system.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Canada outside of Quebec
If we look at the last election and take Quebec out of the mix, here is what we end up with
What you can see here is that outside of Quebec the Conservatives have a strong majority of the seats and hold a comfortable level of support - 43.5% is strong endorsement in our current electoral system.
This is relevant because a the public outside of Quebec did make a reasonably strong vote in favour of the Conservatives. A coalition government will have to deal with anger in many parts of Canada because they are not what people were looking for.
In general we have a problem in Canadian politics as long as there is a political party holding between 12% and 17% of the seats in parliament but is not interested on any level in governing Canada or the very concept of a Canadian state. As long as the Bloc sits in Ottawa and holds as many seats as it does, governance in Canada will be difficult.
Yes, Jean Chretien managed it in three elections, but he only achieved this because there were two parties to the right that ensured he won almost all the seats in Ontario.
The sooner more seats are added to Ontario, Alberta and BC, the sooner the negative effect of the Bloc on governance will be reduced.
In Wiemar Germany there was a problem with governance that came from having two major parties elected representatives that were not interested in good governance - the communists and the Nazis. By the late 1920s the nation had become ungovernable and this lead to the Hitler being able to seize power. In a democracy the representatives elected have to be interested in constructively governing for the whole, the Bloc does not meet this test.
It is time in Ottawa for parliament to create some different rules for how political parties are supported to ensure that we see better governance, here are my suggested changes:
- Conservatives 133 seats and 43.5% of the vote
- Liberals 63 seats and 27.2% of the vote
- NDP 36 seats and 20.4% of the vote
- Independents 1 seat
- Greens 0 seats and 8% of the vote
What you can see here is that outside of Quebec the Conservatives have a strong majority of the seats and hold a comfortable level of support - 43.5% is strong endorsement in our current electoral system.
This is relevant because a the public outside of Quebec did make a reasonably strong vote in favour of the Conservatives. A coalition government will have to deal with anger in many parts of Canada because they are not what people were looking for.
In general we have a problem in Canadian politics as long as there is a political party holding between 12% and 17% of the seats in parliament but is not interested on any level in governing Canada or the very concept of a Canadian state. As long as the Bloc sits in Ottawa and holds as many seats as it does, governance in Canada will be difficult.
Yes, Jean Chretien managed it in three elections, but he only achieved this because there were two parties to the right that ensured he won almost all the seats in Ontario.
The sooner more seats are added to Ontario, Alberta and BC, the sooner the negative effect of the Bloc on governance will be reduced.
In Wiemar Germany there was a problem with governance that came from having two major parties elected representatives that were not interested in good governance - the communists and the Nazis. By the late 1920s the nation had become ungovernable and this lead to the Hitler being able to seize power. In a democracy the representatives elected have to be interested in constructively governing for the whole, the Bloc does not meet this test.
It is time in Ottawa for parliament to create some different rules for how political parties are supported to ensure that we see better governance, here are my suggested changes:
- A caucus is only recognized if it has MPs from at least three provinces
- Research and other support funding for a parliamentary caucus is tied not only to how many MPs they have, but also to how many provinces they are elected from
- Taxpayer support dollars only flow to parties running in at least 2/3s of the ridings of Canada. Drop the % support completely.
How to measure support for the coalition
Stephen Harper did not get a huge degree of support to govern, but the Liberals got even less.
I know there are people saying that the combined Liberal and NDP vote was higher than the Conservatives, but this assumes that their supporters are all behind a coalition government and I believe this is not accurate. It is an utter fallacy in our electoral system to look at the raw vote totals and make assumptions about things because of it. The decision making process people use when they vote in our system is a complex one that delivers little or no direct information about public will. The only reflection we have of public will is through the MPs elected.
In the election the Dion made it clear he would not form a coalition with the NDP, so this is something people voting Liberal expected. Many Liberals are more likely to support the Conservatives than the NDP, how many Liberal supporters would be happier with a Conservative government than a coalition? This is something we can not know and can not fathom.
Are New Democrats happy to be in coalition with the Liberals? Not all of them. A lot of NDP voters will never vote for the Liberals - look at the results in Saanich and the Gulf Islands where the NDP candidate still got several thousand votes after ending his campaign.
