Ontario Smoking Ban: More Government Intrusion

The Liberals love to intrude. Tell you what's good for you, what's bad for you, etc. We now face more intrusion. In Ontario, a new law came into effect May 31, 2006 banning smoking in all public places and workplaces.

This law, pushed by anti-smoking activists, intrudes on personal choice. From a business perspective, many businesses that, up until recently (or perhaps May 31) allowed smoking, did so partly because this was part of their "target market". This smoking ban will negatively effect their business. One can argue that the drop in smoking customers at this business may be offset by the rise in non-smoking customers, but why must we intrude on the choice of the individual or the choice of the business owner?

Many believe that facilites that allowed smoking interfered with the freedom of non-smokers. But this is simply not the case.

If a smoker goes out to a bar and fills it with second-hand smoke, they are in no way interfering with a non-smoker's freedom to go where they want or when they want. They do make it inconvenient or unpleasant for a non-smoker to visit this bar, but that is not in any way the same as infringing on their rights - and besides, it shouldn't be up to either of them (or the government) in a privately owned establishment. With this law a smoker can no longer go to any bar and fill it up with smoke, but the non-smoker is still free to gow where they want, when they want.

We are not talking anymore about ensuring freedoms, we are only talking about ensuring convenience, but only for the side that is perceived as having the higher moral ground.

My final thought is this... let the market cater to non-smokers and smokers, whomever they prefer to target. Not add another level of government intrusion.

Some Favourite CPC Member Quotes

Many more available at In Their Own Words.ca

"I think you'll see more uses for the Notwithstanding Clause in the future."
- Conservative MP Randy White in the documentary film Let No One Put Asunder, May 19, 2004.

"We should try to keep our mothers in the home and that's where the whole Reform platform hangs together."
- Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative MP for Yorkton-Melville, in the Vancouver Province, October 11, 1993.

"We're it not for the idiocy of the Liberals contemplating the extrapolation of spousal benefits to roommates, it could be argued that parental leave discriminates against infertile couples -- but that may lead to the risks of extending parental leave payments to those who merely go through the motions!"
- Cheryl Gallant, Letter to the Editor, Fredericton Daily Gleaner, October 28, 1999.

"If they say they're personally opposed to abortion but they don't want to impose their opposition on society, ask them if they're personally opposed to child abuse, ask them if they're personally opposed to slavery. "
- Concervative MP Jason Kenney, Canadian Catholic News, May 24, 2004 Edition.

"That should be a no-brainer, shouldn't it?"
- Conservative Health Critic James Lunney stating that a 'parrallel' system of private health care services should be available to take pressure off the public system and reduce waiting lists, Vancouver Sun, February 21th 2001.

"Do you notice that in Toronto there has been increased crime from certain groups, like Jamaicans? "
- Calgary Northeast MP Art Hanger during a get-acquainted tour of Toronto's ethnic communities, to a storekeeper about crime, quoted in the Edmonton Journal, March 14th 1994.

"Let's lower the age to ten."
- Conservative MP Myron Thompson, commenting on the age at which he believes one should be tried as an adult, at a Vernon, BC meeting.

It's been awhile... Harper Muzzling again

Harper is up to his old tricks again.

The Prime Minister has warned Conservative MPs not to comment on the marriage of two gay RCMP officers. This message was said to be for "the small minority who might say something stupid".

I doubt this is a small minority. If it were, than the CPC Policy declaration under section 63, part iv) wouldn't state, "A Conservative government will support legislation defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman". Or did this small minority manage to force this policy through against the will of it's members, much like the CPC has been going against Parliament on the Kyoto issue?

He may fool some, but this "small minority that might say something stupid" is just part of a larger majority that feel the same way, but are smart enough to keep their mouths shut.

May 15, 2006:Kramp wants to extend EI Benefits for the Sick

Ottawa- Prince Edward-Hastings MP, Daryl Kramp, introduced, today in the House of Commons, a Private Members’ Bill entitled Convalescence Benefits Act.

