Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

earts

and

inds

Tomas Mulcair, MP

Stephen Harper hasonce again ound a riendand ally in the leader o the “Ocial Opposition”.Stephane Dion’s leadershipsaw to the passing o 43Conservative condencemotions in the House o Commons. It appears thatMichael Ignatie is going to ollow his predecessor’s lead. He looksinto the camera and addresses the people o Canada and explainshow this budget doesn’t meet the needs o the country, but that he’llsupport it anyway. He has abdicated the moral authority o his party to call itsel the ocial opposition. He has absolved Stephen Harpero his responsibility to keep his word. He has oered the condenceo the 62 percent o Canadians who didn’t vote Conservative, to aleader who brought into law xed dates or elections and then brokethe law because it served his purposes to do so.

(Cont’d on p. 2)

Issue 1 Feb 2009

Federal budget andCoalition failure

CONTENTS

Federal budget and coalition failure:Thomas Mulcair, MPGaza: Just when peace was about to break outEditor’s intro: Launch of Hearts & MindsFederal budget and housingDecline of social assistance in McGuinty Ontario:Cheri DiNovo, MPPBackground: Snapshot of Canada’s poverty anddeclining social spendingPost-secondary education as stimulant toeconomyFederal budget betrays unemployed:Peggy NashHearts & Minds IndexThe importance of “public”:Gord Perks, City CouncilorChile—private wealth, public squalorNDP urges McGuinty gov’t to invest $1.4 billionin poverty reductionToxic household waste disposalThe enviro impact of the budget:Linda Duncan, MPNext on the chopping block: Canada’senvironmental standardsStanding up to big oil and the tar sands project:Linda Duncan, MPLooming pension crisisSteady State economics - a recent discussionBook reviews

J.A. MacNeil

As I began this piece on January 19, there was a tenuous ceaserebetween Hamas and Israel. Signicantly, both Israel’s and Hamas’sceaseres were unilateral, indicating that neither party intended itsceasere to be interpreted as a negotiated commitment to the otherparty.Israel launched air and missile strikes across Gaza on De-cember 27, 2008. According to the BBC, most o the 225people killed on the rst day were Hamas policemen, but somewomen and children were also victims.

(Cont’d on p. 14)

Gaza: Just when peace was aboutto break out . . .

The articles contained within representthe views o each author, not necessarilythose o either the riding associationexecutive or any other NDP body

earts

and

inds

He seems to believe that a governmentthat claimed that the economy wasstrong at the beginning o Decemberhas a steady hand on the nances o the nation.Te NDP does not believe thatMr. Harper’s right-wing agenda is inthe best interest o the country or itscitizens. We see a leader who canpromise new money or inrastructure,but still hasn’t delivered inrastructureunds promised to big-city mayors in2007, as unt to lead.Our party entered into a coali-tion agreement with the two otheropposition parties in the spirit o cooperation, recognizing that theneeds o the country could never bemet by a party which demonstrably places the interests o oil companiesand banks above the needs o our el-derly, our homeless, our skilled work-ers and our bright young minds. Tecoalition partners were willing to puta little water in their wine i it wouldlead to a more promising uture orour country’s children.Mr. Ignatie can’t be counted on to

(Editor’s note: The following is part of theWellesley Institute’s analysis of the federalbudget’s housing spending. Michael Shapcottwas a candidate for the NDP in the 2004 and2006 federal elections in Toronto-Centre.)

Michael Shapcott

Billions in new housing dollars, butwho really benets?Federal budget 2009 promises todeliver billions upon billions o dol-lars over the next two years in newhousing investments – the singlebiggest amount o new housing

Budget 2009: Billions in new housing spending, but not for those who need it the most

Editor’s Intro

Launch o “Hearts & Minds”

At the November 2008 meeting o theParkdale-High Park NDP riding executive,one o the exec members proposed thelaunch o a new newsletter to perorm theollowing unctions:- share inormation, analysis and reec-tion o our members on key Canadian andinternational issues- promote awareness and debate about NDPpolicies and the experiences in other social-ist or social democratic jurisdictions- provide links to other sources o inorma-tionMembers enthusiastically took up the task.We quickly realized that many New Demo-crats are willing to share their experiencesand insights on issues, and that we wouldnot lack or material.We decided at the outset that the opinionsexpressed in the articles do not necessarilyhave to reect current NDP policy.I you’re interested in commenting onsomething in this issue o Hearts & Minds,or contributing to a uture issue, pleasecontact:editorheartsandminds@gmail.com

spending in more than two decades.Tis is a solid victory or housingadvocates, who created a powerulnational campaign to convincethe ederal government to includehousing in their economic stimulusplans. But most o the new dollars willow quickly to people who already own their home and want to re-pavetheir driveway, or cottagers who wantto add a new sun deck. Te hundredso thousands who will experiencehomelessness this year won’t get asingle penny in desperately needednew programs and services; and thethree million Canadian householdswho are precariously housed (a mod-ern-day record) will have to wait tosee i the much smaller dollars beingoered to them will actually make itthrough a complicated set o ederal-provincial-territorial negotiationsincluding a cost-sharing requirement.For the ull article, see:http://welles-leyinstitute.com/ed-budget-2009-billions-new-housing-spending-not-those-who-need-it-mostoppose Mr. Harper.Tis budget ails Ignatie’s ownlitmus test o protecting the vulnera-ble, saeguarding the jobs o today, andcreating the jobs o tomorrow.

