Guess we should brace ourselves once again, just waiting for word on the Liberals' fall fiscal update. I wonder what Morneau and potato have in store for the next 6 months...it's doubtful it will be anything that would include any semblance of fiscal restraint or responsibility.
Liberal deficits, apparently, work for everyone
We assume he’ll assure Canadians the federal Liberal’s track record of rising debt, massive deficits, tax hikes and growing government red tape were part of a proven plan to modestly grow Canada’s economy over the past three years.
That adding a national carbon tax that will hike the cost of gas, groceries and cost of living will magically put more money into everyone’s pockets.
That following his government’s taxpayer credit-card fueled spending spree, that saw government spending top $300 billion annually for the first time ever, fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets are on the horizon.
Meanwhile, fiscal irresponsibility has defined the past three years.
During the 2015 federal election campaign, then Liberal leader Justin Trudeau predicted that if elected he would run a $9.9 billion deficit in 2016-17.
Instead, it hit $19 billion — 92% higher than planned.
OTTAWA - Canada will contribute $50 million to a global charity for children's education, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted to comedian Trevor Noah, a pledge that quickly drew criticism both for its content and its form.
Celebrities gathered in Johannesburg, South Africa on Sunday for the Global Citizen Festival: Mandela 100, a charity concert honouring Nelson Mandela a century after he was born.
Trudeau tweeted to Noah, who is hosting the festival, that Canada would give the money to Education Cannot Wait, an organization that funds education for children affected by conflicts, natural disasters and other crises.
Global Citizen is an organization that wants to end extreme poverty by 2030. Its Mandela 100 campaign sought to bring in US$1 billion in donations, and Global Citizen tweeted that the campaign surpassed that goal, bringing in over $7 billion.
"Hey @Trevornoah - thanks for everything you’re doing to celebrate Nelson Mandela’s legacy at the @GlblCtzn festival. Sorry I can’t be with you - but how about Canada pledges $50M to @EduCannotWait to support education for women & girls around the world? Work for you? Let’s do it," Trudeau tweeted to the South African comedian and "The Daily Show" host.
Noah said "This is amazing!" as Trudeau’s tweet was shown on a big screen at the concert.
But back in Canada critics were less enthusiastic. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer accused Trudeau of pledging $50 million in a tweet to impress a TV personality.
"Taxpayers need a defender not somebody who throws their money around to be popular with celebrities," Scheer tweeted.
Similarly, Conservative MP Michelle Rempel tweeted that Trudeau's message was "tone deaf" and also accused him of trying to get noticed by a TV star and said the money had not been budgeted for.
Louis Belanger, the director of communications for International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, said the $50 million is part of $400 million in aid previously announced during the G7 Summit in Charlevoix, Que., near Quebec City, in June.
Belanger said Education Cannot Wait is one of the only funds that specifically helps girls' education in places such as refugee camps and war zones.
"This is the type of funding that we had our eye on since we announced it in Quebec City," he said.
Belanger said the decision to announce the $50 million was made three weeks ago but officials had been talking about giving to Education Cannot Wait for months.
He said the organization operates in Jordan, Lebanon and South Sudan and in camps where people have been displaced by the west African terrorist group Boko Haram, for example.
"We think it's important for girls to continue their education and that's why we're moving forward," he said.
Trudeau's principal secretary Gerald Butts took to Twitter to defend the move.
"This money is going to educate women and girls in the developing world, in commemoration of Nelson Mandela’s 100th birthday," he tweeted, adding, "And the Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada’s reaction..." and included a link to Scheer's tweet.
Toronto-based lawyer and former Liberal staffer Warren Kinsella tweeted that Education Cannot Wait is a worthy cause, but called Trudeau's tweet an "appalling" way for the decision to be communicated, "to a American-based TV host, no less."
This could easily go into is he an idiot thread I chose to put it here
Trudeau's $50M tweet draws attacks
This UN human council bid is going to break us
Canada is set to sign onto the UN migration pact. Here’s what you need to know
It comes with being born with a platinum spoon in one's mouth & getting no direction from any sane people!
St. Anthony cop who accompanied Yanez during traffic stop of Castile. He met Yanez on Larpenteur Avenue and approached the passenger-side window of Castile’s car while Yanez went to driver’s side. Kauser testified in court that he didn’t smell burnt marijuana at car — Yanez told authorities he could — and that he never saw a gun in Castile’s car nor perceived the situation as potentially threatening until shots rang out. He also said he was surprised when Yanez drew his gun and fired, but said he had a different vantage point than Yanez and trusted his partner’s decision and believes he “followed protocol.” Kauser never drew his own gun during the incident.
Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough and her bureaucrats at Public Services and Procurement Canada will often claim that the various purchases the department makes using your tax dollars are “fair, open and transparent.”
It’s the mantra at Public Services.
There are ongoing questions whether the procurements are actually fair. And the “open and transparent” part is open to question.
Take for instance my latest article where I report how taxpayers – like you – are on the hook for potentially tens of millions of dollars after federal bureaucrats bungled the purchase of trucks for the Canadian Forces.
Public Services and Procurement Canada now must make good on the lost profits for a U.S. firm who complained that the process was unfair and had its complaint backed up by a trade tribunal.
The department, which oversaw the flawed defence procurement, declined to provide details on just how much the penalties will cost the public.
Defence industry representatives, however, say the penalty being paid to the U.S. company, Oshkosh, could be as high as $60 million as it has to account for lost profit on the $834-million truck contract as well as other expenses the firm incurred.
