Through the wringer

Back to the con job Federal Budget 2009.

If you missed yesterday's post, please have a look: It's about how the Cons really don't care about the increasing number of unemployed in Canada. They would even deny them EI because the maximum $447 a week anybody can get -- and that's a relatively small percentage of those who need EI -- is tantamount to living high off the hog. Whoopeeee!

The good news is, not all Liberal MPs are falling into line behind their fearless probation officer. That despite the media rah-rah approval of Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff's nakedly political stand. Well, the media have been on the wrong side of the voters before. I remember the Charlottetown Accord.

So kudos to the two MPs who have spoken up so far.

A second Liberal MP said Friday he is prepared to vote against the Conservative budget if it is not amended to resolve what is seen as punitive measures against Newfoundland and Labrador.

Avalon MP Scott Andrews told CBC News he will "absolutely not" vote for the federal budget unless it is changed to prevent Newfoundland and Labrador from losing $1.6 billion in the next three years.

Andrews follows Judy Foote, who represents the southern Newfoundland riding of Random-Burin-St. George's, in deciding to risk a possible reprimand from their caucus, if Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff decides to endorse the budget as it is.

Andrews said, however, that Liberals from Newfoundland and Labrador are trying to persuade Ignatieff to support their cause.

Foote told constituents in an email that enough people have contacted her office about the budget that she has sufficient "hard evidence" about the feelings of constituents.

Newfoundland and Labrador's six Liberal MPs are being pressured to vote against the budget, should it not be amended to delete language that could see the provincial government lose about $1.6 billion in offset payments over the next three years.

Meanwhile, there's a movement afoot in the fem-o-sphere to alert Liberal MPs that they're screwing the majority of the population by approving this budget. This is just the thin edge:

If women are a constituency, then it makes sense that Canadian women contact the Liberal critic responsible for the status of women, Anita Neville, because the budget fails women in a huge way:

- continues the attack on pay equity in the civil service

- provides no support to the working poor or those living in poverty

- does nothing to provide desperately-needed childcare supports

- provides stimulus to male-dominated areas of the economy, further ghettoizing the “pink ghetto''

Head over to the Regina Mom for info on who and how to write.

Today's treeware column also took on the budget, but from an environmental perspective. It shows how everybody is getting burned.

My dishwasher is 16 years old.

I bought my fridge 18 years ago.

My solid steel washer and dryer just turned 31.

As for my stove, well, it was in the house when I moved in – and the Quebec manufacturer went out of business in the 1980s.

All work great, thanks to the superior construction of yesteryear, my local Greek repairman, and the fact that I have been on my own since 1991.

A couple of loads a week for the washer and drer, maybe one weekly load of dishes if I haven't had guests, and no kids to scrounge for snacks and open, close, open, close the fridge.

None of these appliances is energy-efficient by today's standards. The fridge probably consumes twice as much electricity as it needs to.

I am pretty sure the washer, which I usually run on cold, which means I need tougher and more polluting detergents, could be replaced by a newer one that requires less water.

I could spend some $3,000 to $4,000 on made-in-Canada appliances and, if not stimulate the economy, certainly tickle it, while greening my home. Everybody would win: Canadian workers, the environment and my delicates which will no longer get agitated in that old washer.

I'd do it in a heartbeat if only that joke of a Conservative budget had included appliances in its maximum $1,350 Home Renovation Tax Credit which will apply to projects like repaving the driveway or laying sod, neither of which contributes much to the environment.

So it looks as if I'll paint instead. I'll deduct the cost of the paint while paying some students to do the work – and you can bet that they won't pay taxes on the cash they get.

But hey, at least I still have my home.

As for the 60 per cent of unemployed Canadians who don't get EI, the majority of them women who have worked at minimum wage, well, I guess they can clean houses or help contractors finish basements for money under the table.

I sure hope they can find decent child care because, no matter how much retraining money the budget has allocated, it's useless to people who can't access it.

As the Progressive Economics Forum points out, the budget has "nothing to strengthen public pensions, no funding for a national anti-poverty plan, and no significant increased investments in social needs such as early learning and childcare, social services or health care.''

