Voice of the Association

Today in Saint John, regional minister Hon. Greg Thompson launched the Apprenticeship Incentive Grant in New Brunswick. This program is designed to help apprentices achieve their goals by offsetting the costs of tuition, travel and tools.

“In a time of ever-tightening labour markets, skilled workers are getting harder to find,” said Minister Thompson. “Canada’s New Government wants to encourage more Canadians to consider the trades and this program will help those who have chosen this career path to go on and develop their skills. I am pleased to be able to present a cheque for $1000 to an eligible apprentice.”

In Budget 2006 Canada’s New Government invested more than $500 million over two years to support apprentices and skilled tradespersons, including the new Apprenticeship Incentive Grant program investment of $125 million. It is estimated that, annually, up to 100,000 apprentices in Canada will be entitled to receive this cash grant. This includes 100’s of New Brunswick tradespeople who are embarking on a new career.

Interested parties can find the full details on the Apprenticeship Incentive Grant Program on the Service Canada website (link) or by calling 1-866-742-3644 (TTY 1-866-909-9757), or visiting your local Service Canada Centre.

Some observers poked fun at the PM for standing up for Arctic sovereignty. PM Harper has been consistent in his position that Canada needs to strengthen her claims to our ‘true north strong and free.’ Even before the last federal election, Mr. Harper made it clear what the position of the Conservative party is concerning Arctic sovereignty.

At first their were only minor brushes with other countries like Denmark (Hans Island) and the US (Northwest Passage) – but now Russia has upped the ante by claiming a large part of the north pole, with its accompanying oil, gas and diamonds.

The Arctic regions, including the North Pole, represent one of the last truly remote regions on earth. Back in April of this year, our Canadian Forces made an Arctic Sovereignty Patrol covering 785 kms through blizzards and white-outs to establish our claims to traditional territory.

There are many factors that lend importance to our north. Not the least of these is the strategic importance of being on the doorstep of the northern hemisphere in any direction. Second is control of the Northwest Passage and the commercial shipping potential it represents in a warming north. Third is the untold wealth of natural resources that lies beneath its surface.

The Prime Minister was right. Our Armed Forces need to be able to operate effectively in this harsh and forbidding environment. We need to protect our national interests there and assure that aggressive countries like Russia do not continue and encroach on our territory. Stephen Harper had the foresight to show leadership, even before Canadians elected him to lead this country. It’s time that we started to recognize that we have the leader for our time.

In a letter in today’s Times & Transcript, Minister Day responded to criticism about lack of services at NB airports. In his efforts to set the record straight, Min. Day cited a spring visit by Moncton’s Mayor Lorne Mitton, Daniel Allain of Downtown Moncton, Brian Baxter of Enterprise Greater Moncton and other area leaders for helping to get action on this file.

“I have met with representatives from the Moncton area (including mayors and economic development officials) to discuss customs services at the Moncton airport,” Min. Day said. “Therefore, I am well aware of the issue. That is why I have tasked my officials at the Canadian Border Services Agency to conduct a Core Services Review to establish a service delivery approach that is fair, transparent and flexible.”

“CBSA services are always carefully planned to balance issues of security, customer service and budgetary constraints. Options for program changes are currently being developed, and I intend to take action in the fall,” the Minister said.

As we reported earlier here, Brian Murphy has done nothing but whine to the press. It is not the efforts of our Liberal MP that have advanced the file, but those of competent and concerned public servants like those listed above. Whenever the next election comes, we need to work hard to make sure that Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe is represented by someone who will work full time on issues important to the riding.

One of the main purposes of this blog is provide researched, sourced material for Conservatives to speak up in defense of the party and its policies.

The material linked below is too long to post, but if you right click on the link and choose “Save Target As” you can download the document to your hard drive. It contains quotes from a 132 page document, reduced to 5 pages.

The link is to a Panel Report for the Council of the Federation (provincial Premiers) concerning Equalization. This independent report was commissioned by the Premiers and was released just as the Conservative government took office. It dovetails nicely with the later Expert O’Brien Panel on Equalization (commissioned by the Martin government).

Both reports recommended exactly the course of action followed in Min. Flaherty’s 2007 Budget. The new formula was not something dreamed up by Conservatives to “rob Atlantic Canada” or any other region. The 2007 resolution to the fiscal imbalance was based on years of study by independent panels and the requests of the provincial Premiers.

The report for the Council of the Federation can be accessed here (link in Word doc format). Both reports recommended a 10 province standard and 100% inclusion of all resource revenue. This is even more demanding than what the Conservatives have proposed. It’s beyond time that the public insisted on fairness and accuracy in reporting, instead of just quoting people with an axe to grind.

