Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) and other Reviews of Platform Costing

8 posts / 0 new

Sun, 2021-09-12 12:55

jerrym

Below is a review of the NDP's Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) reviews of platform costing.

The federal NDP is promising $214 billion in new spending over the next five years, according to a costing breakdown of its platform commitments released Saturday. Much of that spending would be offset by $166 billion in revenue raised during the same period through a series of new taxes and other measures targeted at wealthy individuals and large, profitable corporations. ...

The costed platform calls for $40 billion in additional spending for 2021-22. It predicts a steep deficit of $145 billion in 2021-22, which would shrink to $53 billion the next year before declining gradually to $34 billion in 2025-26. There is no immediate plan to get back to budgetary balance, but party officials point to the declining debt-to-GDP ratio — which would go from 48% in 2021-22 to 45.8% by 2025-26 — as an indication that the party has a clear path back to balance.

Unlike the Conservative Party platform, which proposes cancelling the Liberal's big-ticket promise to spend $30 billion to build a national child-care program, the NDP plans to honour the existing deals the Liberals have signed with several provinces and to finish building a national system.

The most expensive line item in the NDP costing is $68 billion in new health-care spending over the next five years, which would fund universal prescription drug coverage, expand long-term care and home-care options, and cover dental care and mental health expenses for many Canadians on the lower end of the income spectrum.

The party says this would bring its platform the closest to meeting the provincial and territorial premiers' demand to have the federal government cover 35 per cent of all health-care costs — which would amount to increasing the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) by $28 billion per year. (The Conservative platform would inject $60 billion into health care over the next 10 years with no strings attached, although most of that money would be coming in the latter half of the decade. The Liberals would create a dedicated mental health transfer and say they are willing to negotiate increases the CHT).

The NDP is also proposing to spend $26 billion to fight climate change and support workers who may need to transition out of high-polluting industries such as oil and gas. In addition, the party would redirect $35 billion already budgeted for projects with the Canadian Infrastructure Bank into a "climate bank," which would have a mandate to boost investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency and low-carbon technology.

Another $30 billion would go toward efforts to achieve reconciliation with Indigenous people. More than half of that amount would be invested to bring the federal government in compliance with a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling by compensating First Nations families and children who were removed from their homes and placed in the child welfare system. ...

Below are the revenue raising measures and the amounts the party projects each would bring in:

$60 billion through a 1% annual tax on households with wealth over $10 million.

$44 billion through raising the capital gains inclusion rate to 75% from 50% .

$25 billion through raising the corporate income tax rate to 18% from 15%. This would apply only to businesses that make more than $500,000 in profit.

$14 billion through an "excess profit tax" on companies that made large profits during the COVID-19 pandemic. This would apply to only some companies that make profit in excess of $10 million per year.

$12 billion through cracking down on tax havens. The Canada Revenue Agency would receive $100 million in extra funding to expand its capability to track down such funds.

All of the above revenue items have been costed by the PBO, according to party officials.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-platform-costing-1.6172629

Sun, 2021-09-12 13:08

jerrym

Costing of the Conservative platform shows it would only spend just $3.6B of its $60B health care promised in the first five years among other misleading promises, including the cancelling of the Liberal child care plan, which would be transferred to measures that primarily favor the well-off. Its $9.7 billion in funding for fiscal stabilization would primarily go to Alberta and Saskatchewan as compensation for continuing their fossil fuel economy and $2.5 billion for the fossil fuel's carbon capture schemes that have shown little promise:

The Conservatives have released a costing breakdown of their platform commitments that says a government headed by Erin O'Toole would deliver $52.5 billion in new spending over the next five years, with no plan to return to budgetary balance before then.

The costing, carried out by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, projects how much Conservative platform promises would cost over the next five years.

The platform calls for $52.5 billion in new spending over five years, with $29.6 billion planned for 2021-22. The costing predicts a deficit of $168 billion in 2021-22 that would decline gradually to $24.7 billion in 2025-26. ...

