The tax cuts announced in Ralph Goodale’s economic update (really an election budget document) is simply a disguised program of starving the government of revenue so that it cannot expand government social programs. This continues Paul Martin’s historic mandate (given to him by the BCNI and Bay Street) to reduce the role of government to as low a level as possible. In his 1995 budget he boasted - not of reducing the deficit but of slashing government spending back to 1951 levels (as a percentage of GDP).

We need to attack these tax cuts for what they are - gutting future government revenue so the government can claim it has no money for social programs.

There are any number of themes that can be used to do this. Pick one or two from the bullet points below and write a letter to your local newspaper(s)...

The overarching theme: tax cuts mean choking off social programs.

• On the same day as Goodale releases his budget the highly respected polling firm Ekos released a poll showing voters don’t want tax cuts. Instead, 50 per cent of voters rank social programs as the most important issue of the next election, 20 per cent say jobs and growth,17 per cent say ethics. Just 12 per cent indicated tax and debt relief were important. (see the Toronto Star)
  
  
• In his 1995 budget then finance minister Paul Martin boasted not of reducing the deficit but of slashing government spending back to 1951 levels (as a percentage of GDP). The current election budget just continues that course.
  
  
• In the year 2000 finance minister Paul Martin introduced $100 billion in tax cuts over five years when he was faced with similar huge surpluses. Why? Because his goal is to have minimal government and with all that surplus money Canadians would rightfully demand more social spending. This more of the same.
  
  
• In Paul Martin’s world tax cuts are social program cuts. He will throw away $30 billion in revenue over 5 years - $30 billion that could have gone to things Canadian say they want - more money for child care, more programs to reduce child poverty, more money for improving the state of Canada’s cities, more money for foreign aid which Mr Martin has promised to increase, money desperately needed for improving the terrible conditions on First Nations reserves across the country.
  
  
• The tax cuts and spending programs are a huge subsidy to corporate Canada. Billions in new university research designed to help corporations, billions towards the “innovation economy,” hundred of millions to promote trade. The reason for all this help fpr corporations is that corporations won’t invest in these things themselves - so ordinary Canadians have to foot the bill. It’s about time Canadian corporations caught up with those of other countries and invested in research and new equipment.
  
  
• The wealthy get a huge break they don’t deserve. The threshold for when the highest tax rate (already much lower than the comparable rate in the US) kicks in will be increased from $116,000 to $200,000. This is just a gift to the wealthy - there is no evidence anywhere that demonstrates these kind of tax cuts result in economic growth or new investment.
  
  
• Is this Paul Harper or Stephen Martin? These two men and their parties are looking more and more identical - parties of the rich and corporations who will do anything to avoid spending on social programs. This budget exposes the Liberals as no different than the Conservatives, despite their efforts to come across as caring.

« back to index