The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN'S to VICTORIA.
ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM - Don't cut our taxes
CHARLOTTETOWN GUARDIAN - Addressing the issue of nitrates
HALIFAX NEWS - Apathetic democracy
HALIFAX CHRONICLE HERALD - Burma's pain, China's shame
MONTREAL GAZETTE - Neither reasonable nor accommodating
OTTAWA CITIZEN - $14.2-billion surprise
TORONTO STAR - Failing grade for Tories on schools
NATIONAL POST - Complicit in Burma's misery
TORONTO SUN - Big surpluses not happy surprises
HAMILTON SPECTATOR - Car buyers just want the truth
LONDON FREE PRESS -
REGINA LEADER-POST - Who to Believe?
People are understandably confused by the torrent of sometimes-conflicting health advice.
CALGARY HERALD - Surplus a sign taxes too high
GRANDE PRAIRIE DAILY HERALD TRIBUNE - Job fair ban of army wrong
EDMONTON JOURNAL - Brief public on secret oil talks
VANCOUVER SUN - Witnesses hiding in RCMP protection programs encounter double jeopardy
VANCOUVER PROVINCE - Harper now should reduce business and income taxes
VICTORIA TIMES-COLONIST - Protect your right to know
Ottawa looks at protecting jobs of reservists on active duty or training
Canadians won't pay Afghan cleric 'bribe'
Van Doos take steps to counter anti-Canada talk
Troops caught between factions amid rumour of deadly home raid
Rising number of soldiers treated for addictions
Bomb on Afghan army bus kills at least 27
UK's Afghan gains 'could be lost'
British troops in Afghanistan may have to take ground gained this summer again next year, the Nato chief has warned.
An elusive quest for justice in Afghanistan
War of 1812, revisited
Some American historians seem to think their side won the conflict
Terrorists crossing borders
Canada worse than Mexico for U.S. border security
Japan stops imports of Canadian poultry
The truth on wireless
U.N. envoy heads into Myanmar maelstrom
A massive wrench in Putin's works
NAFO bans bottom trawling on Grand Banks for five years
Europeans scorn Canada and U.S. over climate change
Landmark ruling ties politicians' hands, expert says
Mayor of Windsor told to expect more Mexican refugees
Day promises 'consequences' for illegal refugees
U.S. refugee worker arrested for helping Haitians enter Canada
Ontario lawyers' group opposes charge laid against human rights worker
POLITICS IN THE PROVINCES
PQ's solution: an independent Quebec
Tory vows to put ankle bracelets on violent crime parolees
Liberals, NDP sneer at Tory's plan to monitor violent bad guys in Ontario
Tory facing tighter-than-expected race for seat
Tory offers mea culpa on schools issue
Misunderstanding of his position on faith-based funding is due to incomplete explanation, the PC Leader says
Grits should avoid triggering fall election: MP
Stephane Dion backs aide under fire for alleged remarks about Quebec
Dion backs senior party official
Two unpalatable choices for Dion
Confidence in Dion reaches crisis level
Ignatieff urges Libs to come together, says 'united we win, divided we lose'
Calls for tax cuts intensify as government posts second large surplus in two days
The Harper feds have a $14.2-billion surplus and you, the taxpayer, are going to get a whopping 15 bucks of it
Give us our surplus back
Take the hint, Flaherty, we are overtaxed
Flush Ottawa spurns Toronto
With election looming, PM pledges tax cuts as government racks up $13.8 billion surplus
Harper pledges $725-million in tax cuts
Rebate would put about $35 in each Canadian's pocket as federal surplus swells to $13.8-billion amid rampant election speculation
Liberals ready for election, adviser says
NDP looks to build on Quebec win
Outremont MP named deputy leader as party tries to present itself as national choice
Little talk, even less action
Recent grads losing millions in post-secondary tax credits: group
Federal surplus already $7.8 billion in new fiscal year
Federal government accused of stifling access to information
Bush: Environmental progress must be measurable
Say it once, say it forever, privacy experts warn
OPINION AND INFORMATION
Why I'm voting against MMP
MMP helps voters feel like their ballots count
In defence of going slow
'As conservatives, we need to develop a mature view of our relationship with the Conservative party. We tried supporting ideologically pure parties. It felt great when we read the platforms, but it didn't feel so great when the votes were counted' Tom Flanagan, National Post
Europeans have the right not to join a union. Why not us?
