First Year Report Card: Grading the Graham Administration, Part I
As the New Brunswick Liberal party celebrates its one year anniversary since being sworn into office, perhaps it's time to step back and ask how they faired, policy-wise, in their first year in office. So how should taxpayers judge the Liberals in Fredericton thus far? Here's a rough guide.
Word of note: NB Taxpayers recognize the fact that Shawn Graham did not enter office with a huge majority of seats in the legislature. Nonetheless, that does not mean the New Brunswick Liberals should abandon its [election] promises or reject superior ideas not included in their election platform, such as keeping taxes low and growing the economy. Moreover, though they didn't enter office with a huge majority, their lead was extended after the fact with the defection of two tories and a by-election win in Moncton East. So in retrospect, a slim majority should no longer be an excuse in there ability or inability to move forward, or better yet, be evaluated.
Enough introduction. How does one evaluate our current premier and his administration, and how does one do it without sarcasm and satire — aye, there's the rub. Let's just pick some of the key moments of Graham's administration and see what transpires. I'll never get this done in one article, so we'll begin by looking at a few key policy planks, to start with. Part II and III will look at some other important policies. Let's get started:
1.) Lower Taxes
A report released last July by the C.D. Howe Institute indicated that New Brunswick has the lowest taxes [15.9 per cent] on the cost of doing business in Canada. Now as much as I would like to give the Graham government credit on anything related to lower taxes, both personal and corporate, I have to give credit where credit is due. And unfortunately, for the Graham government, this incremental policy change has to be credited to the previous government.
Moreover, in a time where most provinces and nations are looking at ways to decrease the tax burden on its citizens, in his very first budget, Finance Minister Victor Boudreau sent a clear message to taxpayers indicating that his department would be legislating some tough love on SMEs and personal taxpayers, in that, they rescinded the small business tax boosting it from 1 to 5 per cent, not to mention, raising personal income taxes so as to generate an extra $50 million for the province and scrapping the energy rebate. Plus, they added a liquor tax which was later found to be unconstitutional.
Furthermore, Boudreau indicated recently that there were to be no more tax increases for New Brunswickers, however, tax cuts are still not on the government's radar screen. This is very disappointing, especially with a surplus reportedly hovering around $236.8 million. It's clear Boudreau jumped the gun by raising taxes prematurely on NBers.
Grade: F
2.) Control Spending
The provincial budget in the spring of 2006 laid out by the Tories and Finance Minister Jeannot Volpé projected that spending in 2006/07 would rise by $108 million, or 1.7 per cent. However, the spring 2007 budget dropped recently by Finance Minister Victor Boudreau, by contrast, estimated that spending in 2006/07 had risen by $522 million, or 8.4 per cent. If the books published in public accounts are accurate, New Brunswick's spending over-run in 2006/07 will be its worst in a decade, and will endanger a record that, up to now, has made it one of Canada's best governments for hitting its spending targets.
Furthermore, with the government recently reporting a surplus ten times what it reported in March, coupled with regressive taxes, there could be no end in sight when it comes to irresponsible government spending from this Liberal government.
*I will add that the lack of accountability with the $60-million bailout of the Caisse Populaire de Shippagan added to the lower grade.
Grade: D
3.) Corporate Welfare
After taking a substantial amount of heat from taxpayers regarding the tax hikes implemented in the 2007 budget, as a means to get the public back on his side, Graham vowed to use "tax breaks instead of grants and loans to attract companies to invest in the province, stimulate job creation and further the government's agenda of self-sufficiency."
In a complete reversal of that pledge, Graham continued on with his corporate welfare agenda pumping in millions of our taxpayer-dollars to communications giant Rogers Inc., not to mention, more non-repayable loans for repeat offenders like Atcon Group Inc. and Atlantic Yarns.
Furthermore, this was an easy one to grade, especially with the recent musings from agriculture minister Ron Ouellette that the province is still open to the idea of bailing out corporate welfare sinkhole Atlantic Beef Products Inc. (a P.E.I. plant) to the tune of $2 million annually.