Bloc voters can not be counted as supporters for the coalition, they simply can not be counted as supporting any federalist party.
So, where are we at with popular support for the coalition? My estimate is that about 28% to 30% of Canadian voters support the coalition at this time. I can hear some of you out there saying "but that is unrealistic" - for an example of the whole is less than the sum of the parts, look at what happened when the PCs took over the Alliance and formed the Conservatives, the new party lost a lot of support.
Anecdotally in online polls and other measures of support things are running between 25% to 33% in favour of the coalition and 67% to 75% opposed.
When the first public opinion polls come out, my question of levels of support will be clearly answered. What does the NDP do if their support is way down? How do the Liberals react to very low polling numbers?
I suspect very low polling numbers will push the coalition to hold power and the Bloc will attempt to keep them in power because of the fear of Conservative majority.
I expect the media line to become "No one elected them and they are wildly unpopular - get rid of them." or something like that. Low polling numbers, no public mandate for a program of governance and bad economic times is going to make for life in hell for a Lib/NDP coalition.
I know there are people saying that the combined Liberal and NDP vote was higher than the Conservatives, but this assumes that their supporters are all behind a coalition government and I believe this is not accurate. It is an utter fallacy in our electoral system to look at the raw vote totals and make assumptions about things because of it. The decision making process people use when they vote in our system is a complex one that delivers little or no direct information about public will. The only reflection we have of public will is through the MPs elected.
In the election the Dion made it clear he would not form a coalition with the NDP, so this is something people voting Liberal expected. Many Liberals are more likely to support the Conservatives than the NDP, how many Liberal supporters would be happier with a Conservative government than a coalition? This is something we can not know and can not fathom.
Are New Democrats happy to be in coalition with the Liberals? Not all of them. A lot of NDP voters will never vote for the Liberals - look at the results in Saanich and the Gulf Islands where the NDP candidate still got several thousand votes after ending his campaign.
Bloc voters can not be counted as supporters for the coalition, they simply can not be counted as supporting any federalist party.
So, where are we at with popular support for the coalition? My estimate is that about 28% to 30% of Canadian voters support the coalition at this time. I can hear some of you out there saying "but that is unrealistic" - for an example of the whole is less than the sum of the parts, look at what happened when the PCs took over the Alliance and formed the Conservatives, the new party lost a lot of support.
Anecdotally in online polls and other measures of support things are running between 25% to 33% in favour of the coalition and 67% to 75% opposed.
When the first public opinion polls come out, my question of levels of support will be clearly answered. What does the NDP do if their support is way down? How do the Liberals react to very low polling numbers?
I suspect very low polling numbers will push the coalition to hold power and the Bloc will attempt to keep them in power because of the fear of Conservative majority.
I expect the media line to become "No one elected them and they are wildly unpopular - get rid of them." or something like that. Low polling numbers, no public mandate for a program of governance and bad economic times is going to make for life in hell for a Lib/NDP coalition.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Liberal Leadership Race - How Will They Campaign?
Lib/NDP coalition can be certain of 162 votes versus 143 to 145 for the Conservatives. What happens when three Liberal MPs want to hit the road to campaign? The loss of three government MPs makes the margin 159 to 145. What about sitting MPs supporting leadership candidates?
The dynamics of Liberal leadership race reduces the effective governing coalition enough to put Dion in danger of losing votes depending on who is there.
Harper needed only one whip to make sure the numbers were there. Dion will have to rely on the whips of two other parties to make sure the votes are in the house. Stephane Dion will be utterly dependent on one man to make sure the numbers are there, Michel Guimond, the Bloc whip.
Depending on the Bloc to be in Ottawa and to keep Mr Clarity Act in power strikes me as hubris. It really comes down to the Bloc making sure they have at least forty four MPs in the house voting for the government to keep Dion in power.
Imagine being a separatist and going back home and telling people you are supporting the author of the clarity act?
The dynamics of Liberal leadership race reduces the effective governing coalition enough to put Dion in danger of losing votes depending on who is there.
