Just another WordPress.com weblog

Provincial Leaders Meeting

On Friday December 2nd there was a conference call between all of the provincial Green Party Leaders, Johan Hamels the GPC Executive Director, and MP Elizabeth May, the national Leader.

The purpose of the call was to establish a framework for cooperation on a national basis and a sharing of both information and resources in light of the financial crunch affecting all of the parties.

All provinces, with the sole exception of Newfoundland, and the Yukon Territories have registered parties. Alberta is in the throes of re-establishing itself after a dormancy of two years, and Newfoundland is in its infancy stage of coming together.

Interestingly, all leaders spoke of identical issues and the top three boil down to what I have been calling the 3M campaign: Membership, Money and Media. All three are symbiotic; if you have any one you get the other two.  The trick is to discover which one to start with to get the best results in the shortest amount of time.

Most of us will pick Media every time. It is the most attractive and at the same time excruciatingly inaccessible, and for small organizations, difficult to control the message. Consequently the public message about us is repeatedly delivered by our opponents and we are characterized as commie-hippie-tree huggers trying to save some species of fruit fly nobody has ever heard about. The mainstream media (MSM) only call us when there is an environmental story. They do not print our press releases and they continually frame us as a single issue fringe party.

So for the most part we ignore the MSM and work the online social media circuit, with some varying degrees of success. The problem here is that we are most often preaching to the converted and not broadening our base of support.

So…how do we work around this quandary? We, as party leaders, have agreed to a national information and resource sharing network. It will start off slowly, as all things do, but hopefully will pick up momentum.

Here are some ideas that we threw around and will hopefully come to fruition with some effort on our part.
·    Members to be seen as members of all levels of the Green Party within Canada (research legal privacy issues involved). This is done in most other jurisdictions.
·    Share platforms, share press/communications for multi-level issues
·    BGM – should be a joint statement from all Canadian Green Parties
·    Share Grimes database provincially and municipally
·    Share phone canvassers with all levels
·    Mobilize members through website communications with multi-levels
·    Build our lists, share our lists better – lists are everything
·    Press release templates sent out by GPC for use by others, as in during the federal election
·    Link all provincial and national websites and cross-post.

Most of this sounds like common sense stuff and should have been done for several years. Well, part of the maturing process is learning from one’s mistakes. I will personally push for the implementation of these ideas and I will update on our success.

Our next conference call will be in mid-January and we will be making this a monthly meeting.

December 15, 2011

The Province of Nova Scotia is forecasting a deficit of $365.2 million for 2011-2012, a reduction of $24.3 million from the estimate at budget time. This is the result of lower-than-expected expenses offset by lower-than expected revenues.

Total revenues, including net income from Government Business Enterprises, are forecast to be $8.8 billion, a decrease of $80.1 million from budget. Total expenses including consolidation and accounting adjustments are forecast to be $9.2 billion, $104.4 million lower than budget.

There is not much to draw on here, pretty much “stay the course, aren’t we doing a great job”. Well, yes and no. About what one can expect from any government past the halfway point in its mandate.

Much of the “savings” here are in more favourable interest rates on our debt (which is a good thing), not on any specific program initiatives brought in by the government. Personal income taxes are up $29 million and corporate taxes are down $6.8 million, in part due to a smaller share of the national corporate tax revenue. We are still quite reliant on federal tax transfers in Nova Scotia and I will admit that it is difficult to project numbers based on what some other entity is potentially going to give.

GDP is being forecast at 1.7%, slightly higher than the 1.6% forecast by RBC Economics Research. Their report indicates that Nova Scotia’s economy is in waiting mode. Economic growth has been slow in 2011, with ongoing declines in natural gas production and lower major project investment contributing to weak employment growth and consumer spending. Unemployment remains high compared to other parts of the country at 9%, although to be fair, it is the lowest in Atlantic Canada. This should trend downward because capital spending related to the $25 billion 30-year shipbuilding contract awarded by the federal government in October to Halifax’s Irving Shipyard is also expected to begin in 2012, initially with work on new structures required for the contract that is expected to last until 2014.