My article published Sunday night noted that the department claimed details of the payout are confidential. It did not explain why the penalties that taxpayers must shoulder should be considered secret.
On Monday I asked Public Services and Procurement Canada the following: “I would like a detailed description on why taxpayers who paid the penalty to Oshkosh for the SMP truck deal are not allowed details about how much they had to pay?”
The answer? Public Services and Procurement Canada wouldn’t provide one.
Alan Williams, the former DND head of procurement who also worked for a time at Public Works, noted that the figure should be made available to taxpayers. “I believe that it has to appear in the Public Accounts,” he explained. “It may be combined with other such legal obligations making it harder to identify by itself.”
That was Harper too.
Always great to hear from a subject matter expert/climate change denier.
The Liberal government of Jean Chretien joined the F-35 consortium in the late 1990s. That included a token payment to the consortium that also implied Canada would consider the aircraft for purchase and Canadian aerospace companies would participate in the design, development and building of F-35 components. About five years later, the Paul Martin Liberal government made a second and much larger payment.
In January 1998, the Chrétien government formally signed on with seven other allies — Australia, Britain, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Turkey. As a “level 3” participant, Canada invested approximately US$440 million, with the expectation that Canadian aerospace firms would receive contracts from the firm that won the competition. In 2001, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II was chosen, and in 2002, the Chrétien government signed on to the next phase of the program.
Joining the JSF program was a smart decision. While Chrétien might have been attracted by the benefits to Canada’s aerospace sector, the F-35 was also a strategically sound choice. Simply put: if the F-35 was the only fighter that the US was going to fly in the 2020s and 2030s, then it was the logical fighter for Canada. Since the cancellation of the Avro Arrow in 1959, Canadians have always flown American fighters, and so it was logical that the CF-18s would be replaced by the F-35 in the fullness of time.
The sale to Japan is seen as vital to the F-35's future. The new aircraft has been dogged by steep price increases and vexing technical issues mostly related to a U.S. Marine Corps variant of the aircraft that Canada and Japan are not purchasing.
The controversy over the lack of a formal bidding process for the F-35 in Ottawa, which the Liberal government of the day first committed to in 1997, has largely ignored the reality that Canada also did not have an open competition when it recently spent several billion dollars to acquire C-130 J Super Hercules and C-17 Globemaster III transports.
Both of these new aircraft were used extensively to support Canada's operations in Afghanistan and against Libya. If the C-130-J and C-17 had been put through an official tendering process, and the only alternative to those transports — the Airbus consortium's A400M — had won, the RCAF would still be without any new transport aircraft. This is because the A400M's development is years behind schedule. Hobbled by technical and financial issues, it has attracted far less interest from international buyers than the Super Hercules or the Globemaster III.
Our Canada Pension Plan
Allan Scott’s daughter died this year at the age of 34 and When he inquired about her CPP he was told that because she was not married and had no children, the money now belonged to the government. Nobody else was entitled to it.
On Sunday, November 6, 2016, Scott wrote: “When the CPP was put in place by the government of the day in 1965 (under liberal Lester B. Pearson) it was meant to assist people that did not have a pension.
Employees put in a percentage and the employer doubled the employee's input. There is no money in the CPP from the government of Canada. For a fee from the pool the government was supposed make the pool grow. We Canadians are getting less than half of what that pool
should be paying out every month. We are being cheated out of something that is legally ours, the government's.
This should be investigated by the Supreme Court. Good information for our families and friends and it should be passed around until everyone has read it.
Those who went before — one major thing wrong with the government's calculations of 'available CPP funds is they forgot to figure in the people who died before ever collecting CPP cheque. Where did that money go?
Also, ponder these additional points:
●The math: remember, not only did you and I contribute to CPP but your employer did too. It totalled 15% of your income before taxes so if you averaged only $30,000 during your working life of, let’s say of 45 years, that's $202,500. Read that again. The government paid nothing.
●Interest on the month you and your employer sent to the government was to ensure you would get a retirement cheque from that money you “invested” (not the government). If you calculate the future invested value of $4,500 a year (yours and your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% interest, after 49 years of working you'd have $892,919.98.
●The scheme: if you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $26,78760 per year and it would last more than 30 years or until you're 95, if you retire at age 65), and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit!
● If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a life-time income of $2,976.40 per month. Those in Ottawa have pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did! They call CPP an “entitlement” even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives. Now that it’s time for us to collect, the government is running out of money! Why does the government treat the fund as its general piggy bank?
The government is now calling CPP payouts an “entitlement,” but we paid aid cash for our CPP and just because the government “borrowed” it for other “programs doesn't make our benefits some kind of charity or handout!
Think about the entitlements of senators! We pay for their health care, outrageous
retirement packages, 67 yearly holidays, three weeks' paid vacation and an unlimited number of paid sick days. Now that's welfare. Yet, they have the gall to call our CPP retirement payments entitlements.
The latest estimate (as perGlobal news) is that it will cost us $600-million to bring in 25,000 refugees. The government (according to the Public Accounts Office) is already $5-billion in the hole. How much more will they take from our CPP to cover that expense? Former Immigration Minister, John Mccallum stated in a Global TV interview, that he would present his plan to Cabinet shortly, but he could not be pinned down as to cost. Will they write a blank cheque on our CPP account? The new philosophy is, refugees first, Canadians last.
One final thought on this. The military pays into CPP as everyone else does. Yet, when it comes time to draw on this “entitlement” an amount similar to CPP is witheld from their military pension. Who stands on guard for them? Sad isn't it? Get used to it as 99% of us won’t send this on.