More on Spending Cuts
After first hearing about the spending cuts my reaction was largely based on the opinions given from the different parties, who as usual will always take the position which helps them the most politically. The Tories will talk about being responsible fiscal managers, while the Liberals will call it cruel and heartless, but at the end of the day the changes were not the big to get too riled up either way. I am still unhappy about cancelling the Court Challenge Program, but I don't believe it will be the end of the world. Most of these programs work out to less than 20 cents per Canadian so hardly something to be overly upset about taxpayer's money being spent there in the first place. Likewise those complaining about the cuts have every right to be mad, but I ask them to now step up to the plate. Always wanting the government to do everything for you is not the kind of society I want. Individual initiative and making a positive difference to help those who are less fortunate should be encouraged. I also don't believe every problem automatically requires another government program to solve it. Unlike some who complain about the Court Challenge Program being cancelled, I will say right here that if some private organization sets up a similiar organization, I would happily donate to it. In fact I have already donated to Egale on the Same-sex Marriage issue, so for those Conservatives complaining about me wanting to suck up taxpayers' money to promote left wing causes, I will point out, unlike some on the left, I put my money where my mouth is. Perhaps if we all did this, maybe we could do away with many government programs. And perhaps if we treated our minorities better there would be no need for the Status of Women and Court Challenges Program. Ultimately I hope a day comes when these programs are truly redundant, but that day still hasn't yet come.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 7:56 PM
7 Comments:
I don't think that the government should abdicate imporant responsibilities to non-existant private special intrest groups. By-and-large the private sector rarely steps up to the plate when funding is needed - just look at the the private sector with regards to the Olympics. Do you think all those that proudly displayed their "I'm backing the bid" stickers are now opening their cheque books to VANOC? [supress laughter] Of course not. And if they won't do it for the Olympics - an event which may make them lots of money - what makes you think they're going to do it for a cause which will make them no money and has basically zero sponsorship sexyness.
I am not disagreeing with you here totally Brian. I think the issue for a lot of Conservatives is political advocacy groups that take a particular position on an issue. I personally don't believe an advocacy group should get funding regardless of what position they take. As for the Court Challenges Program, I think it shouldn't have been scrapped, but I am willing to step up to the plate if some private organization will fill in the void.
I agree the government cannot fund everything, but we need some programs to help the truly helpless and oppressed. I am not too worried about the Status of Women office, but I donot like the Court Challenge program being cut, or the tourism promotion budget.
Crescent Canuck - I generally agree with you. I think the Court Challenges Program should be reformed, but not cut. Anyways once the Liberals form government again they might want to have it take on a broader mandate so the right will have a tougher time claiming it only funds left wing special interest groups.
Hmmm... I just wrote this on your other blog but then noticed that you restrict commenting there to the blogging community.
Since I already wrote it I'll just put it here and maybe you'll open up the other one too?
re: privatization:
As for BC Hydro, I know privatization would be political suicide, but I would support it under one condition only: every dollar raised go towards paying down the debt
I have issues wiith much of what you wrote here in this policy piece, but don't you think that this is fairly short-sighted? I think that BC Hydro is an excellent long-term investment. I like BC Hydro serving citizens of BC, not serving a company (likely to eventually be foreign owned) by extracting the maximum revenue possible from the resources our predecessors developed via the citizens of BC. Our electricity is currently very cheap and even so BC Hydro raises large amounts of money for the government (thereby allowing us to have lower taxes). It might take us a little longer to pay off the debt, but in the long run BC will be stronger with BC Hydro as a crown corp.
Also BC Ferries is no longer a crown corp - that brilliant decision by Campbell et al. cost the ferry corp their GST-free status, forced them to pay property tax, etc., etc. And they still require governmnent subsidies, presumably larger ones because now, via the GST, we are sending money off to Ottawa (who gives them no money despite being part of highway 1). Such a silly decision.
In genneral I don't see any great advantages to going from a crown corp. to a priavtely owned monopoly - you don't gain any competitive advantages, and in that environment a private company is just as likely to get lazy as a crown corp. At least when it's crown if things are getting ridiculous it's eaiser to do something about it.
Brian - I changed the comment settings, so you can now comment.
have issues wiith much of what you wrote here in this policy piece, but don't you think that this is fairly short-sighted? I think that BC Hydro is an excellent long-term investment.
I would argue that it could just as easily be an investment under a private company, since that company will have to pay taxes whereas BC Hydro has lost money more years than it has gained. In 2001, I believe it was, it made a windfall of the California electricity crisis.
I like BC Hydro serving citizens of BC, not serving a company (likely to eventually be foreign owned) by extracting the maximum revenue possible from the resources our predecessors developed via the citizens of BC.
It wouldn't necessarily have to be foreign owned. In fact over 70% of business in Canada is by domestic companies and even the 30% foreign ownership is balanced out by the fact many Canadian companies have been successful abroad. I should also note that West Kootenay Power which services Kelowna, Castlegar and othe areas in the Southern Interior is privately owned and owned by Fortis BC who are out of Atlantic Canada. In fact the prices they charge are the same as BC Hydro as both are regulated by the BC Utilities commission who sets prices independently based on a fair market return, known as the rate of return.
Our electricity is currently very cheap and even so BC Hydro raises large amounts of money for the government (thereby allowing us to have lower taxes). It might take us a little longer to pay off the debt, but in the long run BC will be stronger with BC Hydro as a crown corp.
BC Hydro only raises money for the government if it makes a profit. In fact there is much reason to believe a private company could bring as much in through taxation. In Nova Scotia, the Progressive Conservatives privatized electricity in 1992 (I should note this was Red Tory government, not an ideological one) and since then prices have been stable and service has been good. One of the problems with crown corporations in general is too often they are used for political purposes such as the ICBC and BC Hydro rebates in 2001, freezing electricity prices in Ontario in 2003 (By a conservative government I might add) simply to improve their chances at re-election. Decisions on pricing ought to be made based on market conditions, not political considerations. Now to tell you the truth, it is not something I feel strongly about. I am quite content to have it remain as a crown corporation. My point is a privatized BC Hydro could work.
Also BC Ferries is no longer a crown corp - that brilliant decision by Campbell et al. cost the ferry corp their GST-free status, forced them to pay property tax,
I see this as a good thing. All the money from the GST goes to Ottawa, which is where we get money for important programs such as health care and education funding. Property taxes are used by municipal governments and I suspect in some of the smaller communities this has been a great boost to their revenues. I should note BC Ferries was privatized along the same model as airports which was done by both the Mulroney Tories and Chretien Liberals. In fact Marine Atlantic had 5 of its 6 routes completely privatized (or discontinued) under the Chretien Liberals, thus going even further than Campbell.
who gives them no money despite being part of highway 1
To my recollection, I believe the federal Liberals under Paul Martin did provide funding. This might have been terminated by Stephen Harper though, I am not sure the exact details, but I do know the pacific gateway provided funding to a lot of BC's infrastructure.
Now I am not against BC Ferries not being privatized. I think the real solution here is put each route out for tender and compare each one with what the government doing it in house would cost. This would create competition, while ensuring whoever can run the routes the best government or private sector does it.
In genneral I don't see any great advantages to going from a crown corp. to a priavtely owned monopoly - you don't gain any competitive advantages, and in that environment a private company is just as likely to get lazy as a crown corp. At least when it's crown if things are getting ridiculous it's eaiser to do something about it.
This can be a problem so I believe by requiring them to compete for the contract is the most efficient method, and this would include the government competing as well for the contract.
(comments left on the other blog)
Post a Comment
<< Home