The Conservatives intend to cancel the Liberals' child care plan, which would free up $26.7 billion. Some of that money would go toward O'Toole's promised child care tax credit, which the PBO said would cost $2.6 billion over the next five years. ...

One of the biggest financial commitments the Conservatives have made during the election campaign is to increase the annual rise in health transfers to the provinces from a minimum of three per cent now to a minimum of six per cent. The Conservatives say that adjustment to the Canada Health Transfer would inject $60 billion into health care over the next 10 years. The PBO's costing, however, says that boost in the health transfer would amount only to $3.6 billion in new spending between now and 2025-26.

According to the PBO, 2021-22 would see no health care funding increase under the Conservatives' plan, but the extra funding in 2022-23 would amount to $304 million before rising to $329 million the following year, $901 million in 2024-25 and $2 billion in 2025-26. Unlike the Liberals, who are promising to allocate funds specifically for mental health under a proposed new Mental Health Transfer, the Conservatives say they would encourage the provinces to fund improved mental health services using the extra money in the Canada Health Transfer. ...

he Conservatives' promise to double the Canada Workers Benefit, up to a maximum of $2,800 for individuals or $5,000 for families, is expected to cost $24 billion over the next five years — $1.3 billion this year, rising to $5.7 billion in 2025-26.

The Conservatives are promising a Canada Seniors Care Benefit, which would give $200 per month per household to any Canadian living with and taking care of a parent over the age of 70. According to the PBO, that commitment would cost about a $500 million a year, totalling $2.49 billion over five years.

The Canada Investment Accelerator — which the Conservatives say would provide a 5 per cent tax credit for any capital investment made in 2022 and 2023, with the first $25,000 refundable for small businesses — would cost $13.8 billion over five years, says the PBO.

The one-month GST holiday the Conservatives have promised to provide in the fall would come at a cost of $1.8 billion.

Another significant item in the Conservatives' plan is $9.7 billion in funding for fiscal stabilization, all of which would come in 2021-22.

A Conservative official speaking on background said about half of that money would be used to make retroactive payments to provinces hit hard by the collapse in the price of oil: Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador.

A Conservative official speaking on background said about half of that money would be used to make retroactive payments to provinces hit hard by the collapse in the price of oil: Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador. Over the next five years, the Conservatives carbon capture plan would cost $2.5 billion while its "Natural Climate Solutions" plan would cost $1.5 billion.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-platform-costs-otoole-1.6...

Sun, 2021-09-12 13:33

jerrym

Here's a review of the Liberal platform costs and revenue.

The platform promises $78 billion in new spending over five years and is costed (although not fully), in comparison to the NDP and Conservative platforms, which rely on the Parliamentary Budget Officer to review their plans. ...

The Liberal plan includes both new and many previously announced platform planks, such as a national child care plan, funding for long-term care and programs aimed at addressing the cost of housing.

New items in the platform include: a mental health transfer to the provinces, a new minimum 15% tax on high earners, a proposal to allow new parents with student loans to pause them, a new law protecting abortion access, new EI measures for the self-employed, extending the Canada Recovery Hiring Program, and $400 million over four years in additional funding for CBC/Radio-Canada. Generally speaking, however, the platform articulates a continuation of an agenda that the Liberals had already begun while presiding over a minority government. ...

The Liberal platform pledges to launch a $1 billion fund, announced earlier in the campaign, to support provinces and territories that implement proof of vaccination requirements. It also promises to table legislation to protect businesses and organizations that decide to require proof from legal challenges.