The bill, if passed, would provide for an additional 35 weeks of employment insurance benefits to individuals convalescing from a serious health issue and unable to work after exhausting their sick benefits.

"Recovering from a serious health matter is stressful enough without having to worry about meeting financial obligations." Kramp added, "I want to eliminate the gap between sick benefits and disability pension that leaves too many people without any source of income."

Kramp explained that after collecting the maximum 15 weeks of sick benefits, a person can only apply for a disability pension if their health problems are permanent. Individuals who are expected to make a full recovery, those convalescing, do not qualify leaving them without income protection.

According to Kramp, there are a number of people in the local area who, while battling serious health issues such as cancer, find they are without any income protection.
"Many of these people have worked their whole lives. They deserve better than to be abandoned and told to fend for themselves after 15 weeks," said Kramp.

-30-

This is long overdue.

Daryl Kramp is the MP for the riding of Hastings-Prince Edward and represents the Conservative Party of Canada. So far, Daryl Kramp has done well as our MP, and efforts like this are to be commended. Unfortunately, he represents a party that I feel should not be supported.

Judging so far, he is a reasonable man with good intentions, but he is with the wrong party. Come to the PC Daryl... you never seemed to fit well with the Alliance.

PRESS RELEASE

Standing down: Actions betraying slogans.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 15, 2006Toronto, ON – Mr. Harper came to office under the slogan “Stand up for Canada” but he drops final determination that the United States has abrogated a signed treaty (NAFTA) in return for an agreement that returns only part of the money taken illegally from our lumber industry. This alone is enough to say that this new Conservative government has lost the "moral authority to govern", to use Harper’s words.

"Open Federalism", another Harper feel good phrase, in the softwood lumber agreement is accepting that alterations in provincial forest policy changes be subject to U.S. government approval and requesting the provinces agree to this and all other terms within 24 hours.

This new Conservative minority has mastered “spin” – and the defenders will try to persuade Canadians there is no loss of sovereignty. Or they’ll go on the attack. But the reality is – so far, there is only one party that has come out strongly on this issue and it’s the Progressive Canadian party. We were critical of the Liberal approach and we abhor the neo-Conservative approach.

The P.C. Party is absolutely against giving up our sovereignty and has the expectation our trading partners keep their agreements. Doing anything else merely telegraphs that we can be bullied whenever it is convenient.

As one agreement being broken another “agreement” is negotiated. No wonder they want it done quickly. The government is practicing “sleight of hand”. It doesn’t want people thinking this through carefully, debating the implications or even reading this agreement and finding out how we have given away our sovereignty so that the Harper government can redeem Mr. Emerson. There is no cost to the U.S. It doesn’t have to live up to the North American Free Trade Agreement, why would one more agreement matter? The only possible rationale is that this new agreement is so lopsided in favour of the U.S. interests that they’d be fools not to follow it.

There are no doubt MPs on the government side who know this is wrong but refuse to speak up. They have seen what Mr. Harper does to anyone who disagrees with him. There are also those who know this is wrong but would make a deal with the devil because they are so close to power that they can taste it. Either way, Canada’s interests go undefended.

Speaking in defence of the Agreement, Mr. Emerson speaks of the U.S. making "concessions" where none exist. He says "At the end of the day the government has to represent the public interest and of Canada as a whole," which for him is avoiding the situation that " if Canada continues to rely on NAFTA, the Americans are likely to expand their attacks on the Canadian forest industry to include other products."

Canadians ought to be informed of what is happening. Mr. Harper is once again denying his words, “Canadians don’t turn and run” by his actions. We are to accept tucking our collective tails between our legs and begging the U.S. to give us back part of the money they took from us illegally. And we’ll go cap in hand with any forest management program we have to have the U.S. tell us what Canadian provinces can and can not do. If that’s not turning and running, what is?"