Way to go Stephen Harper, and your probation officer, Michael Ignatieff.

Not only did you abandon most Canadians with your tax-credits-for-the-rich-and-corporations budget – and we saw how well those worked out for Americans – but you also sold out Mother Earth as well as our children, who will inherit the deficit and pay for your political ambitions.

Sorry but I can't be had for 317 pieces of silver, or whatever my tax cut works out to be.

What's more, you did this at a time when we are looking south with leadership genius-envy. We can see U.S. President Barack Obama's economic plan, one that puts the environment and a sustainable economy at the forefront.

Especially infuriating in all of this is the Liberal response.

Watching Ignatieff bluster about holding the government to account with regular report cards yada-yada all-hat-no-cattle bluster, I couldn't help but yell at my old not-eligible-for-a-tax-credit-but-that's-okay TV, "Hello? You're the leader of the opposition! You're supposed to hold the government to account!''

Not a single concession, not one, did Ignatieff extract.

When you go to the government's budget website, the little icon up by the URL is that traditional finance ministerial shoe.

Would it be unladylike of me to suggest that I'd love to use it to kick these guys in their stimulus package?

A couple of readers, including one from the United Steelworkers of Canada, wrote to me to say that my sentiments are all very nice but there is no more appliance industry in Canada. I quote from one of the emails:

I read your column this afternoon and you hit the nail on the head but FYI there are no more White Goods Industries left in Canada they are all made in the US now. The last one to make those products was in Hamilton called CAMCO or GE but they closed a number of years ago. Most of the White Goods Industries were affected by the Free Trade agreement in the late 80s or earlier 90s and I'm not surprised that your machines are still working. We took great pride in Canadian made when Inglis was producing Washers and Dryers for the Canadian market. Too bad those great jobs disappeared.

Indeed.

But, if you look on GE Canada's website, and go through their product lines, you'll see a a little maple leaf symbol which denotes that model is ''Made in Canada.'' It's not all good though. Here are the dryers...which appear to be for coin laundries only. The dishwashers are made for Canadian homes. But none of the fridges are made in Canada. And it appears to be the same sad story with the ranges.

Okay, my bad -- although a couple of companies still seem to be at it, albeit with branch plants in the US and Mexico.

And now my mad. This was the picture 10 years ago. And now?

No wonder we're in such crummy shape!

Bring back manufacturing jobs.

One more thing: Ontario used to have tax rebates for energy-efficient appliance purchases. No longer. But still, if the feds allow us to deduct for made-in-China carpets, why can't we deduct for Energy Star appliances?

Why do the Conservatives hate the environment?

UPPITY WOMAN DATE: Beijing York weighs in. Here's some of her letter to Anita Neville, Liberal party critic for Status of Women.

The budget presented by Harper's Conservative government is a failed attempt at addressing the severe recession we are entering. Mr. Ignatieff seems to recognize this but still insists on supporting it with the proviso of periodic report cards. This is a meaningless gesture that does nothing to protect the most vulnerable, which includes many women across Canada. This budget provides little of no relief for low income, single income, unemployed and working women.

Those who are fortunate enough to still have jobs need meaningful childcare supports, something former PM Martin recognized but didn't act upon fast enough. Those without jobs or earning low incomes need refundable tax credit mechanisms to supplement household income and not increases in income exemptions and bracketing that fail to provide women with non-taxable incomes little relief. Many of the women who will lose their jobs will not qualify for EI benefits based on the current system. And lose their jobs they will since most women are employed in the retail and services sectors (including health care) and the taxation and economic stimulus measures will not create very many opportunities or protect jobs in these sectors.

But what really galls me is that the Liberals have failed to demand a reversal of the government's attack on pay equity.

If you're interested in doing something, and i hope you are, here are the deets:

Hon. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre):

Parliament Hill Office

House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 992-9475
Fax: (613) 992-9586
EMail: Neville.A@parl.gc.ca
Web Site: www.anitaneville.ca/
Preferred Language: English

Constituency Offices

Unit D - 729 Corydon Avenue,
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3M 0W4
Telephone: (204) 983-1355
Fax: (204) 984-3979

Send Anita an Email: Neville.A@parl.gc.ca

If you're feeling lazy, just send a link to this blog post!