Harper needed only one whip to make sure the numbers were there. Dion will have to rely on the whips of two other parties to make sure the votes are in the house. Stephane Dion will be utterly dependent on one man to make sure the numbers are there, Michel Guimond, the Bloc whip.
Depending on the Bloc to be in Ottawa and to keep Mr Clarity Act in power strikes me as hubris. It really comes down to the Bloc making sure they have at least forty four MPs in the house voting for the government to keep Dion in power.
Imagine being a separatist and going back home and telling people you are supporting the author of the clarity act?
A Lib/NDP Cabinet
What might it look like?
There are 24 cabinet posts, 18 Liberal and 6 NDP.
There has to be one from each province and one from the north.
Liberals
NDP
A number of the people in Cabinet are obvious, they have to be in because there is no one else to choose from.
I wonder why the NDP agreed to only six seats in cabinet when they are almost 1/3 of the coalition? The NDP should have had at least seven and really eight seats at the table.
With a small cabinet, there is a problem Dion will have, who are the women we will chose for cabinet? There are only 19 women elected as Liberal MPs. The NDP should be able to achieve gender parity for their six, but the Liberals are going to have problems.
There are 24 cabinet posts, 18 Liberal and 6 NDP.
There has to be one from each province and one from the north.
Liberals
- Gerry Bryne from Newfoundland
- Scott Brison from Nova Scotia
- Wayne Easter - PEI
- Dominic Leblanc - New Brunswick
- Denis Codere - Quebec
- Irwin Cotler - Quebec
- Marlene Jennings - Quebec
- Alexandra Mendes - Quebec
- Bob Rae - Ontario
- Michael Ignatieff - Ontario
- Ruby Dhalla - Ontario
- David McGinty - Ontario
- Glen Peason - Ontario
- Anita Neville - Manitoba
- Ralph Goodale - Sask
- Ujjah Dosanjh - BC
- Joyce Murray - BC
- Larry Bagnall - Yukon
NDP
- Peter Stoffer - Nova Scotia
- Linda Duncan - Alberta
- Jack Layton - Ontario
- Thomas Muclair - Quebec
- Nathan Cullen - BC or Jean Crowder or Dawn Black
- Judy - Wasylycia-Leis - Manitoba
A number of the people in Cabinet are obvious, they have to be in because there is no one else to choose from.
I wonder why the NDP agreed to only six seats in cabinet when they are almost 1/3 of the coalition? The NDP should have had at least seven and really eight seats at the table.
With a small cabinet, there is a problem Dion will have, who are the women we will chose for cabinet? There are only 19 women elected as Liberal MPs. The NDP should be able to achieve gender parity for their six, but the Liberals are going to have problems.
A Lib/NDP Cabinet
We have been told that the cabinet will have 24 members and the PM. The NDP would have six cabinet members. Here are some issues I have:
How will the cabinet report to two separate political caucuses? This is done elsewhere but has not been tried here. The standard in Canada for a generation has been that the PM has all power, how will the NDP handle that?
The PM has a lot of powers on his own, how will Dion engage the NDP and Bloc on appointments?
Who chooses who is in cabinet and who chooses who gets what roles? Does each party have ownership of the positions?
Can the PM fire an NDP cabinet member?
Normally communications goes through a single point in a cabinet - that is how Chretien, Martin and Harper have done it. Will the cabinet members be allowed to speak on their own?
Dion is a lame duck in the middle of a leadership race - how will the NDP deal with a new Liberal leader?
There are MPs in the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc that are not happy with this arrangement at all. Will the parties be able to keep them on side? The government can not afford abstentions, what if some New Democrats miss planes and happen not to be in Ottawa for votes?
How will the NDP deal with a Liberal budget that will be 95% the same as Stephen Harper's? The NDP is going to vote in favour of a budget that supports corporate tax cuts.
How much can the NDP caucus tell their cabinet members what to do?
Being in opposition is a lot easier, finding fault with a government decision is easier, who will the Bloc and the NDP deal with having to back everything the goverment does?
A minority parliament is hard enough to navigate when you have a strongly unfied party and the best PM in Canadian history in handling this is Stephen Harper. Stephane Dion does not strike me as having the skills to hold this coalition together, let alone govern well. Every cabinet meeting is going to be a battle between the NDP and the Liberals with the NDP feeling resentful that they are not listened to.