As every child learns in the school yard, you don’t deal with a bully by running, hiding or begging. You stand up to them. Quietly and with dignity you say --- no, I’m not going to take this. And you stand your ground. That’s what people with character do.", stated Tracy Parsons, Progressive Canadian Party Leader.

Stand up for Canada? It requires a back-bone to stand up. There is none evident in the Bush-Harper agreement. There is courage in following through with the challenge the U.S. has made to the March 17 NAFTA panel findings which went in favour of Canada. Anything else is like failing to show up for the last game of the Stanley Cup finals.

The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party is a registered Federal Political Party comprised of progressive-conservative minded Canadians rebuilding from the roots of the former Progressive Conservative Party. For more information on the PC Party, it’s policies, structure or general information, go to http://www.progressivecanadian.org/ or call 866-812-6972.

-30-

For more information or to request an interview, please contact:
Tracy Parsons, Leader
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel 866-812-6972
tracy.parsons@pcparty.org

Jim Love, President
Progressive Canadian Party
Tel (647) 403-5519
jim.love@pcparty.org

QUOTES AND INFORMATION CITED DRAWN FROM:
Emerson defends softwood deal http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/05/12/1577382-cp.html

Ottawa's softwood deadline called 'railroad'TREATIES I The Tories are fast-tracking the agreement processhttp://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=0c6be61b-4616-45cf-b6e5-1a6742e6f51d

Forest policies must now be vetted by U.S., Emerson saysSOFTWOOD DEAL I B.C.'s timber pricing system awaits Washington approvalhttp://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=d2238df1-293b-44c4-aca4-e223df2f6cd4

(courteousy of Al Gullon)

The "progressive conservative" legacy of Sir John A. Macdonald
"Sir John A's 'risen from the Dead!..
...to slap Stephen 'arper upside 'is 'ead."

Since the 2004 election media pundits have made much of Stephen Harper's sudden and mysterious modesty but without pointing out that the disastrous election results have left him with much to be modest about. Moreover, on the one point on which he has been less than modest since that election he is blatantly wrong. His frequent claim that the "new" Conservative Party (aka Reform III) is continuing in the legacy of Sir John A is at best a misreading of history... and at worst an outright lie.

On "Black Wednesday", October 15, 2003, with the surprise revelation of the Agreement in Principle, a new political party was born of an illicit liaison between senior officers of the "parent parties". Over the next two months they walked roughshod over and through the Constitution of the PC Party on their way to register the new-born during the weekend of December 6-7. On the official "birth certificate" issued by Elections Canada on that "Silly Sunday" the word "Progressive" was conspicuous by its absence.

Exactly 150 years previous to these "sorry events", and in stark contrast to their secret nature, the not-yet-Sir John A. Macdonald was very publicly wrestling with the faults and fissures in the policy platform of the"olde conservative party". In a February 9th, 1854 letter to a colleague*, he stated his conclusion that the future growth and development of Canada required that,

" … our aim should be to enlarge the bounds of our party so as to embrace every person desirous of being counted as a "progressive Conservative", and who will join in a series of measures to put an end to the corruption which has ruined the present government and debauched all its followers."
(*one Captain Strachan, in the National Archives, see extract on p.2)

Some nine months later Macdonald, although not yet Leader, was able to pull together a coalition of the less-radical liberals and the more-progressive conservatives into the MacNab-Morin government. Throughout the fall of 1854 that government enacted "a series of measures" which removed many of the "Conservative" privileges of the Seigneurs (in Quebec) and the Family Compact (in Ontario) and released the economic energy of the individual to begin to build the strong Canadian economy we know today. [George-Etienne Cartier participated in those measures and joined Macdonald in the Cabinet in early 1855.]

This progressive platform continued to characterize the Conservative party through Confederation and Canada's expansion to the Pacific and Arctic oceans. The addition of the adjective "Progressive" at the 1942 AGM was thus not, in fact, a policy change for the Party but a public proclamation of Macdonald’s progressive policies which have been maintained now for 150 years … and which the PC Party, re-registered as the "Progressive Canadian Party" [because Elections Canada rejected our application for "Progressive Conservative"], is determined to continue for the next 150 years!