Learning from Greenspan
'Immense hurdles' seen for faith-based schools
Spending power: truth and spin
The economic fallacy of 'eat local, buy local'
Following the principle of comparative advantage is what keeps us from the penury of subsistence farming
Limits to hypocrisy
The mathematics of a majority government
Historical evidence shows that 11.2% is the magic number
Stéphane Dion n'a pas l'intention de démettre le dg du PLC, Jamie Carroll
Grippe aviaire: le Japon cesse d'importer des volailles canadiennes
Le NPD et les libéraux rejettent un plan conservateur contre la criminalité
Ottawa veut protéger les emplois des réservistes
Layton et Mulcair à l'assaut du Québec
L'aile québécoise libérale ne peut plus acquitter ses factures
(May i use you response to my query without your last name to
pass the thoughts on to those in like circumstances. J)
I will look at your blog as well.
Yes, you may use my response.
«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»From: fitz matheson
Subject: The John Tory All Candidates Debate is This Sunday 1:30 pm
IT'S TIME TO RALLY THE TROOPS!
The All Candidates Debate for John Tory is this Sunday
afternoon - be there at 1:30 pm!!!!!
Sunday, September 30, 2007 2 - 4 pm
It is time for supporters to step up and cheer John
on, ask the probing questions, and show the strength
that only Conservatives can. Bring along Conservative
friends and family.
If you can attend please plan to be there at 1:30 pm
when the doors open and claim the seats.
Leaside High School is located in the Eglinton and
Bayview area, off of Hanna Rd, south of Eglinton, 1
block east of Bayview. See You There!
*It is interesting to discover an article ("*The Cost of Kyot*o") in the National Post, a publication I have little use for as we can still afford rather easy on the behind toilet tissue, that explains that to embrace Kyoto and its deadlines would mean to destroy our economy. Not only is Kyoto a nonsensical proposal, as I attempted to point out yesterday, but it is also a dangerous one. That is, unless sharing the lot of the homeless is your view of social progress.
The Hamilton Spectator, in its article "*Seeking Truth In Free Speech*", asks if allowing Iranian prez *Mahmoud Ahmedinejad* to speak at Columbia University was a good idea? Well, the introduction given him by Columbia's president observed that the visitor showed all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator. Not much sugar coating there. Then Ahmedinejad spoke, and showed to the world that he is indeed an idiot.
It is always nice to know the truth about someone, but what we do with that truth, if anything, is another matter.
Good to see *Jack Layton* once again giving credence to my concerns about the NDP, as illustrated in the Brockville Recorder article "*NDP Warns Government Of Election After 'Undemocratic' Surplus Announcement*." It would seem that fiscal responsibility once again is something the NDP would rather take a pass on. Personally, I believe that when you are $14,000 in debt (which represents the share each of us has in our national debt), you really should pay the $420 (our per capita share of the surplus) we find jingling in our collective pockets toward paying that debt down. At least, that is what my daddy taught me.
Now, should Layton and his party can come up with ways of spending every dime they stumble upon on something more than programs that solve little while perpetuating the social ills they profess to combat, then I'm willing to listen. Unfortunately, much of our debt has been caused by those who have proven to be fiscally and, I believe, socially irresponsible. To put it in every day terms, if a man insists on going into the deep end of the pool, would it not be better to take that man and teach him to swim rather than toss him a deflating flotation device that will eventually leave him in as bad a shape as you found him?