Comments

[Chrystal Ocean]

Bang on! Have run out of fingers counting the ways this budget is dead wrong. What little stimulus it generates will be too little too late. And because it fails to cushion the already very poor against rising rents and food prices, we will see a continuing rise in the number of homeless.

[hysperia]

Thanks for the info on how to fight back against these miserable, self-involved King Midas guys! I'm on it.

[sooey]

Remember during the last election, 3 months ago, when the New Conservatives said the economy was fine? It's funny now to look back on those innocent times, eh?

[Barb Pearce]

I agreed with the Coaltion when Stephan Dion was leader. I felt that the match of Mr. Dion, Mr. Layton and Mr. Duceppe was a good match. I viewed Mr. Dion as more left than center and thought his “lean” and his honesty (which most of the other party leaders attested to) would be a uniting force. Harper had made a huge mistake, and there was a window of opportunity.

Had the Gov. Gen. refused Harper’s request to prorogue government, and instead allow the Coaltion to govern, it would have worked.........provided a good budget was provided in a short period of time. Time is very important here. A good budget on the table, combined with the growing grim news of the economy, would have highlighted the Conservative mishandling of the economy. The election of Obama, his inauguration, his plea for inclusiveness and peace, what he has done in this short period of time, would cast a shadow on Harper Conservatives. The apparent similarity of values between Obama and the Coaltion, would strengthen Canadians trust in the Coaltion. In particular it would have illuminated the similar social policies of the bloc as opposed to the separation mandate. Most importantly it would show Harper true place as polar opposite. Economists predict the economy will be gloomy for quite sometime. Had the Coaltion formed in December, I don’t think the ongoing gloominess of the economy would be attributed to the Coaltion. The gloominess would be attributed in part to the global economy but also to the Conservative’s failure to act in the first place and their apparent blindness/deceitfulness. I believe Canadian’s would have been willing to offer patience.

Sometimes for a brief moment....the moon and the stars all line up to light a way..... An opportunity offered at a certain time, succeeds because the appearance and order of new circumstances propel it that way. . Harper shut down the Coaltion’s opportunity.

The “cooling off period” has set off panic in Canadians. The Coaltion no longer has the benefit of the initial economic reality shock, and nor do they have the novelty of new circumstances. The Obama factor is still there, Harper’s ineptness is still there, but what is lost is the original timing that provided unavoidable mass air play that would have confirmed the necessity of a Coaltion. The positive ideological similarities between Obama and the Coaltion and the ideological distance between Harper and Obama would have been quick and easy for busy, time starved Canadians to grasp. Timing is everything. The initial economic shock has been absorbed and has become the new reality for people. Bad economic news every day, lay offs, plant closures etc. has created stress and a sense of desperation and panic. Wishing for an Obama type leader at this point is one thing, but the sentiment seems to be that calling an election, with no real Obama in sight, would be at the expense of delaying a plan of action (budget), delaying help and hope.

.
Just to back track to time starved Canadians. Most people do not have a lot of time to delve into the issues. Conservatives have been able to sell their product, precisely because it is shallow, looks logical from a narrow perspective and is quick and easy to grasp. It is an easy sell to time starved people and those who view politics as necessary, but an annoying fact of life. Like doing laundry. They presented their ideology in an appealing, easy to grasp fast food kind of way. It doesn’t have to be true, to sell it. It only has to seem logical. It has to easily and quickly connect dots that confirm an appealing ideal life is attainable for all at the same providing an easy target to blame for ones current inability to attain that ideal life. Flattery will get you anywhere and the Conservative’s flattering faith in your full individual responsibility is appealing. Free to succeed they market, but it is really free to fall. The connections are shallow and factually untrue (As far as I can see, the world is flat. Therefore it is possible to fall off) but throw in a made for tv rags to riches story once in a while and the myth is perpetuated.