Grade: F
4.) Cutting Gas Taxes
On their first day in office, the Graham government lowered the provincial gas tax by 3.8 cents a litre, thus fulfilling their initial election promise to lower provincial gas taxes. This reduction means the province’s gas tax rate is the lowest in the Maritimes and second lowest in Canada after Alberta.
Grade: A
5.) Democratic Reform
During his time in office, Bernard Lord and his administration made fantastic strides on the democratic reform file as they wrote legislation into law on riding redistribution and proposed fixed election dates and democratic reform (i.e. striking a
Unfortunately, New Brunswick Premier Shawn Graham chose to [unfortunately] go with the status quo whereby he quashed the idea of citizens voting in a referendum on the recommendations brought forward by the
As well, Mr. Graham also refused to act on this democratic impulse when he chose to play petty partisan games with a great piece of federal legislation by submitting a 13 page brief which, in turn, further delayed the passage of Bill S-4 (a one clause bill on senate term limits).
Grade: F
A quick thank you to blogging colleague Paul Tuns for the link, not to mention, the extra traffic.
13 Comments:
I only care about the last one, and I'm only commenting to fix an error. It was NOT a 'citizens assembly', you are thinking of ontario's recent experience. In New Brunswick it was a regular run of the mill committee. It did make a decent enough effort to be 'public', however, 'citizens' input was very severely limited.
Fair enough. Altough, I have a friend who sat on that commission (you're right it wasn't a citizens assembly) and he would probably disagree.
Furthermore, much of the leg work in Ontario was done by fairvote after the citizens assmebly reported. Rick Anderson, Maude Barlow, Walter Robinson, Hugh Segal and Ed Broadbent were a big part of that.
I would hope that this would be the case for New Brunswick, if it had of come to a referendum, although I'm certain it wouldn't as the gentlemen who's in charge of it [Fairvote] once said to me via email that there wasn't even enough NBers to form a chapter or regional caucus. Btw, we are the only one without one. Surprise, surprise. Maybe Enterprise NB or ACOA can take up the slack. Kidding!!
Anyway, he said it would be a good start if I could sign up 20 to 50 members. I never did get on that, maybe I should?
Furthermore, who are the Broadbent's of NB who would fight LOUDLY for change. I mean, Liz Weir is as status quo as you get lately and the other two parties are keeping the boat so steady on the status quo, you wouldn't even know it was in the water.
Just another reality comment that makes me very sad. Maybe I should start siding with the guys around the province who tout for more government money so as to subsidize their Liberal friendly consultants via stealth-like organizations that adocate the status quo.
Disagree on what? I can give you a concrete example, at the very first meetings of the committee a group came from Maine to present Maine's version of democracy. Namely, citizens initiatives and local referenda. That was nixed outright, it never even made to the committee report to government.
As I've posted extensively, the LNG terminal is a perfect example of where citizens initiatives and referenda would not only be invaluable, but clearly present a case where they are damn near ESSENTIAL for the province to be remotely called democratic.
And seeing that it is used in a state which shares the longest border with the province, which is increasingly being partnered for economic development and 'Atlantica', its quite interesting that this wouldn't even be addressed by the committee. Of course its obvious WHY, in fact I found it very sadly amusing that one of the main Irving reporters, during the last election, made the point that she had heard something about that there may be a referendum on something or other!
As for current tactics, I'm not so sure. You can go back through the records and find lots of people who made comments on PR to the committee, some were groups in New Brunswick. Anybody who is a member of the NDP is a shoe in, so going through past elections and finding NDP people who ran and anybody from their albeit flimsy teams is a start.
It's a hard slog because you can forget about media attention, except maybe CBC. However, it only takes maybe a dozen to be a 'chapter' of fairvote. You may have to be less incognito though. I never understood why the NDP didn't grab right onto this and even make the PARTY practically the local chapter.
But people don't join becuase they don't KNOW about it. That is the hardest slog of all, but I may be able to help once this referendum is done here. I've a few ideas of my own:)
You're more kmowledgable on the NDP than I am. Do you know if either candidate that is running this weekend for the leadership is pushing hard for this stuff?? And I'm not talking about a couple of lines on a website, that kind of thing.