In summary, Macdonald forged a coalition of progressive-minded citizens and, with them, enacted "progressive Conservative" policies which removed the elite's economic privileges in favour of "the little guy". In contrast Stephen Harper's new party drove away the more progressive members of the PC Party and now appears to be advocating a return to the "traditional conservative values" of 150 years ago which Macdonald had the wisdom to abandon. The illicitly born "new Conservative Party" has both repudiated his policies and reversed his actions and thus has no claim whatsoever to the legacy of Sir John A.

Keep It Simple Stupid
Conservative Budget: In Laymans Terms

This is my take, without any rambling...

If it is likely that you voted for the Conservative's in the last election or that you would be likely to switch your vote to Conservative next-time around, then you will benefit somewhat from this budget. (normally, the middle-class to rich, and corporations).

If it is unlikely that you voted for the Conservative's in this budget, or that you will switch your vote to Conservative then you will NOT benefit from this budget. (if you're poor, you're income tax just went up by .5%, my friend).

If your province (namely, Quebec) is likely to help win a Conservative majority next time around, you will receive special treatment from the Conservative government.

In summary, Harper is a "strategist", and everything he will do until he has his majority is considered only in terms of politcal gain, not in terms of what will be best for the country in the future.

Don't be fooled...

Copyright Laws on File Sharing
Artists Speak Out

Read This: Artists Speak out on Copyright Laws

As a musician, I would never argue the fact that a musician has the right to be paid for his/her work but I do not think that creating laws that will make it easier to sue fans is the way to go.

The music industry will need to adapt to the changing market, and create innovative ways to make the best of it. We do not need to litigate music-lovers.

This market may actually help certain musicians (particularly independent ones) who may not have had the opportunity to make their music available to the public in the past.

PC PRESS RELEASE

Threat to withdraw government support unconscionable.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 11, 2006 Toronto, ON – It is unconscionable the Government of Canada overtly threatened the Canadian softwood industry in order to obtain acquiescence to its hurriedly thrown together Agreement with the Administration of the United States.

"The industry will be on its own in every respect -- financial, diplomatic and legal." is the threat alleged in a report which states concerning the Agreement "If the seven-year agreement is ratified, the Canadian industry will face permanent restrictions on its access to the U.S. market, as well as rates of tax that will consistently exceed any duty rates that may have survived a bid to end the dispute through a process of litigation." (Three lumber groups attack Ottawa over softwood deal )

The United States has challenged this March 17, 2006 finding: "The NAFTA panel affirmed the DOC’s finding that Canadian softwood lumber production is not subsidized." At that time the Minister Emerson is quoted in a Government of Canada Press release as stating “We will be working with the provinces and industry toward a resolution that is in Canada’s best interest."

http://w01.international.gc.ca/minpub/Publication.asp?publication_id=383767&Language=E

"The interests of consumers in the United States are negatively affected. This deal will ensure that Canadian lumber prices are kept at artificially high levels to avoid competing fairly with U.S. providers. It’s important to remember that these actions have been deemed illegal under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Canadian producers and their employees are being bullied into accepting a bad deal and a bad precedent" stated Tracy Parsons, Leader of the PC Party.

