Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Debating Conservatism Round 2 - Me vs Taylor | Main | Al Gore’s $100 million carbon empire »

Friday, August 15, 2008

What's next on the Conservative agenda?

In his latest column, John Williamson, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, makes the case that “by working with the opposition, the Conservatives passed most of their original election promises” and are “again looking for fresh ideas."

Williamson has generously offered a few ideas of his own.

He argues that the Conservatives should “start by lowering tax on fuel to give Canadians a break.”

Good idea.

He also suggests the government should “reduce and harmonize employment insurance tax rates paid by businesses and workers.  This would eliminate the program's massive annual surpluses and lower the cost of hiring and retaining workers.”

Who could argue with that?

Williamson thinks Senate reform should also be on the agenda.

I’m not sure how a bunch more elected politicians is expected to help reduce the size and scope of government, but it is a winning issue with the public.

A better idea found in Williamson’s column is a recommendation that “Ottawa should pass a law to ensure the public sector does not expand faster than the population.  Such a reform was recently enacted in Saskatchewan.  Why not in the nation's capital?”

Why not indeed.

Williamson also has a few crown corporations in his cross-hairs. He wants to see the Conservatives privatize Canada Post, Purolator Courier, CMHC and VIA Rail with the proceeds from the sales applied against Canada's $457-billion debt. 

I like it.

Williamson predictably has an idea for reforming the tax system: “The Conservatives should...press the tax reform agenda by swapping Ottawa's four federal brackets of 15%, 22%, 26% and 29% with two rates of 15% and 25%.”

15% and 25% are high by my standards, but reducing to top income tax bracket from 29% to 25% is a good idea.

You’ve got the point form version. Now read “On with the show, this is it!” for the full story.

So what do Western Standard readers think of Williamson’s priorities for the Conservative government?

Posted by Matthew Johnston on August 15, 2008 in Canadian Conservative Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e55403c24f8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What's next on the Conservative agenda?:

Comments

Start reducing the corporate tax regime - oh, heh, what about repealing that gift money to Bombardier?

Posted by: Faramir | 2008-08-15 1:31:17 PM


Start reducing the corporate tax regime - oh, heh, what about repealing that gift money to Bombardier?
Posted by: Faramir | 15-Aug-08 1:31:17 PM

How about the $3.4 million that the University of Calgary recently got for natural exploration development. Are the oil companies so poor that the taxpayer has to fund development for them? Just wondering.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-08-15 1:54:58 PM


Should have said natural gas exploration development.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-08-15 1:58:34 PM


"What's next on the Conservative agenda?"

Waiting for orders.

Posted by: Marc | 2008-08-15 2:11:45 PM


So Stig you have no problem giving more money to a single parasite corporation simply because a UNIVERSITY got a reasearch grant. Here in BC the Forest Industry is in collapse. Where the frack is our money? But we don't count because our votes count for shit. Bombardier is the same POS company that told its US dealers not to sell to Canadian buyers. Bombardier can go tits up. In fact every on the teat industry in the East can go tits up and die for all I care - and every last one of you can freeze this winter.

Posted by: Faramir | 2008-08-15 2:11:54 PM


I am left speechless by the claim that the conservatives have implemented most of their election promises. He must be talking about a different government in a different country.

Posted by: Alain | 2008-08-15 2:21:16 PM


So Stig you have no problem giving more money to a single parasite corporation simply because a UNIVERSITY got a reasearch grant.
Posted by: Faramir | 15-Aug-08 2:11:54 PM

I'm merely pointing out that Bomdardier isn't the only one receiving "grants". However, in the real world every aircraft manufacturer is subsidized, whether it be Airbus, Embraer, Boeing, Sukhoi. I'm not saying I agree with it but that's the reality.

So how much money should the BC forest industry get? 10 million, 100 million, 1 billion?

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-08-15 2:33:50 PM


Yes, I know the others are subsidized. Two wrongs to make a right. And at least Embraer isn't actively screwing Canadian consumers like Bombardier. Also Harper, the long ago Harper, was once against corporate welfare. How much should BC get? Well, if life was fair, Harper would do just as much vote buying over here. I just wonder why is it Ontario auto parts and auto makers and Quebece aerospace is so special? What about dying industry elsewhere in the nation. My final answer in the perfect world is nothing for nobody. A University grant is an entirely different category of government funding from corporate bail outs. My concern is corporate welfare. Especially of scum sucking French company Bombardier.

Posted by: Faramir | 2008-08-15 2:49:26 PM


My concern is corporate welfare. Especially of scum sucking French company Bombardier. Posted by: Faramir

Ah, corporate welfare. Then the CBC has to be #1 to go.