Stephen Harper had to find one party to either abstain or support his party to govern. Stephane Dion will need the agreement of all three parties for everything. This is a task that is virtually almost impossible to achieve.
How will the cabinet report to two separate political caucuses? This is done elsewhere but has not been tried here. The standard in Canada for a generation has been that the PM has all power, how will the NDP handle that?
The PM has a lot of powers on his own, how will Dion engage the NDP and Bloc on appointments?
Who chooses who is in cabinet and who chooses who gets what roles? Does each party have ownership of the positions?
Can the PM fire an NDP cabinet member?
Normally communications goes through a single point in a cabinet - that is how Chretien, Martin and Harper have done it. Will the cabinet members be allowed to speak on their own?
Dion is a lame duck in the middle of a leadership race - how will the NDP deal with a new Liberal leader?
There are MPs in the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc that are not happy with this arrangement at all. Will the parties be able to keep them on side? The government can not afford abstentions, what if some New Democrats miss planes and happen not to be in Ottawa for votes?
How will the NDP deal with a Liberal budget that will be 95% the same as Stephen Harper's? The NDP is going to vote in favour of a budget that supports corporate tax cuts.
How much can the NDP caucus tell their cabinet members what to do?
Being in opposition is a lot easier, finding fault with a government decision is easier, who will the Bloc and the NDP deal with having to back everything the goverment does?
A minority parliament is hard enough to navigate when you have a strongly unfied party and the best PM in Canadian history in handling this is Stephen Harper. Stephane Dion does not strike me as having the skills to hold this coalition together, let alone govern well. Every cabinet meeting is going to be a battle between the NDP and the Liberals with the NDP feeling resentful that they are not listened to.
Stephen Harper had to find one party to either abstain or support his party to govern. Stephane Dion will need the agreement of all three parties for everything. This is a task that is virtually almost impossible to achieve.
House of Commons numbers - some more
There are 23 MPs currently over the age of 65 in the House of Commons. The oldest caucus is the Bloc with 9 MPs over age 65. When one looks at the statistics, the odds of an MP dieing in the next year is high, realistically two could die.
When one looks at the MPs in Ottawa, the odds are the MP that dies will not be a Conservative. the odds are 40% that it is Conservative and 60% that it is not.
Death is not the only issue, critical illness is also an issue. The odds are that about 15 MPs will have a critical illness and be effected badly enough to reduce the time they can be in parliament. The split is 6 Conservatives and 9 Lib/NDP/Bloc.
If you apply this to the standings in the house, here is where you end up:
Then one looks at the MPs who have been serving for at least 15 years. There are 19 Liberals, 10 Bloc and 9 Conservatives that have served more than 15 years. The odds of these MPs resigning is higher than the rest. Fully one quarter of the Liberals have been in the House for more than 15 years, six of them more than 20 years.
I expect the Liberals to keep most of their MPs and maybe lose only 2 to retirement. It is with the Bloc that I expect to see a lot more retire, five within the next year. I see one Conservative resigning.
Apply this to the above numbers and this is how it looks:
When one looks at the MPs in Ottawa, the odds are the MP that dies will not be a Conservative. the odds are 40% that it is Conservative and 60% that it is not.
Death is not the only issue, critical illness is also an issue. The odds are that about 15 MPs will have a critical illness and be effected badly enough to reduce the time they can be in parliament. The split is 6 Conservatives and 9 Lib/NDP/Bloc.
If you apply this to the standings in the house, here is where you end up:
- Conservatives - 137
- Lib/NDP/Bloc - 152
- Ind - 2
Then one looks at the MPs who have been serving for at least 15 years. There are 19 Liberals, 10 Bloc and 9 Conservatives that have served more than 15 years. The odds of these MPs resigning is higher than the rest. Fully one quarter of the Liberals have been in the House for more than 15 years, six of them more than 20 years.
I expect the Liberals to keep most of their MPs and maybe lose only 2 to retirement. It is with the Bloc that I expect to see a lot more retire, five within the next year. I see one Conservative resigning.