At the moment, other than what Bernard Lord brought forward, I haven't seen any efforts from either Volpe or Graham to push this kind of stuff.
Although, I'm sure Volpe took a pledge to just man the ship until someone gets in there to forward ideas. Not an easy job that.
There I can't help, I only know what I read, and don't know anything about the internal workings of the NDP or even who those people are. Here in ontario is the first time I've ever voted NDP, and thats because they've stated that regardless of the referendum vote they will institute MMP. However, Bob Rae also said that way back when, but times are far different.
My wife made the joke that because the main four parties were all women candidates, I was basing my vote on whoever has the biggest boobs. But honestly, I think for some people there really isn't much more substance to vote on than that.
I would love to simply call up Bernard Lord and ask him about the two referenda he called. I'm not positive, however, things are literally getting so bad that politicians have to have some sort of direct democracy to seem remotely legitimate. Voter interest is plummeting so fast that I think even political leaders are worried. As I've said before, the 93 referendum scared the bejesus out of politicians. Learning just how differently canadians viewed the country from themselves was a real shock and governments still haven't forgotten.
However, I'm pretty sure Lord knew the outcome of the VLT vote, but if not then he had the sunset clause built in to kill it anyway. This referendum was a bit different, but once again the tories aren't stupid, they made sure to have the referendum, like last time, during MUNICIPAL elections. Of course virtually nobody shows up to vote then, and the ones that do are the ones tied body and soul to the status quo.
It would be very dangerous to have a referendum during a provincial election. First of all, New Brunswickers show up in far greater numbers to vote provincially. Something I've always found odd since the two parties are so similar and the NDP dont' have a chance anyway.
However, second, the elections are usually so lacking in actual policies that people might actually look at the referendum question. But again, there was so much press about the two parties in the spring, and so much bad press about the NDP, that its a given that a minority government is the last thing many NBers would want to see.
Plus, proportional representation is such a big deal now,with so many pushing for it, that you look like a political backwater if you DON"T have some kind of vote.
THat's why its a little odd that Graham would cancel it. He's got to know that there was virtually no chance in hell it would pass. However, just having a referendum is dangerous because people start thinking 'if we can vote on this, why can't we vote on the LNG deal? Or pension funding? Or economic development?...' and on and on. Liberals have always been staunchly opposed to direct democracy.
The tories know eventually they'll get back in, so they don't want it. And as you say, not enough New Brunswickers know enough about it for any politician to take it on as a campaign promise. The NDP though, even with 5% would have held the balance of power, so you'd think they'd have been talking it up and down. But the referendum was announced in the spring, and the NDP didn't even have a website up until well into the election. Weird.
But for lobbying, I think facebook is the place to go. There needs to be some kind of 'hook' though to get people to even pay attention. I think its POSSIBLE that with enough lobbying a referendum could be possible at the next provincial election. But it won't be easy.
As for the NDP, there's always been a sneaky conspiracy theory that there is really NO NDP party in the province, and the other parties just have a few proxies in there to make it seem like there is. Thats overkill, but they don't even seem to TRY to get unions active. NB has a lot of unions, although the public sector ones are much different than the private sector ones. And teachers and civil servants certainly don't seem to be suffering, which means THEY might fear changes to the status quo as much as anybody. But who knows...
As for the NDP, there's always been a sneaky conspiracy theory that there is really NO NDP party in the province, and the other parties just have a few proxies in there to make it seem like there is.
Interesting point. Although, I would blame most of that on the organizers of the party. And trust me, I know 'em well as my former university prof. was president of the party and is now running one of the chaps campaigns. He can be seen in the bowling picture on one of the candidates sites. He holds a very strong opinion against welfare and people in poverty. The kind of ppl that party should be going after as members. Go figure.
Anyway, if anything, keeping MMP or STV off the agenda and out of the minds of voters in New Brunswick is a good thing for the Liberals.
Look at it this way, if the NDP were to add voices in the legislature (via MMP), especially ones that start talking about issues like poverty, direct democracy, abortion covered by medicare, pushing human rights, higher taxes for programs, etc., etc. This will force the hand of the other traditional parties to start talking tough on their own principles (the pendulum effect so to speak).