Posted by: Sounder | 2008-08-15 3:09:57 PM


Please don't betray Harper now. While he's not perfect, he's the best hope we have. If the Liebrals and/or Dippers get in, they'll be impossible to remove. Imagine Dion as another Chretien. There, now Harper doesn't sound so bad.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-08-15 3:30:38 PM


Dion is nothing like Chretien. Their faults are completely different.

Chretien was at best a dishonest and egotistical opportunist and bully whose primary objectives in life were to win elections and feather his own nest.

Dion is honest, modest, and mild-mannered. He really believes in what he stands for politically, and is motivated by his perception of the public interest.

Chretien was a pragmatist who campained on the left and governed from the centre (adopting the Reform platform on NAFTA, GST, debt and deficit, the Clarity Act, etc.).

Dion is a consistent idealist with dubious ideals. Dion may be the more dangerous politician, despite being the much better person.

Posted by: Grant Brown | 2008-08-15 3:54:09 PM


Can't we get into a more productive debate, like whether Batman would whoop Spiderman's ass, or vice versa?

Posted by: Grant Brown | 2008-08-15 3:56:54 PM


You can speculate all you want on what the Harper government SHOULD do.....let me tell you what they WILL do.

They will do WHATEVER is expedient for their reelection.Everything else is window dressing.

If you haven't figured that out in the past two years, you are either cmpletely ignorant of politics or are blinded by groupthink partisanship.

Posted by: Canadian Observer | 2008-08-15 8:11:33 PM


"Chretien was a pragmatist who campained on the left and governed from the centre (adopting the Reform platform on NAFTA, GST, debt and deficit, the Clarity Act, etc.)."

Look for Bill C-341...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_Contingency_Act

Posted by: Marc | 2008-08-15 8:40:39 PM


So how much money should the BC forest industry get? 10 million, 100 million, 1 billion?

Posted by: The Stig | 15-Aug-08 2:33:50 PM

They should get at least as much as the Alberta petroleum industry got during our last 3 recessions. If I remember correctly, the sum total amount was ZERO. Does that sound about right?

Posted by: dp | 2008-08-16 9:19:06 PM


"What's next on the Conservative agenda?"

Waiting for orders.

Posted by: Marc | 15-Aug-08 2:11:45 PM"

F**k are you stupid.

Posted by: deepblue | 2008-08-17 12:30:45 AM


Zebulon, yes a fellow church goer I think has me reconsidering on dumping Harper. Still angry, very angry about his corporate welfar and overspending, but you are right about the Liberals.

Posted by: Faramir | 2008-08-17 8:01:32 PM


Come now dp. Don't you know Alberta must give its pound of flesh for the good of Ontario? It is sad Harper is playing the same games to buy votes. Wasn't the whole lesson of Adscam that you can't buy PQ votes - Ontario voters on the other hand? The CPC can never play that game as well as the NDP or Grits.

Posted by: Faramir | 2008-08-17 8:17:32 PM


That's very deep, deepblue.

*

The Libs were using power to feed their greed. The CPC is using power to force an ideology.
Both represent anything but Canadians' interests.
The thing with Harper is that his agenda has been written by a more global movement.
Both can't be trusted.

Vive la Liberté, vive l'Indépendance

Posted by: Marc | 2008-08-17 9:40:39 PM


Your idiocy as usual hardly deserves a response, but what the hell. I'm bored.

There are those of us, many of us, who prefer the conservative ideology on all levels, than decades of marxist/leftist ideology that has been forced upon us for decades thanks to idiots like you who can't see, or through your own dimwittedness, refuse to see the difference.

Your apparent assumption the liberals do not act out of there own ideology, or that it matches many Canadians ideals, is at best laughable.

But that is nothing new from you.


Posted by: deepblue | 2008-08-17 11:25:55 PM


You must be bored as hell, answering two of my posts. If it wasent for the foam at your mouth, you might have been taken seriously.
You fanatic pom pom girl.

The Libs in Canada didnt acted out of an "ideology". Au contraire, they've acted in a way to please the most voters as possible to stay in power while they were filling their pockets and those of close friends.

The CPC do exactly the same, except that their ultimate goal is not money...
It's pushing their fondemantalist ideology (yours) on us all and pleasing a master-chief that lives and govern in a foreign country.
What ? You thought you've got a fiscal conservative government in the CPC ?

I never trusted both but go ahead, try to insult me all you want. Howerver, I have to say that I'm maybe laughable but it's better than being a sorry whore in denial like you, sir.

Posted by: Marc | 2008-08-18 12:15:10 AM


Marc, yawn.

Posted by: deepblue | 2008-08-18 6:27:13 AM



The comments to this entry are closed.