It is the position of the Progressive Canadian (PC) Party that Canada's best interests are served by proceeding with litigation before the NAFTA panel. The Agreement arrived at serves only the interests of the two governments and the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports which has applauded "the tireless efforts of the Bush Administration officials who negotiated a means of offsetting Canadian unfair lumber practices."

http://www.fairlumbercoalition.org/origdocs/releases/press_release_4-27-06.pdf)

Jim Love, PC Party President's asks “Is this what Mr. Harper means when he says Stand up for Canada?” Once again, the U.S. refuses to honour the treaties that they have signed – as they did under the Liberals. The difference this time is that the U.S. can now depend on their man in Ottawa, Stephen Harper, to not only take a bad deal, but to put a positive spin on it for them. They announce a victory, when we get nothing of the sort. They (the U.S.) still keep a large chunk of money illegally taken from Canadian producers . In return, we get a seven year term that guarantees nothing thanks to a little noticed term that will add an “export tax” when prices fall. By not continuing to final determination by NAFTA Mr. Harper is not only refusing to “stand up for Canada” – he’s given every other special interest group the blueprint for an end run around any trade agreement we sign.

The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party is a registered Federal Political Party comprised of progressive-conservative minded Canadians rebuilding from the roots of the former Progressive Conservative Party. For more information on the PC Party, it’s policies, structure or general information, go to http://www.progressivecanadian.org/ or call 866-812-6972.

-30-

For more information or to request an interview, please contact:Jim Love, PresidentProgressive Canadian Party(647) 403-5519jim.love@pcparty.org

We have a REAL Choice...

With Liberal Arrogance at an all-time high:

"There's actually no plan for early learning and child-care spaces. So it's a good job they're putting more money for prisons in the budget, because we're going to need them if we don't get this early childhood right." - Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett, criticizing the Harper budget.

And Harper reneging on commitments, refusing to see the other-side of any equation, using government funded websites to promote his partisan agenda and taking a partisan approach to his dealings with the provinces, it seems that the two front-running parties (LPC and CPC) are simply a choice between lesser evils.

Luckily for us, we have a real choice. Politics can be done differently, and I encourage you to visit our other bloggers in the Progressive Canadian Party, as well as our home page.

Harper picking fight with
Ontario?

Prime Minister Harper has once again shown his partisan approach to government in his dealings with Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty.

Last week, Harper met with the Premier for a mere 45 minutes, in a low-profile, no camera situation. After this, the Prime Minister made an appearence at the Provincial Progressive Conservative Fundraiser where he called the leader of the provincial party, John Tory, "the next Premier of Ontario".

The Ontario Premier has been having difficulties even arranging to meet with the Prime Minister, and this meeting had taken 3 months to arrange. In the meantime Prime Minister Harper has been publicly courting Jean Charest (Premier of Quebec), and now he's playing politics with John Tory.

Although I support the Pronvincial Progressive Conservative Party, I don't think Harper has respected Ontario's democratic choices. This sort of action reminds me of Rick Mercer's take on equalization. (under March 28, 2006)

This partisan approach to being Prime Minister is simply not appropriate. However, Harper has shown during his short-term in office that political ethics (beyond the Accountability Act) is not one of his five priorities.

Taxpayer Dollars Feed Conservative Propaganda Machine

I had originally posted this news release but discovered that Sean Tisdall beat me to it. I do my best to refrain from being redundant so you may read the release at his blog.

If you would like the pdf file that came attatched with this release, please email thom.and.char@hotmail.com.

Daycare thoughts: Opinion Requested

To truly formulate an appropriate opinion on the daycare debtate, let us first identify the different positions:

• There is not enough daycare spaces (parents cannot find childcare facilities if they have 2 earners).
• In lower-income families, one parent may be unable to work because the possible wage this parent may earn will not offset the cost of childcare. They are not eligible for any provincial funding for daycare.
• There are many families that choose to have one parent stay-at-home (that is, they can make it by with one income) but they too want to be awarded some benefit (this is where the additional $1200 baby-bonus comes into play).

Does anyone have any ideas how we can address these issues and keep everyone happy?