(See also a profile of NASCAR fans below)

In an editorial today entitled “NASCAR snobs,” the National Post exposes the elitist tendencies of journalists like Susan Delacourt and Greg Weston. “Rest assured, scribes, we understand that you would never dream of having anything but Italian opera on your iPods, single malts in your highball glass and PBS on the television,” the op-ed writer declares.

Lumped into the mix is Stéphane Dion with one-liners like, “NASCAR sponsorship ‘is like everything else the Conservatives do, a car crash waiting to happen.’” which the writer points out was “wisecracking about injury and death so callously.” Odd how Liberals can make crass, insensitive comments and it goes largely unnoticed. M. Dion also criticized the Conservative sponsorship in a recent speech saying, “This car gets just 2 miles to the gallon; it burns almost 600 litres of high-octane fuel every race.”

Oddly enough, M. Dion himself has been the recipient of such criticism in the past. “Mr. Dion is quick to lecture Canadians on the need to cut greenhouse gases yet as environment minister he opted to drive to Montreal, keep his chauffeur in the city and bilk taxpayers $14,225,” stated CTF federal director John Williamson. “Canadians have had enough of politicians instructing us to change our driving habits when the same elites, like Mr. Dion, refuse to heed their own advice. Mr. Dion should practice what he preaches...”

M. Dion’s trips in a gas guzzling limo were over twice the distance of the NASCAR race, and of course we would hope he wasn’t traveling at 160 km/hr like the Conservative race car. Besides the fact that high-octane fuel often reduces emissions, M. Dion is overlooking one very salient issue: “They’re going to do it anyway!”

Unless Dion, Layton and company plan on banning NASCAR races in this country, the same drivers, will be piloting the same cars, over the same courses – whether the Conservatives sponsor them or not. Why does “They’re going to do it anyway” apply to Liberal moral issues (like their move to de-criminalize pot and prostitution, or their opposition to raising the age of consent), but not to NASCAR. This is just more of the elitist, left wing snobbery against everyday Canadians out for a little fun.

The Thunder Bay Chronicle Journal is reporting today that independent MP Joe Comuzzi will join the Conservative caucus on Tuesday. Mr. Comuzzi is a universally respected MP who has voted with the Conservative government on Bill C-38 under the Martin regime, and more recently was kicked out of the Liberal caucus for voting for the 2007 Budget.

This goes to show that there is still a great deal of confidence in the Harper government, specifically on Budget issues. With the addition of Wajid Khan and now Mr. Comuzzi, it seems we are seeing a realignment of MP’s along more principled lines than mere party banners.

On June 19, 2007 Saint John MP, Paul Zed, wrote and open letter to PM Harper in the Globe and Mail. His title read: “Dear PM: You’re cheating New Brunswick out of a billion dollars.” That’s making a pretty blunt accusation, but Mr. Zed is as irresponsible with his research as he is with his allegations.

In his opening salvo, MP Zed says the APEC report “has confirmed…Mr. Harper’s changes to the federal equalization program are going to leave New Brunswick behind.” He goes on to conclude that “Mr. Harper… has created two classes of equalization.” The report confirmed no such thing, and the Prime Minister has done no such thing. He goes on to lament that New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan were not offered the choice of the “status quo” and “[a]s a result, New Brunswick is being robbed of $1.1-billion in equalization.”

This is such a gross distortion of fact that Mr. Zed should have his license to practice law revoked. As he well knows, his former Liberal leader succumbed to political pressure and signed only two side-deals exempting provinces from standard equalization – Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. There was no choice that robbed NB of $1.1 billion dollars because we have never been part of an Atlantic Accord.

He goes on to say that “Mr. Harper promised that his budget would be a permanent fix that would end provincial conflicts on equalization.” What the Conservative government did claim however was a resolution to the fiscal imbalance and an end to federal-provincial bickering. What Mr. Zed seems to have missed is that the dissenting Atlantic premiers have merely carried their fight over from the stalled provincial meetings that failed to agree on a new equalization deal! As Dan Leger rightly stated in the Chronicle Herald, “We might not be having these problems if the provinces themselves didn’t squander their chance to create a new equalization formula. Last summer, the premiers battled themselves to an impasse trying to work out a new system, leaving Stephen Harper the right and responsibility to devise a new one.”

The Saint John MP claims that “former premier Bernard Lord…got hustled by Mr. Harper for partisan purposes. This has led to no new money to address poverty, child care and early learning, no new money for housing and literacy.” To the contrary, New Brunswick got $5.7 million for new childcare spaces and $217 million in social transfers. The Harper government’s resolution to the fiscal imbalance gave almost $2.3 billion in federal money to the Liberal government of our province. That doesn’t sound to “partisan.”