• ere’s $60 in corporate tax cutsfor every $1 to unemployed workers.• Not one single additional unem

-ployed worker was made eligible orEI.

• Harper’s infrastructure pro

-gram won’t work because it requiresco-payments by other levels o government — and they’re broke.

• It attacks pay equity for women.• It fails to build desperately needed

social housing or low-income Cana-dians

• It fails to create childcare spaces

or working amilies.

• It makes post-secondary educa

-tion less accessible or our best andbrightest.We’re reaching out to hundreds o thousands o disappointed Canadianswho voted or Mr. Ignatie’s party toreplace Mr. Harper: you can count onus.

Federal budget and Coalition ailure

earts

and

inds

Council measured welare recipientsin our categories, examining 1) a sin-gle employable recipient, 2) a personwith a disability, 3) a lone parent withone child, and 4) a couple with twochildren.According to the Council, between1992 and 2007, a lone parent’s welare

income declined by almost $5,500 (in

2008 dollars, afer ination is takeninto account), while a couple with two

children lost almost $8,150.

In all our categories, the low-est level o social assistance ratesoccurred between 2003 and 2007,while the McGuinty Liberals werein power. In 2003, a couple with two

children received $20,147 in social

assistance, which only increased to

$21, 058 (5.1 percent more) in 2007.

Te lowest level o social assis-tance or a single parent was in 2005,when such amilies received a measly

$15,064.

Shockingly, or single recipients andor people with disabilities, the lowestwelare rates in the past twenty yearswere those o 2007, when ination istaken into account. For those recipi-ents, social assistance rates were wellbelow the poverty line, ranging rom

$7,204 for a single person without

disabilities to a paltry $12,382 for

people with disabilities.Under the McGuinty Liberals, itseems, the promise o progressive re-orm has been a myth or the most vul-nerable citizens in Ontario. How many other promises have been abandoned?In 2003, Dalton McGuinty and theLiberal Party were elected promis-ing change in the way governmenttreated the most vulnerable citizens inOntario. Afer eight years o Conser- vative reductions in social assistance,coupled with vilication o social as-sistance recipients, the Liberals prom-ised a new era o progressive reorm.Despite making these promises in2003, most o the commitments havebeen abandoned or adopted as hal-measures. By 2004, or instance, theLiberals abandoned their commitmentto reduce university tuition and bringin a new low-cost child-care program.It has been in the area o poverty reduction, however, that the Liberalshave been most notably absent. De-spite launching their much-heraldedanti-poverty plan in late 2008, peopleon social assistance, especially womenwith children, are doing even worseunder the Liberals than when the Har-ris Conservatives were in power.In 2007, the National Council o Welare released its much-anticipatedreview o welare rates in Canada. Te

A snapshot o Canada: In-creasing social inequality anddeclining social spending

Actual social spending andsupports:

Among all 30 OECD countries in terms o total social spending, Canada ranks 25th.Only the United States, Ireland, Turkey,Mexico and Korea (in that order) spend lesson social services, health care, income sup-port programs and pension programs thanCanada, as o 2004.Canada ranks 11th among all 30 OECDcountries on public health care spending aspercentage o GDP.Out o the 28 OECD countries where dataexist, Canada ranks 22nd or levels o publicunemployment coverage.Out o the 21 OECD countries where data ex-ist, Canada ranks 13th in terms o minimumwage levels relative to median income.Canada ranks 16th out o 23 OECD countrieswith respect to out-o-pocket child careexpenses.

Poverty and income inequality:

As o 2000, Canada had slipped to 14thamong OECD countries or the general pov-erty rate and child poverty rate—as o 2005one in 10 Canadians lives in poverty and onein six Canadian children lives in poverty.As o 2000, Canada had also slipped to 14thamong OECD countries or measure o equi-table income distribution (GINI coecient).Among 21 OECD countries, Canada now hasthe 5th highest gap in wages between menand women who are employed ull-time insimilar positions.Source: Building a healthy economy: Morethan just banks and stocks, Scott Wole,Wellesley Institute:http://www.wellesleyinstitute.com/les/scottwolenal.pd

Decline of Social Assistance inMcGuinty’s Ontario

Cheri DiNovo, MPP

Tales of a Yellow Bike

– Free public screening

7 pm - Friday, March 27, The Revue Cinema (Roncesvalles and Howard Park)

“

This beautiul flm will make you want to pedal your bike home

”With director Tina Hahn in attendance Sponsored by Cheri DiNovo, MPP