Apply this to the above numbers and this is how it looks:
- Conservatives - 136
- Bloc/Lib/NDP - 141
- Ind - 1
What Happens with the Senate?
Currently there are 18 vacancies in the senate and at least 11 more will leave the Senate in the next year. These can be filled by the Prime Minister whenever he likes and this leads to a quandary.
What does Stephen Harper do? Does he fill all 18 vacancies so Dion does not get to it?
If they are not filled, how will the NDP react to Dion appointing new senators? The NDP and the Conservatives have the votes to pass a house motion to abolish the senate.
If Harper does appoint people to the senate, this seriously slows down the process towards reforming the second house. If he does not, I can not imagine Dion not appointing the 18 members as soon as possible.
We will either have a senate that is
or
What does Stephen Harper do? Does he fill all 18 vacancies so Dion does not get to it?
If they are not filled, how will the NDP react to Dion appointing new senators? The NDP and the Conservatives have the votes to pass a house motion to abolish the senate.
If Harper does appoint people to the senate, this seriously slows down the process towards reforming the second house. If he does not, I can not imagine Dion not appointing the 18 members as soon as possible.
We will either have a senate that is
- Liberals 58
- Conservatives 38
- Others 9
or
- Liberals 76
- Conservatives 20
- Others 9
More on Coalition Talks - What is the Public Mood?
On facebook the pro coalition voices clearly have a lead, but not a single facebook group for or against has taken off with large numbers. We are talking in the thousands for groups and in almost all cases less than 5000 people.
In the online questions at places like CKNW, CTV, CFAX and more the results are decidely against the coalition. In most cases about 3/4s opposed. On CTV there have been over 14000 votes today and 3/4s are opposed. Their poll of a few days ago had 20841 on the question "Should the Liberals form a coalition with the NDP?" 68% opposed.
In the world of comments, clearly the political junkies on the centre left and left are swarming to comment, the right has not been nearly as quick off of the mark.
There are two clear themes emerging. On the left there is a strong sense of being delivered from hell on earth, that a coalition government would bring about some sort of a golden enlightenment. On the right the theme is very much we are being robbed after we won the election fair and square.
Politically I do not see an NDP/Lib coalition government doing much different than the current Harper government. The possibility is that they will bring in a budget with a large program of support for manufacturing in Ontario and Quebec which would leave us with a $30 to $50 billion dollar deficit.
A problem with this new coalition is that it will only have light representation from the west. Since the problems in the economy are more of an issue in the east, there will be an increased wealth transfer from the west to the east. There emerges a danger of the a Lib/NDP government causing more alienation.
The Harper government is the first and only government in Canadian history that is made of a majority of the caucus from the west. An NDP/Lib coalition moves power very much to Ontario and Quebec.
In the online questions at places like CKNW, CTV, CFAX and more the results are decidely against the coalition. In most cases about 3/4s opposed. On CTV there have been over 14000 votes today and 3/4s are opposed. Their poll of a few days ago had 20841 on the question "Should the Liberals form a coalition with the NDP?" 68% opposed.
In the world of comments, clearly the political junkies on the centre left and left are swarming to comment, the right has not been nearly as quick off of the mark.
There are two clear themes emerging. On the left there is a strong sense of being delivered from hell on earth, that a coalition government would bring about some sort of a golden enlightenment. On the right the theme is very much we are being robbed after we won the election fair and square.
Politically I do not see an NDP/Lib coalition government doing much different than the current Harper government. The possibility is that they will bring in a budget with a large program of support for manufacturing in Ontario and Quebec which would leave us with a $30 to $50 billion dollar deficit.
A problem with this new coalition is that it will only have light representation from the west. Since the problems in the economy are more of an issue in the east, there will be an increased wealth transfer from the west to the east. There emerges a danger of the a Lib/NDP government causing more alienation.
The Harper government is the first and only government in Canadian history that is made of a majority of the caucus from the west. An NDP/Lib coalition moves power very much to Ontario and Quebec.
Unbelievable, but the coalition may happen
Latest news says that Dion will lead a coalition of the NDP and the Liberals and the Bloc will agree not to bring the government down for a year.