The plan details investments in COVID-19 research (like the other parties’ plans) and “free COVID-19 vaccine boosters” as needed, although the sitting government has been negotiating booster procurement since early spring. Given concerns about vaccine nationalism, where rich countries such as Canada move on to COVID-19 booster shots as many parts of the world await their first round of vaccines, it’s important to note the Liberal platform promises to donate at least 200 million vaccine does to vulnerable populations around the world through COVAX by the end of 2022. Comparatively, the NDP promises to support the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Waiver (TRIPS), which would waive intellectual property rights for COVID-19 vaccines and ensure the required technology transfer so low-income countries can make vaccines locally. New COVID-19-related promises include funding to provinces to improve air ventilation in schools, which is critical given that the Delta variant is considered to be airborne, and investments in mental health for those disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

There aren’t any surprises in the Liberal platform on child care. If re-elected, they would: cut child care fees in half in 2022, deliver $10-a-day child care within five years, build 250,000 new child care spaces (although it’s not clear if those will be public spaces), hire 40,000 more early childhood educators, and finalize agreements with remaining provinces and territories. These investments will help to boost critical capacity in child care services and women’s sustained engagement in paid employment while generating revenues to spur Canada’s economic recovery. Once we’re down to $10 a day, the savings for parents would be substantial, as we’ve examined previously.

The Liberal Party is also pledging large-scale investments in health care through a series of conditional transfers to the provinces and territories: $6 billion to reduce health system wait times in 2021-22 (on top of the $4 billion in one-time spending promised in Budget 2021) and another $3.2 billion over four years for the hiring of 7,500 new family doctors, nurses and nurse practitioners. $4.5 billion is being targeted to mental health services plus an additional $500 million for student services and $1.4 billion to co-develop an Indigenous mental health strategy.

The Liberals are promising to introduce new federal legislation “to ensure that seniors are guaranteed the care they deserve,” along with $9 billion in targeted investments over five years to expand the number and quality of long-term care beds, train up to 50,000 new personal support workers, and boost wages among these workers to at least $25 per hour.

A distinctions-based, community-led, Indigenous Long-term and Continuing Care Framework would be co-developed. The investment in the care workforce, in particular, is essential to turning around Canada’s flawed system of support for seniors and people with disabilities. ...

There are a few new proposals to support families in this platform, including investments to speed up processing times for family reunification and to support families pursuing in vitro fertilization and adoption. The Liberal Party is also proposing to convert the old non-refundable Canada Caregiver Credit into a refundable, tax-free Canada Caregiver Credit that will deliver up to $1,250 per year to eligible families.

The platform concludes with a disability statement promising to re-introduce and implement the Canada Disability Benefit Act, creating a direct monthly payment for low-income Canadians with disabilities ages 18-64. ...

When it comes to climate policy, the Liberals build on their work in government over the past six years. To date, those policies have been both unprecedented and inadequate, which is to say that the Liberals’ climate plans wildly surpass all previous federal efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and yet have fallen short of actually reducing emissions in line with Canada’s targets. In this new platform, the Liberals commit to doubling down on their current approach. They promise a higher carbon price, more money for green infrastructure, more subsidies for clean tech manufacturing, more incentives for consumer energy efficiency and greater attention paid to climate adaptation and nature conservation.

However, there is little new money for these initiatives beyond what was included in Budget 2021, which falls short of the public investment needed for a rapid transformation of the economy away from fossil fuels....

The elephant in the room, which all parties continue to avoid, is what to do about the oil and gas industry, which accounts for more than a quarter of Canada’s emissions. The Liberals propose to end fossil fuel subsidies by 2023 while imposing a new regulatory cap on oil and gas emissions, which at least acknowledges the problem, but falls far short of actively winding down production. The Liberals seem content with Canada producing (slightly cleaner) fossil fuels well into the future, even as the International Energy Agency warns of huge declines in global demand.

Support for workers was the second largest area of support during the pandemic, just after support for businesses. The pandemic illustrated how ill-prepared the old Employment Insurance (EI) system was to manage mass unemployment. The old rules were also substantially improved to deal with the layoffs from the pandemic. However, that is all set to end on October 27, when Canada will largely return to the old EI rules, with the exception of a universal, relatively low entrance requirement of 420 hours. But the replacement rate will drop to 55%, the number of eligibility weeks for benefits will plummet, self-employed and gig workers will lose all support, and there will be no new fundamental contributions from the federal government. The Liberal platform commits to a new CRA-run EI system for the self-employed. ...