More On Barry Dalrymple

As a member of the Discussion Group in question, I would like to speak to some points in the article on the front page in the December 6th Chronicle Herald.

In the article Barry implies that he speaks for the board and they are all in complete agreement with his point of view, thus tarring them all with the same brush. From the article: “When he got the email last week he told her that he was opposed, and he imagined much of the board would be, too.”

In fact, when Barry spoke with Sheila Barling, Barry mentioned that he brought it up with the board. From the article: “He said the board didn’t want to be associated with the controversy that has surrounded the Occupy movement.” This implies a unanimity that does not exist.

Sheila asked him how many members were opposed and Barry replied “5 or 6.” The Board consists of 12 members so at best, 50% support and 50% oppose. It sounds like it is good fodder for a discussion topic.

He has attempted to shift the narrative to make the topic the story and not the principle. It was always about the principle. This story was never meant to be political, or even about Occupy Nova Scotia, but Mr. Dalrymple signed his email as an HRM Councillor and gave his work email address. He knew this would add weight to his opinion and it was deliberate.

The Discussion Group has never been asked to vet their speakers list with the Board for political correctness or community suitability. Barry should know this; he is a member of the group and has spoken to us on two occasions. To state now that a topic is against community interests is fallacious at best. From the article: “He said it was meant to be a private email, but Barling forwarded it to others in the group.” As a member of the group he should have been aware that Sheila would poll the rest of the group for their opinion on the matter. He received a forwarded copy of the email.

Barry, or the Board for that matter (assuming unanimity), is in no position to determine, or be arbiter, of what is of benefit to the community and what is not. From the article: “He said his other board members have since emailed him saying they are opposed because having Occupy Nova Scotia speaking is not a community event or of benefit to the community.”

That has never been a criterion for the Discussion Group or a standard of use of the Community Hall in question. It would appear that he is making it up as he goes along.

An Affront to Free Speech

I belong to a community discussion group that invites speakers from all walks of life to come and initiate discussion about their area of expertise, whether social, political, business, etc.

Yesterday our speaker organizer asked a member of the Occupy Halifax group to speak. There were many enthusiastic responses and one not so enthusiastic which follows:

Hi xxxx – while I am absolutely fine with most topics and most speakers, as a Board member of the Community Hall I am completely opposed to our Hall being used to further the agenda of this group and I am also opposed to bringing them here and give them the idea of “occupying our hall or property out here because they are looking. If the group wishes to meet with them it will have to be somewhere else because I would ask the Board to disallow the use of our community Hall for their purposes.

I know you are asking to meet with them in good faith and I will not get into it in an email but there is no good faith here on their part, I am not willing to put our hall and our community in jeapordy on this.
Regards, Barry

Barry Dalrymple
HRM Councillor District 2
Exec Director/Treasurer LWF Baseball Assoc
861-1171 (h) 222-0740 (c)
barry.dalrymple@halifax.ca

It appears that at least one member of HRM Council believes that the free exchange of ideas is all well and good as long as he approves them. I was not aware that Council members were given special warrants to curtail the right of assembly and speech (outside of the Grand Parade and Victoria Park of course). He raises the fear that a contingent of Occupy Halifax hippie/commies will descend on the Community Hall and never leave.

We shared space on Grand Parade on November 5th at the Veterans National Day of Protest, and one of the Occupy organizers spoke at our rally, while others in the Occupy camp held a banner by our podium that read, “Respect”. They were all polite, well spoken and respectful, and thankful for the service of our veterans who, they said, made it possible for them to be there airing their concerns.

Barry has every right as a private citizen to express his distaste and displeasure at free speech (irony taken), but when he speaks as a representative of the people and signs off as such, he would be wise to consider his words with greater care and attention.