In conclusion Mr. Zed states that “Mr. Harper has delivered a serious blow…by cheating New Brunswickers out of a billion dollars. We will not stand idly by while the Prime Minister and his minority Conservative government starve our region…If this new equalization formula is the best this Prime Minister has to offer, our answer is: No thanks.” The question arises, who is Mr. Zed speaking for?

Contrary to all the MP’s partisan bluster, our Liberal premier has accepted the equalization with thanks. That is because he wrote to the Prime Minister on October 11, 2006 demanding a “10 province standard” and a principles based formula – that’s what was delivered. Furthermore, our Liberal NB government categorically dismissed the APEC report as depending on “statistics, speculation and growth predictions that are subject to change.” Perhaps he should have consulted with his provincial counterparts who accepted the new equalization and rejected the APEC report before presuming to speak for our province!

Even Danny Williams’ Finance Minister Tom Marshall refused to make public his department’s equalization projections because of the unknown factors involved. He said, “There is a plethora of numbers and there is a plethora of assumptions that one would have to make to do these calculations … we are going to get caught in a debate involving the minutiae of our assumptions” (St. John Telegram - May 19, 2007)

So Paul Zed is willing to go against his own province, and step out on a limb even farther than the warring Danny Williams’ government – why? One can only assume to embarrass the Conservative government and continue to spread misinformation and confusion in Atlantic Canada. The APEC report hasn’t “confirmed” anything. There are not “two classes of equalization,” but one new formula supported by provinces representing 95% of Canada’s population. The only exceptions to this 10 province standard are Newfoundland and Nova Scotia who were ‘grandfathered’ in with respect to existing agreements. It is shocking that Mr. Zed would allow such fabrications to be printed in his name.

Susan Riley of the Ottawa Citizen opined today that the Conservative move to emblazon the hood of a Canadian NASCAR race car was a macho-chauvinistic bungle. “Just a brief word to the canny Tory marketers who came up with the novel NASCAR endorsement: We get it. Save your money. We know you don’t care if women vote for you….” Ah, how tedious the ‘you don’t care about group XYZ’ has become!

Besides being patently wrong on the Conservatives’ disposition towards women, Ms. Riley demonstrated an appalling ignorance of the NASCAR demographic. On the former, the Conservative government boosted the Status of Women program budget to its highest level ever, and provided $250 million dollars to the provinces for daycare spaces, on top of the previous $250 million dollars for corporate/non-profit spaces.

Perhaps she has fallen prey to the illusion that the stereotypical NASCAR fan is a redneck with a beer gut and a pickup truck that requires a stepladder to get into. Had she actually done a cursory bit of research she would have found the following:

NASCAR fans are 41% female. Throughout the age groups from 20-60 years old, there is an almost even distribution. 88% have a high school education, and 60% of fans have finished college. 60+% of NASCAR enthusiasts are married, and 72% own their own homes. 72% of fans are employed full time, and of that group 49% are professional or technical employees, while 23% work in skilled trades.

In short, “‘The people who follow NASCAR are our kind of people. They’re hard-working families, they’re taxpayers who play by the rules. And those are the people that we’re targeting,’” Immigration Minister Diane Finley told the Globe and Mail. According to an article in the rival National Post, “Marketers consider stock racing somewhat of an untapped market north of the border. NASCAR says it has a fan base of 5.8 million people in Canada, representing roughly one in four Canadian adults.”

I guess if you wanted to tell family type, hard-working, taxpaying Canadians “We’re for you! Go have some fun!” – this would be a stellar way to do so. Poor Susan shouldn’t get so ‘riled’ up and slam her NASCAR-loving sisters before she has done her homework. In an odd bit of reverse bigotry, Ms. Riley states, “If you are looking for a really large vote pool in Canada, you should be sending ministers to the annual gay pride march in Toronto on Sunday.” “‘The problem, of course, is that some attendees will be gay…’ she writes, “You might not be welcome.’” Her antipathy towards Conservatives is made crystal clear in the conclusion of her article: “It may someday occur to Tory strategists that a little civility goes a long way. Until then, it’s them against us. A lot of us.” The truth goes marching on.