The Liberal platform includes a number of measures aimed at assisting first-time home buyers. These include a rent-to-own program, a tax-free first home savings account, the doubling of the first-time home buyer’s tax credit, shared-equity mortgage options, the reduction of mortgage insurance premiums, and increasing the insured mortgage cut-off. These measures can help some families to get through the last mile of the housing ownership race. The problem is, most tenant families are nowhere near that last mile.

Take rent-to-own plans, for example. They allow buyers to lock in a property early, carefully negotiate a mortgage, and save a bit on the down payment. In today’s housing market, given how much is needed for a down payment on average homes, rent-to-own plans are not a deal-maker. They’re at best a final push, for some. The vast majority of tenant families will never qualify for such a program. ...

The tax-free savings account is another example. It purportedly combines features of an RRSP and a TFSA to help families afford a down payment faster—which begs the question, do renters currently use those accounts? Most don’t. According to the most recent data available, 70% of tenant households have zero dollars in the TFSAs; 75% have zero dollars in RRSPs. The savings instrument doesn’t seem to be the problem as much as the lack of money to put in it. ...

Like the Conservative’s platform, a set of Liberal proposals focus on corruption activities and foreigner speculation, which are worth pursuing but are unlikely to have a notable impact on housing prices, especially since some provinces are already dealing with the foreigner ownership question.

On the regulatory front, the Liberal platform also promises to ban bidding wars—a long overdue policy—and to curb flipping within a 12-month period. The latter could also be a step in the right direction if it was stricter. Given the measure includes exceptions for “changes in life circumstances,” a longer cooling period (say, three years) would ensure the policy meets its stated objective.

Finally, the platform mentions the need to stop “renovictions” and review the tax treatment of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), although details are missing, and they matter a great deal. The proposed surtax on “renovictions” may not have any impact if applied only on the first year following the flip because landlords will stand to gain from the flip in the following years. In regards to REITs, the platform notably uses cautious language (“review”), without mentioning any timeline or targets.

In sum, the housing platform includes many measures that will likely benefit only a small share of the population...

The Liberal platform promises to provide $400 million over four years to the CBC/Radio-Canada with the goal of eliminating advertising in news and public affairs programming. ...

Our Alternative Federal Budget has long advocated for higher corporate income taxes to fund much-needed public services. Canada’s record-low rates are simply giving the corporate sector a free ride that hasn’t gone to increased investments—it’s gone to higher shareholder payouts and soaring executive bonuses. The new 3% surtax on banks and insurance companies would do just that and possibly opens up the door to raising rates generally. ...

t's too bad that the general CIT rate didn’t go up by 3%. As a refresher, only companies making profits pay corporate taxes, so a higher rate doesn’t harm struggling industries. Banks do make a good target, as they tend to pay closer to the statutory rate than other industries that use a variety of tactics to avoid taxation. The next two bigger tax measures include a reduction in the personal tax gap and a minimum tax rule for top earners. Both of these would be pretty progressive. ...

The flipping tax is discussed briefly in the housing section of this analysis. However, given the very low revenue that it is expected to generate, this means the anti-flipping tax rate that would be charged under this plan would be pretty high—so high that most flippers will work hard to avoid it by holding their properties for over a year, and therefore keeping government revenue from this new tax low. ...

Despite costing very little, the platform proposes an expansion of the Educator School Supply Tax Credit. This is a boutique tax credit in which teachers can claim some of the things they buy for their classrooms back on their taxes. It amounts to almost nothing in terms of a refund, it complicates the tax code, and it should be cancelled, not expanded, so as to put the boutique tax credit era to an end.