As a frequent user of the Grand Parade area I did not witness a single incident where the protestors impeded any citizen’s right to use of the public space. Indeed the public went about their business in their usual manner, some stopped to talk with the Occupy protestors, and some ate their lunch or just took reflective time on the benches without any interference.

At the Veterans National Day of Protest on November 5th on the Grand Parade, the Occupy folks cleared room, cleaned up and helped us set up and tear down. One of their organizers spoke to our rally. A few others held a large sign with the word RESPECT behind our podium. They were all cordial, respectful and supportive.

In his public statements, Mayor Kelly led the citizens of Halifax to believe that an accord had been struck and the Grand Parade would be temporarily vacated for the November 11th services. In good faith the Occupy organizers moved their encampment. That the Mayor chose to act in bad faith and hold an in camera meeting that may very well have contravened the law by not confirming the vote in a public session speaks volumes about the mindset of the Mayor and Council.

It should be noted that not one of the 14 arrested were charged with contravention of a bylaw, which was the excuse used to evict them. All 14 were charged with obstruction of justice, a vague and ephemeral charge that can be issued by asking a question of a police officer, such as,”If you are not charging me with a bylaw offence why are you tearing down my tent?”

While the Mayor may not have technically lied, he has acted dishonourably, and there is no room in public administration for men and women without honour. Those who cheer the actions of Mayor Kelly would do well to reflect that if he can act in this manner toward a group you disagree with, then he can do it to you. I doubt if you will be cheering quite so loudly then.

A Message From The Leader

Our fifth Annual General Meeting has come and gone and by all measures it was a success. It was held at the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Public Affairs, and what a fine venue it was, and very accommodating to our needs.

There were two amendments to our By-laws, both deemed to be important changes.

The first was to create an amending formula to the Leader’s salary, thus removing the fixed amount from the by-law itself. This provides the Executive with greater flexibility to react to changes in our financial strength without the necessity of another by-law change.

The second change is in how our membership renewal process is structured. Membership will now follow the calendar year, much like other political parties. We have factored in a three month grace period so that new memberships (and for this year, renewals) that occur after October 1st, will carry over until the end of the following year. This will simplify the renewal process for members and the Membership Secretary, who thanks you very much.

Most of the AGM was taken up with ratifying policy initiatives and we had three overarching policy strategies and sixteen policy proposals ready for this meeting. I am proud to say that we got through all of them with vigourous discussion on many points. There are still several policy areas to cover and we hope to get to them at the next AGM in late Spring 2012. If you like policy talk, please contact the policy committee and make your views known. The ratified policies will be posted here in the near future when editing and formatting is complete. A big thank you to Mary Lou Harley, Sheila Richardson and Ellen Durkee for their service.

There was also an election. Several positions were up for re-election and here are the results:

Leader – John Percy (by vote of confidence)

1st Deputy Leader – Kris Maclellan

2nd Deputy Leader – Brynn Horley (by vote of Executive)

Co-President Male – Rob Pierce

Co-President Female – Mary Lou Harley

Policy Co-Convenor Female – Sheila Richardson

Ian Charles remains as our Official Agent and Shari-Lynn Hiltz has renewed as our Treasurer.

These are extremely capable and thoughtful people and they all hold the best interests of the party and the people of Nova Scotia close to their heart. This is a strong Executive with a wealth of experience and insight and it will be a pleasure to work with them throughout the coming term.

As I say after every AGM, a party is only as strong as its members. We need to hear from you. We need your input, your ideas, your time and your money. All politics is local and you are the ones who will make us aware of issues of local and regional concern. I am still a strong adherent of the 3M Policy: Membership, Money, and Media. These are the three dietary staples of every political party. These can only come from a strong sense of committment by all members to the principles and ideals that we as a party espouse.