I am amazed that the Bloc would support a government lead by the architect of the Clarity Act. Are they really that beholden to the taxpayer funding that they will do anything to keep it? Another important question to ask is if all the Bloc MPs will be onside. If only a few chose to abstain or to vote against the government, the coalition falls.
A Liberal/NDP government would be 41 seats short of a majority. The Bloc only has 49 MPs. The two independents have shown themselves to be closer to the Conservatives than any other party, but even if they both support the government, the Lib/NDP still need 39 more votes. If ten Bloc MPs break ranks the coalition will fall. If the indepedents vote against the Lib/NDP coalition, it would only take eight Bloc MPs breaking rank.
A Lib/NDP government also has a problem with the loss of MPs through resignations and death. The Liberals have an old caucus with many MPs that have served for numerous terms. The lose of even a few of them puts their ablity to ensure a vote in favour into question.
I have no doubt that the 37 NDP MPs will remain loyal no matter how much they dislike the Liberals, especially here in BC, but I wonder about the Liberals. The Liberals have seen that Stephen Harper has been governing very much in line with the Paul Martinite faction of the party. Might not some of the Martin freindly MPs consider crossing to the Conservatives?
What will the Lib/NDP government have to offer to the Bloc for their support? I am really curious about that.
Will the NDP demand electoral reform even though the Bloc and Liberals are opposed?
With such a narrow margin for governance, the Lib/NDP MPs will be utterly Ottawa bound for fear of losing a vote.
Can a Lib/NDP coalition actually govern well or will they flounder badly? There is a danger of an election next fall and I think that timing would be bad for any government.
I am amazed that the Bloc would support a government lead by the architect of the Clarity Act. Are they really that beholden to the taxpayer funding that they will do anything to keep it? Another important question to ask is if all the Bloc MPs will be onside. If only a few chose to abstain or to vote against the government, the coalition falls.
A Liberal/NDP government would be 41 seats short of a majority. The Bloc only has 49 MPs. The two independents have shown themselves to be closer to the Conservatives than any other party, but even if they both support the government, the Lib/NDP still need 39 more votes. If ten Bloc MPs break ranks the coalition will fall. If the indepedents vote against the Lib/NDP coalition, it would only take eight Bloc MPs breaking rank.
A Lib/NDP government also has a problem with the loss of MPs through resignations and death. The Liberals have an old caucus with many MPs that have served for numerous terms. The lose of even a few of them puts their ablity to ensure a vote in favour into question.
I have no doubt that the 37 NDP MPs will remain loyal no matter how much they dislike the Liberals, especially here in BC, but I wonder about the Liberals. The Liberals have seen that Stephen Harper has been governing very much in line with the Paul Martinite faction of the party. Might not some of the Martin freindly MPs consider crossing to the Conservatives?
What will the Lib/NDP government have to offer to the Bloc for their support? I am really curious about that.
Will the NDP demand electoral reform even though the Bloc and Liberals are opposed?
With such a narrow margin for governance, the Lib/NDP MPs will be utterly Ottawa bound for fear of losing a vote.
Can a Lib/NDP coalition actually govern well or will they flounder badly? There is a danger of an election next fall and I think that timing would be bad for any government.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
House of Commons Math+
In the house of commons, there are 308 MPs, of those MPs, 49 are held by MPs that would like to see an end to Canada as we know it. I was inspired to write this because of a column by Bill Tieleman. Bill and I rarely agree on anything political, but this time I agree with gist of what he has to say and it lead me to think about the members of the hosue of commons and how badly the Bloc skews this.
The Bloc Quebecois is not interested in the good governance of Canada, they are first off interested in an independent Quebec and secondly in whatever can be done to increase the power of the province of Quebec. If one looks at politics in Canada through the lens of the 90% of people that voted for parties that are federalist, the situation looks different.
Taking out the seperatist MPs leaves us with the following:
A clear majority of the MPs interested in the concept of a federal Canada are Conservatives. This has to be considered by all the MPs in Ottawa as a significant mandate from non-seperatist Canadians.
The problem is that there 49 MPs in Ottawa with no interest in the bigger picture of a federal country. These 49 MPs mean that neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals/NDP can govern without them. Both posssible governments are to some extent depedent on people not interested in stablity in Ottawa.