McGuinty Top 50: Broken promises

1. "I won't raise your taxes."
2. Balance the Budget every year of their mandate
3. Balance the Budget by 2007
4. Roll back tolls on the 407
5. Fund Medically-Necessary Health Care Services (de-listed eye exams, chiropractic care and physiotherapy
6. Not Add to the Province's Debt
7. Stop 6,600 Houses on the Oak Ridges Moraine
8. Abide by the Balanced Budget law
9. Cap Hydro Rates at 4.3 cents per Kilowatt Hour Until 2006
10. Respect MPPs and Democracy
11. Allow all non-cabinet MPPs to criticize and vote against government legislation
12. Provide autism treatment beyond age six
13. Reduce Auto Insurance Rates by 10% Within 90 Days
14. Reduce Private Consultants
15. Cancel P3 Hospitals in Brampton and Ottawa
16. Public Inquiry into Meat Inspection
17. Withdraw Government Appeal on the Richmond Landfill
18. Make Ontario's Chief Medical Officer an independent officer of the Legislature
19. Govern with honesty and integrity
20. Respect the Outcome of the Kawartha Lakes Referendum on Amalgamation
21. Better mental health care
22. Value and Support the Public Service
23. Divert 60% of municipal garbage to recycling by 2005
24. Close "private" MRI and CT clinics
25. Stop School Closings
26. "Immediately" establish an Arts and Culture Advisory Council
27. Provide Adequate, Multi-Year Funding for Hospitals
28. Hire Over 1,000 Teachers a Year
29. Hire 1,000 New Police Officers
30. Close Coal-Fired Electricity Plants by 2007
31. Hire 100 New Parole and Probation Officers
32. Double the Number of Apprentices
33. Create Tens of Thousands of New Child Care Spaces
34. End the "Clawback" of the Federal Child Tax Credit
35. Build 20,000 New Affordable Housing Units
36. Spend "Every Penny" of the New Health Tax on Health Care
37. Cut Ministers' Pay for Running a Deficit
38. Eliminate Barriers to Foreign-Trained Professionals within One Year
39. Require Trades and Professions to Accept Qualified Immigrants within One Year
40. Repeal the Tenant Protection Act within One Year
41. Establish a Standing Committee on Education to Hold Yearly Hearings
42. Liberal Promises Would Cost $5.9 Billion
43. Provide Legal Rights to Victims of Crime
44. Hire 8,000 nurses by the end of 2007
45. Make the Ministry of Agriculture a lead ministry
46. Invest in rural roads and bridges
47. Support the Province's Cities
48. Make sure health dollars are being spent wisely
49. Stop the waste of taxpayers' dollars
50. Guarantee stable, long-term funding for our rural communities

(from: Pay More Get Less)

American War Deserter Rejected by Harper

I'm sure that no one is surprised that Prime Minister Harper has refused to accept the request of American War Deserter Cindy Sheehan (pictured above), who recently asked the Prime Minster to offer sanctuary to American War Deserters. In addition to Harper's support of the Iraq war, Harper has been trying to improve Canada's relations with the United States. Such action would not help. Cindy Sheehan has become one of the best critics of this war, since her son, Casey, was killed in Iraq.

Unfortunately for Harper, he has forgotten that he does not have control over parliament. His refusal of this request could be rejected by an opposition motion if it is put forth. If the other 3 parties agree that Canada should offer sanctuary to American War Deserters, then we will, and Harper may finally realize his lack of a mandate.

If an opposition motion of this sort is brought forth, theoretically Harper could make it a vote of confidence, which would force an election.

I am skeptical that he would want to fight an election on the Iraq war.

Budget 2006: Tax Cuts, Focused Spending, Debt Paydown

CPC News Release:
02 May 2006
Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty today presented a balanced federal budget that significantly cuts taxes, focuses federal spending on priority areas and pays down debt.
The budget delivers $20 billion in tax relief over two years—that is more tax relief than the previous four budgets combined. Key tax measures include:
A one-point reduction to the GST, effective July 1, 2006.
Broad-based income tax relief.
Targeted tax measures to help Canadians with the cost of:

Tools.
Textbooks.
Transit passes.
Kids’ sports.
The budget prioritizes and focuses federal spending including:
$3.7 billion over two years for the new $1,200 Universal Child Care Benefit.
$1.5 billion more this year for agriculture.
$1.4 billion more this year for policing, border security and public safety.
$1.1 billion more over two years to rebuild the Armed Forces.