We were also graced with the prescence of Elizabeth May, O.C. MP on Saturday night for a dinner and talk at the Atlantica Hotel. Elizabeth is one of my personal heroes and I wish I had a tenth of her strength. I had originally asked her to speak for about fifteen minutes and had made accomodations for her to speak sitting down, in deference to her hip replacement surgery four weeks ago. But no. She walked up and climbed the podium and spoke for at least thirty minutes without notes and most likely would have gone longer but the hotel staff were looking nervously at their watches. This country is most fortunate in having her voice in Parliament.

I would like to thank the Green Party of Canada for absorbing the costs of travel and accommodation for Elizabeth. It was appreciated.

We are two years or less from a provincial election. It is not too early to be thinking about the election or our platform. The policies that we passed and the ones for the Spring 2012 AGM will be important cornerstones for the election platform.

I was visited last Thursday by the PC candidate for my riding, Sackville-Cobequid. He is already doing door to door canvassing. We spent an hour and a half in my living room in deep discussion. Paul Russell is a thoughtful and caring man with great intelligence and we got along famously. He will be a formidable opponent. Your Executive has been in election preparation mode for several months now and the membership should start gearing up on the local front so you are not caught by surprise and lacking organization. Electoral District Associations are a big part of the election process. They can legally raise funds, and select local candidates and receive money from the party. They are essential components of democracy. Consider holding a meeting in your area to form an EDA, if you don’t already have one, and get the ball rolling. Remember, the Leadership and Executive are here to help. We are willing to go everywhere in Nova Scotia to assist you in your endeavours. Strong organization is the key component to success and voter visibility. Like everything else in the Green Party, it comes from the grass roots.

“I always thought somebody should do something about things, but then I realized I was somebody” – Lily Tomlin

Proposed Changes to the Environment Act
September 06, 2011

To the Government of Nova Scotia:

It has come to our attention that today, September 6th, 2011 is the deadline for public submissions to the Environment Act Review. The notification went up on the ns.gov.ca website on August 12th, a Friday afternoon and today being the deadline gives the public exactly three weeks to put together a comprehensive response to a review of an extremely important piece of legislation. It should be noted as well that the original date for submissions was August 22nd, barely one weeks notice at the height of the summer break.
If it is true that in politics perception is reality, then the perception here is twofold: either the environment is not a particularly important portfolio for this government or there is little interest in the public viewpoint. Such an important consideration as changes to the Environment Act should be given greater public consultation and widely advertised. That you did not do so creates the public perception of an apparent lack of consideration for transparency in government operations or accountability to the public.
We hasten to add that this is in no way a criticism per se of the proposed changes already published, but rather of the process and accessibility of public input. We did expect this government to do better. In this matter you are not living up to our expectations.

Debt reduction is critical in ensuring that progressive policies and programs will be well funded and sustaining. Nova Scotia is paying out $1 billion each year to manage our debt; that is $1 billion we do not have to care for our citizens and shift our economy into the 21st century. Reducing our debt is paramount to good governance.

Greens favour a steady economy, maximizing meaningful work and economic health.  The highs and lows of booms and busts may be bearable for those with lots of chips to gamble away, but are brutal for the average citizen.

Now that we are in the business of increasing deficits to end the recession, we have to be very mindful of how we get out of a deficit.

Economists warn of creating a “structural deficit.”  Greens are very concerned about this risk. A future structural deficit could threaten our health care system and other indispensable government-funded programs.

As long as we are in deficit, we cannot find the resources to pay down the debt. Being indebted to external creditors also makes political decision-makers vulnerable to pressures from outside our country. If we had no debt, we would no longer be beholden to the IMF and global credit rating agencies.

The Green Party believes in living within our limits, ecologically and fiscally. Sustainability isn’t about standing in front of logging trucks. We are committed to a balanced budget and to reducing the debt. It won’t be easy. To pay down the debt while supporting programs that meet immediate social, economic and environmental needs, we must maintain a healthy and fair level of taxation and we must ensure that Canadians get good value for their tax dollars.