We are in an odd deadlock in Canada as long as the Bloc can hold the balance of power. With the Liberals and NDP talking coalition, they dramatically increase the power of the Bloc because the house is then divided into two factions needing the Bloc.
There are only a few possible outcomes of this stand off:
I can not see the Liberals and NDP actually managing to build a coalition that could realistically ask the GG to let them govern.
I think the NDP is making a huge mistake in helping the Liberals. I know it would hurt the NDP if they lost the support per voter money, but they are the second best party in Canada when it comes to raising money. The current system helps keep the Liberals ahead of the NDP and to be able to out spend them. Without the money, the number two party nationaly would be the NDP and the national election debate would be between the NDP and Conservatives.
The NDP would also benefit from a Green Party having less money to spend and a Bloc with effectively no resources at all.
With the talk of a coalition, the NDP is saying people should back the Liberals, they are putting wind into the sails of a party in serious trouble.
The Bloc Quebecois is not interested in the good governance of Canada, they are first off interested in an independent Quebec and secondly in whatever can be done to increase the power of the province of Quebec. If one looks at politics in Canada through the lens of the 90% of people that voted for parties that are federalist, the situation looks different.
Taking out the seperatist MPs leaves us with the following:
- Total MPs - 259
- Conservatives - 143
- Liberals - 77
- NDP - 37
- Ind - 2
A clear majority of the MPs interested in the concept of a federal Canada are Conservatives. This has to be considered by all the MPs in Ottawa as a significant mandate from non-seperatist Canadians.
The problem is that there 49 MPs in Ottawa with no interest in the bigger picture of a federal country. These 49 MPs mean that neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals/NDP can govern without them. Both posssible governments are to some extent depedent on people not interested in stablity in Ottawa.
We are in an odd deadlock in Canada as long as the Bloc can hold the balance of power. With the Liberals and NDP talking coalition, they dramatically increase the power of the Bloc because the house is then divided into two factions needing the Bloc.
There are only a few possible outcomes of this stand off:
- The Liberals and NDP back down with the knowledge they have slapped the government enough to wake them up.
- The prime minister makes some deals with the Bloc to gain their support or at least get them to abstain.
- The government offers to spend more money
- We head to another election very soon.
I can not see the Liberals and NDP actually managing to build a coalition that could realistically ask the GG to let them govern.
I think the NDP is making a huge mistake in helping the Liberals. I know it would hurt the NDP if they lost the support per voter money, but they are the second best party in Canada when it comes to raising money. The current system helps keep the Liberals ahead of the NDP and to be able to out spend them. Without the money, the number two party nationaly would be the NDP and the national election debate would be between the NDP and Conservatives.
The NDP would also benefit from a Green Party having less money to spend and a Bloc with effectively no resources at all.
With the talk of a coalition, the NDP is saying people should back the Liberals, they are putting wind into the sails of a party in serious trouble.
What is going on in Ottawa
I am annoyed by what is happening in Ottawa for a host of reasons and it is making me angry. I do not like the fact that the Liberals and NDP are talking about trying to form a government so close after the last election.
1) The Liberals and NDP have a total of 114 seats in parliament, the Conservatives 143. Both need the support of the Bloc to govern. Clearly the Conservatives have a much, much stronger right to govern. Can the Liberals and NDP govern when they are 30 or so seats smaller than the Conservatives? No. They will be dependent on the Bloc. The governor general would have to see some form of a written agreement between all three parties before allowing a new government. Even then, the Liberals were the national party most rejected in the last election, to allow them to govern is not really following the will of the electorate.
2) The funding of the political parties - as much as the opposition claims their interest is a different approach to economic stimulus, everything came to a head when the government suggested taking part of the taxpayer subsidy away from political parties. I am digusted that any of the parties are in favour of this. Taxes are collected to allow the government to function and do its business. We do not collect taxes to fund closed, exclusionary private clubs. All public funding of political parties is fundamentally undemocratic and unethical. This money does not go towards people running for election as MPs, but to the private structures we have not control over. Cutting the funding to them may be small, but it is $30 000 000 less in taxes that need to be collected.