The budget is balanced and specifically commits $3 billion per year in debt paydown.
For 2005–06, the federal surplus is currently estimated at $8 billion.

With respect to restoring the fiscal balance, a commitment to address concerns over fiscal imbalance; greater certainty with respect to 2006–07 Equalization and Territorial Formula Financing payments; up to $3.3 billion in additional funding support to provinces and territories to help address short-term pressures in post-secondary education, affordable housing and public transit; and a commitment to a principle-based framework for fiscal relations, outlined in the companion document Restoring Fiscal Balance in Canada.

PC NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 5, 2006


Political expediency priority one.

Toronto, ON – The Progressive Canadian Party believes that the Harper Government has crafted a budget designed to maximize short range support within the electorate rather than present any vision for the future. The first budget of the new Conservative Party reflects the absence of progressive thought. It focuses on tax cuts and giveaways designed more to buy votes than solve either long or short term national problems.

"The $1200.00 renewal of the Baby Bonus will not increase the availability of day care spaces, nor transit tax credits have more than minimal effect on degrading of the atmosphere," stated Party Leader Tracy Parsons. "The abrogation of the Kelowna Agreement, for whatever reason, may be received as a challenge to native peoples already unsettled by confrontations in Caledonia."

Chris Schnurr, Health Critic for the Progressive Canadian Party, sees very little in this budget to ensure that provinces effectively manage federal dollars appropriately. "What we are seeing is increased funding to health care at nearly three times the inflation rate, with the 6% annual escalator to the Canada Health Transfer payments, with no safeguards to ensure that our tax dollars are used appropriately by the provinces."

"This is basically throwing billions of dollars at problems without addressing how the system is managed by individual provinces," he continued. "With over $20-billion in tax cuts, I also am concerned at how sustainable this funding is, especially if Canada slips into a recession."

The decrease in GST at the expense of increases in income tax disproportionately benefits high income earners.

The budget of 2006 is a document directed at the short rather than longer range well being of Canadians. With a strong economy and surplus revenue this is the time to embark on an exciting new program to meet climate change and a rapidly changing world economy. We need public investment in education, training, and research to develop new technologies for meeting the challenges ahead. The time has come to stop simply handing back money to a corporate sector that continues to take profits rather than invest in new ideas.

That the Prime Minister would be pleased to take this budget to the electorate is apparent. An election precipitated by challenging the other party leaders to defeat it in the House of Commons evaporated when the Bloc declared support. Rather than being pleased to go forward with the business of running the country, the Prime Minister’s immediate reaction was to shift his challenge to the Liberal controlled Senate.

"Make no mistake about it, with the polls indicating increasing support, priority one is to get thrown out of office. Harper’s challenge appears to be driven by desperation for the power flowing from a parliamentary majority," concluded Jim Love, Progressive Canadian (PC) Party President.

Are Ontarians Pocketbooks in McGuinty's Sights Again?

With the Conservative budget released, one can only wonder if Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has his eyes on Ontarians' Pocketbooks once again. McGuinty, who promised during his election campaign that he would not raise taxes introduced the infamous "Ontario Health Tax" which costs the average Ontario family aproximately $690/yr, as well as cancelling income tax cuts which would have saved the average family about $240.38/yr.

Unfortunately, with many tax-cuts announced under the new Conservative government, McGuinty seems to be thinking of raising taxes again. When asked whether or not McGuinty intended to raise taxes again to offset the federal savings, the Premier was silent.

The Liberal government is continuing to tax more and deliver less. It is unclear whether Ontarian's will even benefit from the federal tax cuts or whether McGuinty will tax the savings back. We Ontarian's should be very concerned, I think McGuinty's dreaming of our dollars again.