Most Canadians don’t like paying taxes, especially if they think that the taxes are unfair or don’t deliver good value for money. People don’t like wasteful spending by an over-bureaucratized government. Fair enough. However, about half of Canadians say that they would not mind paying more taxes for a cleaner environment, better health care and education, and to support people in need. It’s not that the money isn’t there, it just isn’t prioritized correctly.

Taxation and spending policies shape society by sending signals about which sectors of society governments think are important. Over the past several decades the traditional old-line parties have used our tax system to benefit large corporations, reducing federal corporate taxes by almost 8 per cent even as corporate profits hit record highs. Shifting from taxing corporations’ net income to taxing their retained earnings will prompt companies to reinvest their profits in the communities they serve, rather than pay themselves bonuses. We are at the highest level of corporate retained earnings ever and yet the same corporations are not investing in hiring. Meanwhile, the cost of living has increased. Canadians save less, carry more debt and work more hours for the same money. Even before the current recession hit, people were having a harder time providing for their families and paying for a decent place to live.

The Green Party believes in reforming our tax system to make it fairer and more in tune with Canadians’ desire for a healthy environment, a sustainable economy and a vibrant, caring society.

It makes no sense to subsidize the wealthiest corporations on Earth – the oil companies. We must remove these perverse subsidies immediately, not in the slow, “grandfathered” approach of the old-line parties.

The Green Party will reduce taxes on things we all want, like income and employment, and we will increase taxes on things we do not want – things that harm people and our environment.

Our “green tax cuts” will be progressive, with a schedule that gives industry time to gear up or down. And it will be revenue neutral because a tax shift is not a tax grab. Income and payroll taxes will decline and the changes will help not hurt, less fortunate members of our society.

To set the right prices, we have to change to a “true” or “full-cost” accounting method that incorporates economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits in the national accounts. Using this method, products and services are taxed, and thus priced, according to the positive or negative impacts caused throughout their lifecycle. We have already done this with tobacco products. Such taxes help consumers make more rational choices.

There are other ways to put taxes to work improving our society. Our tax system must be designed to reduce poverty, encourage environmentally-beneficial activities, and generate more wealth for the 90 per cent of Canadian families who are currently working harder without getting further ahead.

The Greens’ fiscal plan is straightforward: gradually reduce our debt, give clear tax signals that enable companies to pursue profits on a level playing field, and shift taxes to ensure that both revenue streams and expenditures meet social, economic and ecological goals.

The Green Party supports good business practices and encourages businesses to realize the profit potential in shifting to sustainable models. We believe supporting these businesses is an investment with an ROI realized in more and better jobs. Supporting unsustainable businesses is strictly an expense with no stable ROI and a drain on our economy.

Too many small businesses go bankrupt, while major industrial sectors such as manufacturing and forestry struggle to stay afloat. Meanwhile the auto sector has received giant bailouts from provincial and federal governments without committing to protecting Canadian jobs or making the transition to green technology.

This generation has the potential to capitalize on the single biggest business opportunity in human history – the shift to a low-carbon economy.  Whether this is driven by the need to end the recession through economic stimulus, high energy prices, dwindling oil supplies, strategic geopolitical threats to foreign oil, the climate crisis, or all of them combined, let’s stop arguing about who is at fault and commit to the idea that the country that mobilizes resources to develop and commercialize low-carbon technologies (e.g. alternate fuels, renewable energy and energy efficiency) will survive the price shocks of fossil fuel’s last gasps and emerge with a thriving economy.

All levels of government need to advance this green economic approach through effective tax and policy measures and appropriate skills and trades training at the secondary and post-secondary levels.

The Green Party will gradually and progressively shift current consumption taxes onto products and services that harm people and the environment while reducing taxes on income, products and economic activities that do no harm. Greens do not support tax increases. As pollution taxes increase, other taxes, such as income and payroll, decrease. This approach is called being “revenue neutral.”