Unfortunately, the NDP and others who should know better insist on such temporary "solutions" at great cost and wind up solving nothing.
Meanwhile, *Keith Coghlan* wrote in to offer his support for the *Mixed Member Proportional electoral system* in Ontario's present referendum.
Rather than an imperfect system that allows a single individual responsible to the electors to be elected, as we have now, Keith believes we should add to the mix a list of party selected individuals who are responsible only to the party in order to keep their position in the pecking order. How is this more democratic? The present system presents candidates who, in the end, must stand on his own against the electorate, even one that often consists of bleating sheep who vote based on God knows what, but at least has that power to use or abuse in electing their representatives. _Their_ representatives, not the representative of a party.
The fact that the Afghan parliament is made up of a dog's breakfast of parties, with its members taken from party lists, is not an argument for adopting such a system here. We have a long tradition of democracy, while in Afghanistan any system that involves ballots instead of bullets is a step forward for them, but such a system would be horribly backward for us.
Now, should MMP allow the people, the voters, to select the order in which those off the party list would be deemed elected, then at least the system would leave the actual decision in the hands of the people, nor entirely with any political party. To me, that would be a test that any system would have to pass to be deemed democratic and worthy of embrace. The current MMP proposal in Ontario fails the test and, in my opinion, should be rejected.
As always, Joe, thanks for the stump.
From: "Robert Ede"
Subject: Canada -Annual Financial Report 2006-07
This just released Ann Fin Report ( not Public Accts
-reason "big debt reduction" announcement was made
And always super-interesting
Fiscal Ref Tables - goes back to 1961-2 in each category
Check the "new" total for Interest Bearing Debt on extreme right column of Table #14
-irrespective of what the Treasurer (min) & PM(min) Harper said
From: Jacob Rempel
To: "Editor DAILY DIGEST"
Subject: reading the constitution :
Subject: For The Digest
Regarding Jacob Rempel's comments about Section 36 of the 1982 Constitution as
the authority for federal government intrusion into areas of provincial jurisdiction, my
reading of that section, and particularly its opening clause in subsection (1), is that it
does not confer on the federal government the authority to pursue such intrusion, as
Rempel claims. Indeed, Section 36's opening clause specifically guarantees the
rights of provincial governments accorded them under sections 92 and 92(A)
of the Constitution.
I respond to Real Gagne's reference to Sections 92 and 92A
I'm glad Real Gagne raised this argument. It is often presented,
and I appreciate how the 1867 BNA outlines the jurisdictions.
However, after reading the first four lines of Subsection (1) of
the 1982 Act, we need to continue reading the next three lines
and (1)a ,b, and c ; then read Subsection(2) which commits the
Government of Canada, the government of each province, the
Parliament of Canada and the parliament of each province to
promote equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians,
further economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities;
and provide essential services of reasonable quality to all Canadians.
Certainly not the prime minister and no provincial premier in 1980
declared that what his province was at that time providing was not
reasonable. I conclude therefore that anything of lesser quality
delivered after that would breach the constitutional commitment.
And I cannot conceive how a federal government and parliament could
possibly fulfil these constitutional commitments without entering into the
jurisdictional areas referred to in BNA Sections 92 and 92A, which they
had already been doing since the 30s with the eager cooperation of the
provincial governments other than the Parti Quebecois in Quebec, and
even they accepted the monies and perforce the federal conditions.
Nor can I conceive of a federal government trying to fulfil all these
commitments without financially and administratively entering into
the jurisdictions identified as provincial in the 1867 BNA.
As well, both Liberal and Progressive Conservative MPs from
Quebec supported the Canada Health Act and federal Regional
Diversification programs and road building and housing and many
joint programs. Only separatists and the Stephen Harper/Preston
Manning cabal call these programs intrusions on provincial
jurisdictions. Others consider these to be obvious federal
and provincial mutual and joint responsibilities financially
and administratively to ensure good government.
(They quarrel mainly about who deserves political credit.)