A Canadian Press report today began with the following: “Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is standing by his assertion that he’s put an end to federal-provincial bickering, even as three provinces continue to scream betrayal over equalization reforms in his last budget.” The article went on to say, “…even after a hostile grilling by Liberal senators from Atlantic Canada, Flaherty said he has no regrets about declaring in his March budget speech that ‘the long, tiring, unproductive era of bickering between the provincial and federal governments is over.’ He said setting up a ‘principled, predictable, long-term formula’ for equalization was a major accomplishment of his government. And while a few provinces have ‘some discomfort’ with the reforms, he said most are supportive. ‘We’ll look back on this two or three years from now, we’ll say this was the year that this was resolved - not without some grumpiness, you know, some difficulty, but we will have resolved it and we can move on to the more important issues, quite frankly, in this country,’ Flaherty said.”

The question is, how can the Finance Minister make such comments in the face of the political squealing from the east? The answer is simple, the problem with equalization is between the provinces, not between the federal government and the provinces. As Dan Leger said in his excellent article, “We might not be having these problems if the provinces themselves didn’t squander their chance to create a new equalization formula. Last summer, the premiers battled themselves to an impasse trying to work out a new system, leaving Stephen Harper the right and responsibility to devise a new one.”

Joan Bryden wrote about Minister Flaherty’s testimony today before the Senate committee: “During his testimony, Flaherty attributed such complaints to the fact Ottawa was forced to impose equalization changes because the provinces were ‘fundamentally and deeply divided’ about how to proceed. Unlike premiers, who have an obligation to ensure their provinces get the ‘biggest piece of the pie possible,’ Flaherty said his responsibility was to ‘ensure that the pie is distributed fairly.’” The Finance Minister’s “argument was dismissed as ‘spreadsheet federalism’ by Liberal senators from the Atlantic provinces. They accused Flaherty of breaching the Atlantic accords” Atlantic Senators were soon to be contradicted however by their Liberal colleagues.

“Conflicting regional interests were apparent even among the Liberal senators on the committee. While Atlantic senators were hostile and testy, former Toronto mayor Art Eggleton praised Flaherty for following the recommendations of the O’Brien report on equalization reform. ‘I think under the circumstances, the minefield that equalization is, and while I appreciate many of the comments that are made by my colleagues in Atlantic Canada, the O’Brien formula was the right way to go,’ Eggleton said. He also praised Flaherty for taking steps to remove ‘backdoor equalization’ from other transfer payments to the provinces.” In the closing paragraph, Bryden reinforced the fact that the contention is (and always will be) inter-provincial: “While some Atlantic Liberal senators have vowed to try to defeat or amend the budget bill, it is likely to pass with the support of …Liberals from Ontario and Quebec.” In fact, the Liberals have such an overwhelming majority in the Senate that Conservative Senators could not hope to pass the Budget bill without the support of the Liberals.

The new equalization is not a Harper-Flaherty Conservative formula, it is based on the recommendations of an independent O’Brien panel (commissioned by Paul Martin’s Liberals). Its main premise is a “10 Province Standard” for calculating provincial capacity to provide services. That is exactly what the Premier of New Brunswick demanded! The “bickering” between the federal and provincial governments is over. A decision has been made and provinces representing 95% of Canada’s population support the Budget and the new “10 Province Standard” O’Brien formula of equalization. Minister Jim Flaherty is right.

In a recent interview on Mike Duffy Live, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion said, “I think that to reach the heart and minds of Canadians, sincerity and honesty are better than spin, manipulation…I’m sincere, and honest. In eleven years in politics, I never broke my word.”

M. Dion wrote on the Liberal website: “The Prime Minister [Stephen Harper] himself stated in this House on October 26, 2004, that when it comes to the Atlantic Accords there is ‘a moral obligation to keep these promises: no caps, no clawbacks, no limitations, no conditions, no big exceptions in the fine print’.”

The implication is that the imperative was Mr. Harper’s persuasion. When we actually READ the record of the House however, there is a somewhat different story. Here is what Mr. Harper said: “Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister [then Paul Martin] went to Atlantic Canada earlier this year and had a deathbed conversion on the election trail. He said that he would give Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador 100% of the revenue from their offshore energy resources. Now he has reneged on that deal. Will the Prime Minister [Paul Martin] and his Atlantic ministers admit they have a moral obligation to keep these promises: no caps, no clawbacks, no limitations, no conditions, no big exceptions in the fine print? Will the Prime Minister keep his word? Will his Atlantic ministers make him keep his word?”

So, then Opposition Leader Stephen Harper, did not say it was HIS conviction that there was a moral obligation to eliminate caps and clawbacks – he said it was Paul Martin’s conviction because Paul Martin had made the promise! How can you trust someone who is so blatantly manipulative with others’ words? M. Dion may not call that lying, but it sure isn’t a lightening rod for the truth.