By moving to “true” or “full-cost” accounting, whereby products and services are priced according to the positive or negative impacts they cause throughout their life cycle, our society can make rational market choices that will guide the economy toward environmental sustainability.

We are already falling far behind the European Union and are fast committing ourselves to becoming importers and consumers of new technology rather than innovators. Again, this is an expense and not an investment and an example of 20th century thinking that is not consistent with the realities we will face in the 21st century.

And poverty? Don’t get me started. OK, too late.

The ranks of the unemployed are expanding, but access to the insurance system designed for times such as these has been shrinking. Meanwhile, we are among the most overworked citizens in the industrialized world. A report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) states that the richest 10 per cent of Canadians are the only ones not working longer hours. The report concludes that, despite being better educated and working harder, Canadian families are now “running faster just to stay put and the bottom half is actually falling behind.”  They will eventually require access to programs funded by our taxes instead of contributing to the tax base. An expense, not an investment.

This is unacceptable.

The National Council of Welfare has estimated that over 15% of Canadians are living in poverty — about 4.9 million people.  In a wealthy country such as ours, this is unacceptable.  Eliminating poverty while supporting healthy communities will pay for itself in reduced health care costs, as poverty is the single largest determinant of ill health.  Eliminating poverty will pay for itself in reduced crime rates.  Failure to eliminate poverty will cost our society far more than a civilized program to make poverty history.

The Green Party believes it is time to re-visit a major policy initiative — the use of a negative income tax, or Guaranteed Livable Income (GLI) for all.  The use of a GLI could eliminate poverty and allow social services to concentrate on problems of mental health and addiction. The essential plan is to provide a regular annual payment to every Canadian without regard to a needs test.  The level of the payment will be regionally set at a level above poverty, but at a bare subsistence level to encourage additional income generation.  No surveillance or follow-up is required.

Unlike the current provincial welfare and federal Employment Insurance (EI) schemes, additional income is not “clawed back” until a higher level of income, above subsistence, is achieved.  The incentive to illegal, under-the table economies is vastly reduced. Additional income is to be declared until the wage-earner becomes a taxpayer. For higher-income Canadians, the amount of the GLI is merely taxed back in whole.

Through policy coherence, municipally, provincially and federally, significant savings can be realized, while simultaneously reversing the negatives of a shame-based system that perpetuates poverty. To be cost-effective, however, government will require time to negotiate a coherent program with the provinces/territories and other levels of government.  Various “poverty-industry” programs of welfare, disability pensions, seniors’ benefits, unemployment insurance, would all be collapsed within one simple single payment system, administered through taxes and a reduced bureaucracy.

The Green Party believes it is time to advance bold ideas such as this. Citizens often talk about wanting change but continue to vote for the same tired policies that created the malaise in which we are wallowing. Continuing this voting pattern is like asking the foxes to renovate the henhouse, and will make the inevitable need for systemic change that much more difficult to achieve, the longer we put it off.

I don’t know if you agree or disagree, in whole or in part, with what I have been saying but I do believe that concerned citizens know that things need to change. We may debate the how and when, but not the why or what.

You know where I stand.

Lest We Forget…is not a slogan…It’s a warning.

Lest we forget…We, the citizens of Canada, through our elected representatives, ask our military service personnel & RCMP to sign a lifetime contract with unlimited liability. Being a contract, there are provisions on our side that we must honour, specifically those pertaining to caring for them when they are injured.  We are not honouring our side of the contract. They have dutifully stood on guard for us, now we must dutifully stand on guard for them.

Lest we forget…Veterans Affairs Canada was established to distribute programs and resources, and provide comfort and assistance to Military and RCMP veterans and their families, applying the “benefit of the doubt” clause enshrined in the existing legislation to all worthy applicants, and not to act like a US medical insurance company with their culture of denial.

