Author:
Michael Campbell Vancouver Sun per jfh
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 10:43:23 02/22/03 Sat
Author Host/IP: d150-99-156.home.cgocable.net/24.150.99.156
Chretien's spending spree defies belief
Michael Campbell
Vancouver Sun
Saturday, February 22, 2003
ADVERTISEMENT
Question: If we've got the biggest spending increase in a generation when things are good, what do they have in store when things go bad?
Even fans of big government tell us to save our money in the good times and spend it in the bad, yet the federal government is on the biggest spending spree since 1981 -- while projecting that the economy will grow by 3.2 per cent this year and 3.5 per cent next year.
There is no economic rationale for this 11-per-cent increase in spending, and we should expect few positive long-term economic benefits.
Economic growth built on low interest rates and a devalued dollar, in combination with excessive taxes, handed the government a magnificent opportunity to assure our competitive position in these uncertain times.
But they ignored it in favour of adding dramatically to the structural costs of government.
Question: With $14 billion in new spending in this fiscal year alone, can the RCMP investigations be far behind?
Last September, the auditor-general told us that $16 billion was inadequately managed or wasted during the previous fiscal year. We are now told that an additional $14 billion will be spent this year under the same management structure that saw a billion-dollar cost overrun in the gun registry yet still gave 94 per cent of the bureaucrats in the justice department bonuses. It's the same structure that resulted in RCMP investigations into the Quebec sponsorship deals and numerous files in Human Resources Canada. It's the same management system that had former auditor-general Denis Desautels proclaim that untold billions have been wasted.
Question: Have you noticed that governments don't spend money anymore -- instead "they invest"?
There's "investment in our children," "investment in our prosperity," "investment in our security" and "investment in our heritage."
What a crock. And the amazing thing is how many in the public and media buy into it. I bet the spin doctors are still laughing (between phone calls to the CBC).
Question: Is there a message in the fact that the Liberals told us we couldn't afford tax relief when we were in deficit and now we can't afford it while we're in surplus?
History makes it very clear that the prime minister and his supporters don't like tax reductions. Only the spectre of the newly formed Canadian Alliance prompted modest relief in the pre-election mini budget in October, 2000. The year before, Mr. Chretien had declared that if our entrepreneurs, medical professionals and business executives didn't like high taxes they should leave the country.
No one should be surprised that even with the biggest over-payment of taxes in history he rejected further reductions in favour of 76 different spending initiatives. In the past 10 years, federal personal income tax collections have grown from 6.9 per cent of GDP to 7.4 per cent, while the total payroll tax burden is up 40 per cent.
Question: Can you teach an old dog new tricks?
With $114.5 million for a new official language initiative, $100 million to the creation of a Canadian Learning Institute to "help Canadians make better decisions about the education of our children," $172 million for the creation of an Aboriginal Languages and Cultures Centres and $150 million for Canadian television production, the answer in John Chretien's case is an unqualified "no."
Question: Do you think the government is spending in any areas that aren't priorities?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 