Tag: sheila copps

Early details about the Liberal leadership race

Remember the Liberal Party of Canada? The House of Commons third-place party has had the luxury of waiting in order to replace Michael Ignatieff with a permanent leader. Former Ontario NDP Premier Bob Rae has stepped in to fill the void in the interim, however, his critics suggest that his plan is to use the office of the Liberal leader to promote and entrench himself to give himself advantage in an eventual leadership contest.

Details are starting to emerge from various Liberal camps upset with this very real scenario. The newly elected Liberal President Michael Crawley was backed by a younger generation of Liberals who have influence behind the scenes of the party in Ottawa. The nightmare scenario for many of these Liberals would have been to present a “renewed” party with Sheila Copps as their President and Bob Rae as their leader. These Liberals have been moving Crawley to define the upcoming leadership race.

I’ve learned that Crawley and Rae will likely agree that the latter must hand over his “interim” title at the end of this spring sitting of Parliament as the House rises for summer.

Also, the projected date of the Liberal leadership race, according to my sources, will put the leadership election date in March or May of 2013. Rae will likely want a shorter race and I’ve heard that March 2013 would be his preferred date. This may indeed be the concession reached, despite the protestation of the other candidates.

As for these other candidates for Liberal leadership, I’ve heard the names David Bertschi, Martha Hall-Findley, Marc Garneau and David Merner.

C-10, censorship, Liberal outrage and double standards

Jane Taber in the Globe and Mail today:

The Liberals acknowledged yesterday that they tried when they were in office to eliminate tax credits for offensive movies, but only to prevent a film about schoolgirl killers Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka.

Critics say that a similar move by the federal Conservative government is an attempt to censor the Canadian film and TV industry.

I tell ya, it’s never been easier to point out a double standard! While Taber does great work reporting on the Liberals coming forward first to suggest that they’ve done something similar, what she fails to mention is that the controversial section of the legislation limiting grants for subjectively offensive films is virtually word for word the same as the Liberal legislation!

In 2003, Sheila Copps, the Liberal Minister of Heritage introduced the following:

(3) The definition “Canadian film or video production certificate” in subsection 125.4(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

“Canadian film or video production certificate” means a certificate issued in respect of a production by the Minister of Canadian Heritage certifying that the production is a Canadian film or video production in respect of which that Minister is satisfied that

(a) except where the production is a prescribed treaty co-production (as defined by regulation), an acceptable share of revenues from the exploitation of the production in non-Canadian markets is, under the terms of any agreement, retained by

(i) a qualified corporation that owns or owned an interest in the production,

(ii) a prescribed taxable Canadian corporation related to the qualified corporation, or

(iii) any combination of corporations described in (i) or (ii), and

(b) public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy.

Guidelines

(7) The Minister of Canadian Heritage shall issue guidelines respecting the circumstances under which the conditions in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the definition of “Canadian film or video production certificate” in subsection (1) are satisfied. For greater certainty, these guidelines are not statutory instruments as defined in the Statutory Instruments Act.

and here’s the analogous parts of C-10, the Conservative legislation:

(3) The definition “Canadian film or video production certificate” in subsection 125.4(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

“Canadian film or video production certificate” means a certificate issued in respect of a production by the Minister of Canadian Heritage certifying that the production is a Canadian film or video production in respect of which that Minister is satisfied that

(a) except where the production is a treaty co-production (as defined by regulation), an acceptable share of revenues from the exploitation of the production in non-Canadian markets is, under the terms of any agreement, retained by

(i) a qualified corporation that owns or owned an interest in, or for civil law a right in, the production,

(ii) a prescribed taxable Canadian corporation related to the qualified corporation, or

(iii) any combination of corporations described in subparagraph (i) or (ii); and

(b) public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy.

(7) The Minister of Canadian Heritage shall issue guidelines respecting the circumstances under which the conditions in paragraphs (a) and (b) of the definition of “Canadian film or video production certificate” in subsection (1) are satisfied. For greater certainty, these guidelines are not statutory instruments as defined in the Statutory Instruments Act.

In February 2004 (under Liberal PM Paul Martin’s government), the following guidelines describing “ineligible genres of production” (those that do not qualify for a tax credit under the program:

a) news, current events or public affairs programming, or a programme that includes weather or market reports;
b) talk show;
c) production in respect of a game, questionnaire or contest (other than a production directed primarily at minors);
d) sports event or activity;
e) gala presentation or an awards show;
f) production that solicits funds;
g) reality television;
h) pornography;
i) advertising;
j) production produced primarily for industrial, corporate or institutional purposes;
k) production, other than a documentary, all or substantially all of which consists of stock footage; or
l) production for which public financial support would, in the opinion of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, be contrary to public policy.

Double standard? Yes, I think so.

Harper: GST from 7% to 5%

harper-gst-cut.jpgA Conservative government under the leadership of Stephen Harper will reduce the GST from 7% to 6% immediately and then to 5% within five years.

This announcement generates a mixed reaction from me, but it’s mostly good.

First of all, small ‘c’ conservatives argue that we should be moving away from income taxes and towards consumption tax as taxing savings and wealth generation discourages investment. However, lowering consumption taxes encourages consumerism which will certainly stimulate the economy from everyday items such as newspapers to big-ticket items such as cars and homes.

While the latest announcement isn’t necessarily reflective of Mr. Harper’s masters degree in economics, he should be awarded a doctorate in politics. Today’s announcement will certainly get voters excited and has the added benefit of dragging the Liberals through the inevitable ‘but some critics say’ angle from the MSM. You see, some critics say that voters don’t trust politicians on GST promises, but then again, we’re talking about Liberals specifically. Remember the broken promise about eliminating the GST in the Red Book? Sheila Copps resigned over that Liberal broken promise.

“I’ve already said personally and very directly that if the GST is not abolished, I’ll resign. I don’t know how clear you can get. I think you’ve got to be accountable…and you have to deliver on it” — Sheila Copps, Globe and Mail, March 11, 1996

So, Stephen Harper gets to make a wildly popular announcement while skeptics can only cite a flaw by pointing out one of the biggest Liberal flip-flops in Canadian history.

Policy wise, is this a good move overall in the eyes of small ‘c’ conservatives? Well, the net reduction of taxes is a conservative ideal, so the reduction of the GST is a victory for small ‘c’ conservatives and the taxpayer. Will we move to a consumption based tax system in the future, eliminating income tax entirely? Perhaps that’s well off into the future, but for the present a 2% reduction in the GST will win the Conservative Party a lot of support.

Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation National Director John Williamson agrees,

“The idea of reducing the GST is just as valid as any other tax-reduction proposal we have seen to date. I think it is one that will prove to be popular with a lot of voters.” — John Williamson

Paul Martin had this to say about the GST in 1989:

“Mr. Speaker, the goods and services tax is a stupid, inept and incompetent tax.” — Paul Martin, November 28th 1989

And today, Mr. Martin had this to say:

“I don’t believe that is the path to follow … Canadians have been down this road before. They’ve heard this story.” — Paul Martin

Didn’t Paul Martin author the Liberal’s broken GST promise in the Red Book?