Lest we forget…and I mean no disrespect to the older veterans such as my father, our perception of veterans is changing. As a boy, of course, I remember veterans very differently. Veterans today are more likely to be our children and siblings rather than our fathers or grandfathers. We have vets from Vietnam, Bosnia, Africa, Afghanistan, and domestic service, and they are going to be around for a long time, and it is our duty to assist them.

Lest we forget…the legislation governing VAC contains an important clause known as the “benefit of the doubt” clause which states that, in the absence of irrefutable proof, the benefit of the doubt shall go to the veteran applicant. VAC does not adhere to that but rather uses what is called the “balance of probabilities”, which leaves decisions to the discretion of the adjudicator.

Lest we forget…SISIP (the Service Income Security Insurance Plan) contributions are mandatory for all service personnel but payouts are geared to your income or outright refused once pension earnings and benefits exceed 75% of your salary. Imagine your car insurance company, after your car was set on fire and destroyed, telling you that they don’t have to pay for the vehicle because you earn too much money, but you must keep paying the premiums. Any SISIP benefits you receive stop at age 65.

Lest we forget…many victims of Agent Orange spraying from 1958 to 1984 are still fighting for compensation. Only two years, 1966-67, were recognized and $96M was earmarked for compensation but only $56M of that was actually distributed.

Lest we forget…the lump sum payment of up to $276,000, when amortised over a lifetime works out to a very small monthly supplement. In comparison, British vets receive almost 4 times as much in lump sum compensation.

Lest we forget…while we can appreciate VAC’s close scrutiny and stewardship of our tax dollars, we should be appalled at a statement made personally to Col. Stogran by a senior VAC bureaucrat that it would have been fiscally more beneficial if all the injured vets had died in battle rather than come home and be a constant drain on the system.

Lest we forget…that the freedoms we enjoy are defended daily by our military and RCMP service personnel and come at great personal risk and expense for many of them. In a representative democracy it should not be necessary to shame our government into pursuing the right course of action. Just as we are asked to remember on November 11th the actions of those who fight on our behalf, we will also remember the actions of those we elect to represent us on election day.

All of us would be correct in the assertion that we are a resource rich province. However many of those resources have been contracted out to multinational companies for their benefit, with little regard for the true owners of the resource, the people of Nova Scotia. We need to level the playing field when distributing rights to resource extraction and build in safeguards and tangible benefits for Nova Scotians.

There is a balance point between corporate profits and societal profit that has been tipped in favour of the corporate side for too many years. However, I should point out that we must continue to make certain that those markets remain profitable for companies to invest here, but business interests and Nova Scotia’s interests should be one and the same.

One major stumbling block to progress has to be our deficit. Currently we pay just under one billion dollars per year in interest on our debt, or 12% of our total revenues, which last year was 8.4 billion dollars. Our total debt is currently around 12 billion dollars. Running continuous deficits only exacerbates the problem. International lenders look askance at borrowing states that do not control their deficit spending. I’m certain that you would all agree that an extra billion dollars per year would go a long way to improving life here in Nova Scotia.

As you can imagine, there are hundreds of solutions being bandied about, many of them quite well thought out, but it is important that we choose those solutions that are economically viable and of greatest benefit to Nova Scotia.

Successive governments of all stripes have wrestled with the conundrum of how to live within their means while providing all the services that are demanded of them. Citizens get angry when services are downgraded or removed, but get angrier when asked to pay more to support those services. Deciding what is essential and what is frivolous never achieves consensus. Ask 100,000 Nova Scotians and you will get 100,000 different answers.

This damned if you do and damned if you don’t policy has frozen governments into inaction, or worse, they end up giving everyone what they ask for without regard to the true long-term costs involved. Asking our children to subsidize our lifestyle  is not an option anymore, but asking citizens to pay more for services is still considered political suicide by most parties.

And yet those 58% of citizens that still bother to vote continue to vote for the dream, not the reality, and then are disappointed when the dream evaporates after election day. And we continue to fall for the dream they weave because it is easier and safer than real change. All politicians speak of change, but most are talking about changing which side of the Legislature on which they sit, and continue to maintain the status quo that has fed them so well over the course of their careers.