The reality that their policies do favour wealth and do repress social mobility is irrelevant. . If you buy into the phony logic, the blame for lack of wealth is on yourself. Pointing out inequalities, or not overcoming them is for failures. Reality therefore, is for failures. More TV please!

Support for the Coaltion drops substantially as you pan out from major cities. That support is crucial as it tips the balance of power. The Coaltion loses support here, because these ridings are also the ridings that have been most affected by the tanking economy. From what I have read, who I have talked to, these Canadian’s want action and they want action now.

They believe the current situation demands stability and action. The Coaltion doesn’t seem stable to them. Ignatieff has been portrayed as Center right. Where he actually is on the spectrum, I myself, haven’t decided. Point is the average Joe/Jane places him there. Jack Layton, while attractive to city dwellers and the higher educated, is not viewed as an alternative to the average Joe/Jane. NDP policies are not easily marketable because they require actual examination. The bloc just plain scares people outside of Quebec. People only focus on the separation mandate.

When the last budget was voted down. Support for the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc declined. Support declined the most for the NDP.

The last poll I could find (Nanas - January 11) put country wide support for the Coaltion at 40%. Support for an election rather than a Coaltion was 49%. (Break down was W.Can. 65% for election / 29% for Coaltion; Ont. 49%./ 40%.; Atl. Can 46%/40%; Que. 62%/30%)

The only poll I could find on the compromise option (Dec 12 - I believe Ipsos Reid) showed 65% of Canadian’s in favour of a compromise.

I think that the budget is a disaster. It will do more harm than good. But people will buy into it. It scatters lots of seeds (that are actually growth disabled). . But at this point, people are panicked and desperate and just see the seeds as hope. Vote it down and you are perceived as a hope killer.

Had Mr. Ignatieff, voted against the budget, there would have been more outrage than praise. If 65% of the public believe a compromise is in the country’s best interest, voting down the budget would mean 65% of the public view the no vote as irresponsible and proof of acting, not in the country’s best interest, but in their own interest of a power grab. It’s fair to state that Ignatieff is thinking in terms of winning a Liberal government, but it is also fair to state that the majority of Canadian’s hold the view that the NDP are doing the same thing. The majority see the Coalition as nothing more than a power grab.

Given the extent of the public opposition to the Coalition, I think the Gov. Gen. would have called an election. The mood of the country because of the no vote, would allow for a Conservative Majority. If the Gov. Gen did allow a Coalition, the overwhelming resistance, the perception of a forced Coalition government rather than a democratically voted in government (which plays into the Conservative propaganda of the communist, freedom stealing lefties), the fast food ideology, would point to a Conservative majority next election.

It is a fair statement that the liberals are acting in their own self interest to form a government....But it is also a fair statement to say that the country’s best interest, relies on the liberals self interest, to prevent a Conservative Majority. Realistically, they are the only Jedi who have enough support to defeat the dark force.

I am petrified of Conservative free reign and it's ramifications to Canada. I think we agree a Conservative majority is the worst thing that could happen to this country. I believe if we are not very careful at this time, or if we ignore the reality of majority Canadian opinion, the possibility of a majority Conservative government is very real. So, in my mind, at this moment in time, passing the budget is the only way to halt the Conservatives from getting a majority. Halting a Conservative majority in my mind is the best thing for Canada and its future.

I’m not sure why Ignatieff didn’t demand amendments. I suspect he had no guarantee of support from the NDP or Bloc. He probably had a heads up on the NDP attack adds that came out hours after the budget. The Coalition as a means to have Harper agree to any amendments was gone. So what could he have realistically done?

That doesn’t mean I’ll be quiet about the lack of amendments. The louder, the better. Hopefully it will startle people into seeing the sick Harper reality.

Things change on a dime. Hopefully, very soon, circumstances present themselves again in such a way, that will invite a positive election result. Do I want the Liberals in? Well yes, that’s why I am a liberal. If for some unexpected reason the NDP got in? Well that would mean my party lost and I’d certainly be disappointed. However, I wouldn’t be shaking in my boots petrified of a patriarchal policy poop pressuring me to be passive.