In the 1982 Constitution Act, all provinces and all parties except
the separatists joined in a great consensus to constitutionalize all
these mutually accepted public services as necessary for good
government in Canada. It was what all parties had already been
doing for several decades to provide modern public services
never dreamed of in the 1867 BNA.
Do read the article in the Dalhousie Law
Journal to which I referred in my posting.
Check it out in Section 36 and in the article "Providing
Essential Services: Canada's Constitutional Commitment
Under Section 36" in the DALHOUSIE LAW JOURNAL,
Vol.19, No.2, Fall 1996
The article analyses how Section 36 provides constitutional
authority for national programs of public services administered
provincially, jointly, or federally using constitutionally mandated
federal spending power.
CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982
PART III: EQUALIZATION AND REGIONAL DISPARITIES
Commitment to promote equal opportunities
(1)Without altering the legislative authority
of Parliament or the provincial legislatures,
or the exercise rights of any of them with
respect to of their legislative authority,
Parliament and the legislatures, together
with the government of Canada and the
provincial governments are committed to
(a) promoting equal opportunities
for the well-being of Canadians;
(b) furthering economic development
to reduce disparity in opportunities; and
(c) providing essential public services
of reasonable quality to all Canadians.
Commitment respecting public services
(2)Parliament and the government of Canada
are committed to the principle of making
equalization payments to ensure that provincial
governments have sufficient revenues to provide
reasonably comparable levels of public services at
reasonably comparable levels of taxation.
A SURPLUS OF TAX-CUT FEVER
by Jordan Himelfarb
September 28, 2007
For most people, the accumulation of $4.6 billion in unforeseen funds would be unambiguously good news. Not so for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who came under attack from all sides yesterday after it was announced that his Conservative government amassed a surplus of nearly $14 billion in the last fiscal yeara full 50 percent higher than the amount predicted. At a press conference yesterday, Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty described the surplus as an indication of a thriving Canadian economy and, in particular, the minority government's prudent fiscal management. Unfortunately for Harper, neither The National nor the Star has forgotten the PM's outspoken criticism of the previous Liberal government's large surpluses, about which he repeatedly stated that grossly undershot budget estimates constitute a sign of poor fiscal management at best, and dishonest and misleading accounting at worst. Against claims of his hypocrisy, Harper offered only this unsubstantiated distinction: "We were very critical of the budget estimations that we thought were flagrantly untrue and deliberately underestimated. That has not been the case with this government."
Though The National reported last night that Harper announced the surplus in a "jubilant" mood, one might wonder why, since the air of hypocrisy was the least of the political fallout from the announcement. In particular, critics of all stripes are dissatisfied with the way in which the surplus has already been spentin full, toward the national debt. According to Flaherty, by reducing the size of the debt by the size of the surplus the government will save $750 million in interest, allowing for ever-popular tax reductions. However, those cuts will only amount to savings of about $30 a year for the average Canadian, and throughout today's Big Seven sources, pundits and editorialists call for the surplus to be converted into massive personal tax cuts. Lorne Gunter's unabashedly libertarian piece in the Post is titled "Give us our surplus back," while this editorial in the Globe (subscription required) argues for the urgency of both significant corporate and personal tax cuts if Canada wishes to maintain its strong economy. Almost every source on the story quotes John Williamson, of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, describing the proposed tax relief as so measly as to be "gouging Canadians for no reason." As pro-tax cut fever besets the Big Seven, one wonders if Harper's jubilance might not have something to do with the possibility, allowed for by the announcement of the surplus, that he could offer tax relief in the lead up to an election ( rumoured to be imminent throughout today's sources). If so, MediaScout would caution the Big Seven that they might get more than they're bargaining for: The prime minister has shown strong anti-government leanings in his past politicsleanings that, without the restraints of a minority government, may translate into not only tax relief, but a rearranging of the role of the federal government in Canada, of which massive tax cuts are just a part.