So how do we fix that? Well…

I am 61 years old and doubt very much that I will see this province and country achieve a workable balance between fiscal, social and environmental responsibility in my lifetime. There is just too much to do and many changes to put in place. But that is why we must start right now. I’m working for my kids and grandkids. The longer we wait the harder and more drastic the solution will be. Most politicians will not tell you this. They will claim that they can fix everything within their four year mandate and ask for your trust.

The biggest change that I see as necessary is beyond any government control. What is needed is a major shift in public attitudes towards government and what they can and should do. That being said, there should be a difference between government spending and government investment. Spending is money out the door. Investment implies a Return On Investment.

Here’s an example from this year. The Yarmouth Ferry debacle. The NDP claimed that $6 million dollars spent on a subsidy for the Yarmouth ferry was a waste of taxpayer dollars. That ferry was the only direct gateway to Nova Scotia from the United States. The 2009 Tourism Ministry report stated that Yarmouth was responsible for 5% of the tourist dollars coming into this province. Total tourism figures for 2009 were $1.3 billion. This means the Yarmouth ferry created $65 million in economic activity. The provincial HST share on that is 10% or $6.5 million. The provincial income tax collected on the 340 jobs dependent on the ferry traffic was about $2.3 million. So in order to save $6 million the province lost $8.8 million.

But wait! The contract with the ferry service contained a cancellation penalty of $3 million which the province gladly paid out. So now we are out almost $12 million to save $6 million. Those lost jobs are now a drain on the economy and those people are now accessing the social services budget. I have no figures on that expenditure as yet.

To make matters worse, in the same breath the government gave $3 million it “saved” to renovate a soccer facility in Halifax, and to add insult to injury, the New Brunswick tourism figures for this past summer 2010 showed a 25% increase in US traffic to their province. Hardly what I would call a sound investment for Nova Scotia.

The Green Party of Nova Scotia is dedicated to balancing the budget, but we also understand that the current economic situation requires investment.  We are committed, however, to refraining from participating in corporate bailouts and we are opposed to drastic measures that would involve swinging between heavy economic intervention and widespread deregulation.

The Green Party of Nova Scotia will reduce government waste, partially through attrition, increase efficiency, and provide tax relief through shifting. It will also ensure every dollar invested today provides jobs, helps diversify our economy, and protects our common wealth: the environment. Just as the Green Party believes in living within our ecological limits, we believe in a government that will operate within fiscal limits.

As fiscally conservative free marketers, we believe that every policy the Green Party of Nova Scotia adopts must meet all three of the following criteria : economically sustainable, socially responsible, and environmentally balanced.

The Green’s will:
1.    Create Jobs in a new sustainable economy, ensuring our economy thrives at the local and regional levels
2.    Build Sustainable Infrastructure geared to a low-carbon future
3.    Invest in renewable energy production
4.    Advance Education and Technology for a new economy
5.    Extend our social safety net to help those most in need
6.    Shift Taxes to redress inequities
7.    Bring about electoral reform to augment true and proportional representation for all citizens.
The Green’s will NOT:
1.    Bail out failed industries
2.    Depend mainly on depletion of our primary resources
3.    Build more roads
4.    Continue to hand out corporate subsidies
5.    Use deficit financing to entrench an old economy
This is just a taste of where we would like to take this province. Many citizens have given up and walked away and don’t even vote anymore. I believe a vote not cast is a vote for the status quo. Many others will oppose changes to the economy, and that is their right, but fearing and resisting change takes far more energy that facilitating and encouraging change.

And change will come. We don’t live in the 19th century anymore so why are we still governed as if we do?

I believe the best ideas come from personal experience. I don’t have all the answers but I’ve been told I’m a pretty smart guy. And the smartest thing I can do is listen to everyone who makes sense.

Tag Cloud

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 319 other followers