In other words, the tories (most likely) would be forced to add tax issues more strongly, pro-life, pro-family policies, better balanced budget legislation, corporate welfare ban, etc, etc. into their daily rhetoric. Not to mention, with a competitive third or fourth party, tranditional parties would not have the luxury of ingnoring the grassroots. Therefore, they would be forced (possibly) into holding town halls in all regions, not to mention, adopting referenda on certain issues.
Anyway, that's how I see MMP or STV influencing the political landscape. It's not just a means to stop false majorities. It is much more than that. A more diverse group of voices would be heard and more ideas would be touted or represented.
I think you just gave credence to my little 'theory'. If the NDP are talking like that, then its the most bizarre NDP platform I've ever heard (depending of course on the context). It also explains a lot about their lack of support, perhaps people simply know they are not the NDP party except in name.
I'm assuming the guy isn't with Dennis Atchison's campaign, I just checked out his website and it leans pretty heavily to main NDP principles.
There's no doubt what MMP CAN do to a legislature. The NDP would get more seats, and as often said, at the very least 'things get a lot more interesting'. People would be paying a lot more attention to what individual MLA's say, and right now I don't think most NBers could even name most MLA's or recognize them on the street. I can't even find out how any of them VOTE in the legislature, that's how bad it is.
There's not much doubt about the grassroots theory either, although the direct democracy thing is a stretch. The NDP, like other parties, does not like direct democracy. THere's a reason that the US and other countries have strict term limits, and you can add the Parti Quebecois and the Reform party as two parties that stabbed their grassroots constituency in the back once they got the taste of power.
That's why I don't hold much stock with MMP in New Brunswick. For reasons you mention about the NDP guy I think NO MLA is willing to actually listen to a constituency majority. There are, of course, serious problems with direct democracy in a province where one family owns so much media. However, with the internet and the already 'spurious trust' that NBers have of Irving media I'd take my chances with direct voting of the population over the MLA's suddenly 'seeing the democratic light' any day of the week.
I can't even find out how any of them VOTE in the legislature, that's how bad it is.
Just like we can't find out where the money came from at election time, etc.
See Elections Alberta as an example. They disclose the individual, corporate and union donations, etc. right on their website for all to see. And for all parties I might add.
Can you imagine if Elections NB had this kind transparency.
Just to clarify, the donations have to be reported (obviously), but the big difference here is they [Elections NB] do not make them as publically accessible as the Alberta Elections' site.
If they do, can you point me in the right direction. I am dying to get my hands on a few old donors lists.
It also explains a lot about their lack of support, perhaps people simply know they are not the NDP party except in name.
To clarify on your above point, what I was trying to say is that there are many educated socialist, like my former prof, with an elitist attitude. In other words, they stick their nose up at ppl like Charles Leblanc because they view them as intellectual inferiors.
I'm not sure if that's a "sneaky conspiracy" as much as a problem that exist amongst all NDP organiztions. A problem they must overcome if they are to get their message out to the masses.
Obviously something they have failed miserably at so far in New Brunswick.
For the record, it's the guy w/t the target on his back. Good prof that one.
Not sure if he still has a copy of my 60 page paper on Max Webber? Let me tell you, the sight of just one page is enough to scare anyone --- even a socialist.
Yes, there are lots of elitist NDPers, which is exactly my point about direct democracy. However, in Manitoba the NDP is quite different, it depends on the membership, which in NB is pretty sparse.
Farmers in the NDP and refinery workers in an NDP are a lot different than sociology profs and CUPE dolls. That helps explain a lot about the NDP.
As for secrecy, I agree, I think we had a similar debate at David's blog a little while ago about dollars going into economic development.
For party donations the only thing I can add is I remember when it was discussed about Lord's salary and Irvings paper were explicit that 'party salaries are public records'. And Irvings papers wouldn't lie would they?
I think the 'Access to Information' people are next.
Looks like you guys have the same problem as Ontario these days. No voices for freedom. Keep up the good work.
Thanks ken. Stay tuned for Part II and III.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home