3) Economic stimulus. The opposition seems to want to have the government spend an extra $30 000 000 000 on subsidiy to industry and on infrastructure building. The first problem with this is that it means an extra $1000 per Canadian in taxes or national debt, the second is that it ignore what the government has already done, and the third problem is the timing of it.
The extra $1000 per Canadian in spending will most likely mean an extra $1000 per person in national debt. Given the time frame it would take to pay this off, the long term cost per Canadian taxpayer will be $150 per person for 12 year, or about $1800. For a family of five this is $9000 between now and 2021. It means any stimulus package needs to have more impact than this to make any sense. At best the package will have a 0.3% boost in GDP 2009, 0.7% in 2010 and 0.5% in 2011. This is less than the cost of the package.
The call for a stimulus package ignores the fact the government has done a lot to improve our situation. The quickest most effective economic stimulus available is to reduce taxes. We have had a falling tax burden in Canada for about eight years now. Our business costs are lower now than in 2000, the amount of money people keep out of their pay cheque is higher. All of this is reflected in the fact that Canada is projected to have the mildest downtuwn of any western world country. This is an amazing given the fact that we are sitting next door to the country going through the worst recession.
If a spending package is moved forward with, it will take a long time to put into place. The federal government moves at a glacial pace. A $30 000 000 000 stimulus package agreed to in the next budget will not see any money spend before 2010. Most of the money will not actually leave Ottawa's coffers till 2011 or 2012. All the projections have Canada out of any downturn by the end of 2009. The money will come too late to deal with a recession and will simply be wasted.
1) The Liberals and NDP have a total of 114 seats in parliament, the Conservatives 143. Both need the support of the Bloc to govern. Clearly the Conservatives have a much, much stronger right to govern. Can the Liberals and NDP govern when they are 30 or so seats smaller than the Conservatives? No. They will be dependent on the Bloc. The governor general would have to see some form of a written agreement between all three parties before allowing a new government. Even then, the Liberals were the national party most rejected in the last election, to allow them to govern is not really following the will of the electorate.
2) The funding of the political parties - as much as the opposition claims their interest is a different approach to economic stimulus, everything came to a head when the government suggested taking part of the taxpayer subsidy away from political parties. I am digusted that any of the parties are in favour of this. Taxes are collected to allow the government to function and do its business. We do not collect taxes to fund closed, exclusionary private clubs. All public funding of political parties is fundamentally undemocratic and unethical. This money does not go towards people running for election as MPs, but to the private structures we have not control over. Cutting the funding to them may be small, but it is $30 000 000 less in taxes that need to be collected.
3) Economic stimulus. The opposition seems to want to have the government spend an extra $30 000 000 000 on subsidiy to industry and on infrastructure building. The first problem with this is that it means an extra $1000 per Canadian in taxes or national debt, the second is that it ignore what the government has already done, and the third problem is the timing of it.
The extra $1000 per Canadian in spending will most likely mean an extra $1000 per person in national debt. Given the time frame it would take to pay this off, the long term cost per Canadian taxpayer will be $150 per person for 12 year, or about $1800. For a family of five this is $9000 between now and 2021. It means any stimulus package needs to have more impact than this to make any sense. At best the package will have a 0.3% boost in GDP 2009, 0.7% in 2010 and 0.5% in 2011. This is less than the cost of the package.
The call for a stimulus package ignores the fact the government has done a lot to improve our situation. The quickest most effective economic stimulus available is to reduce taxes. We have had a falling tax burden in Canada for about eight years now. Our business costs are lower now than in 2000, the amount of money people keep out of their pay cheque is higher. All of this is reflected in the fact that Canada is projected to have the mildest downtuwn of any western world country. This is an amazing given the fact that we are sitting next door to the country going through the worst recession.
If a spending package is moved forward with, it will take a long time to put into place. The federal government moves at a glacial pace. A $30 000 000 000 stimulus package agreed to in the next budget will not see any money spend before 2010. Most of the money will not actually leave Ottawa's coffers till 2011 or 2012. All the projections have Canada out of any downturn by the end of 2009. The money will come too late to deal with a recession and will simply be wasted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)