As a final point, it's important that Canada continue modernizing its corporate tax system to stop tax avoidance that has become endemic among large multinational corporations. If companies never declare profits in Canada because they’ve shifted them elsewhere, it doesn’t matter what the tax rate is. A global minimum tax, committed to in the Liberal platform, is an important means of getting around the accounting games. It would mean that no matter where you say the profits emerge, companies can’t avoid a 15% corporate tax. The OECD has been making important moves in the right direction. However, countries like Canada may eventually have to put their foot down irrespective of that process and impose restrictions unilaterally at first, although that is certainly not what is being proposed. ...

The Liberal platform inadvertently illustrates that the return (or not) of economic growth is really what will drive deficits in years to come, not government spending. Rapidly picking up economic growth again will be critical to the federal government in the years to come. One of the important ways to do that is through government investment.

https://monitormag.ca/articles/platform-crunch-2021-liberals-release-cos...

Sun, 2021-09-12 14:29

jerrym

Here's another look at a Conservative platform review.

Some of the big ticket items in this platform include: large increases to military spending, which could cost upwards of $20 billion more a year; higher health care transfers and equalization payments to the provinces; doubling the Canada Workers Benefit; and an expanded child care expense deduction. There are few money-raising proposals, outside of cancelling the $10-a-day child care plan that is being negotiated with a number of provinces.

The platform commits to greater support for re-opening businesses, including a large expansion of the small business loan program and tax credits for Canadians who spend money at food and accommodation businesses (similar to those already in existence both federally and provincially).

The Conservatives also commit to workers on EI receiving 75% of previous earnings (instead of 55%) during recessions. Improving the replacement rate is something that we’ve detailed in our Alternative Federal Budget, although we’ve suggested it be permanent, not just during recessions. In the end, businesses have received 50% more support than jobless workers so far through the pandemic ($180 billion vs. $120 billion). ...

the Conservatives promise to stockpile PPE and to ensure Canada has the ability to make needed supplies and vaccines domestically—although the NDP commits to make vaccine production a public entity while the Conservatives appear to be choosing the private path by partnering with pharmaceutical companies (an approach that was taken this year by the federal government, which it announced agreements with two U.S.-based vaccine manufacturers to produce COVID-19 and mRNA vaccines in Canadian facilities). ...

This year, the party is supporting targeted investments for hard-hit sectors, such as hospitality and tourism—which are large employers of women workers—and new investments in training, with an emphasis on “traditionally underrepresented groups.”

The party is also proposing to boost funding for child care to enable more women to take up paid employment. Here we are on more familiar territory. There is a clear battle of ideas around child care shaping up, with the promise of the Conservatives to cancel the $10-a-day plan for universal child care promised by the Liberal Party and the NDP—just as they did in 2006. In its place, this time around, the Conservative Party is proposing to replace the Child Care Expense Deduction with a refundable tax credit, covering up to 75% of child care expenses up to a maximum of $6,000 for families earning less than $150,000/year. This credit is modelled on a similar Ontario program, which was introduced in 2019, that delivers an average of $1,300 to families. ...

What we know from studies in Quebec, which has both $8.75-a-day child care and a generous tax credit regime for those paying for for-profit care, is that it’s two-to-three times cheaper for middle class families to be in an $8.75-a-day spot than in the for-profit system—even after taking the tax credit into account. Moreover, the quality of care is lower in the for-profit system in Quebec, despite costing parents more. At a system level, a tax credit does nothing to cap fee increases, which CCPA research shows have been galloping ahead of inflation for years. In almost every big city, for-profit care has higher fees than non-profit care. Flooding more money into the private care market only drives up costs for parents and it does nothing to build affordable high-quality services in communities that need it most. Offering cash incentives to parents—inevitably too small—won’t fix this problem. If this was so, we wouldn’t be in the situation we are in today.

It’s difficult to imagine how Canada can bring about meaningful change for families and advance women’s economic security without the resources and the will to make it happen. The different policy options on offer, of course, aren’t inherently progressive or regressive. Rather, it all comes down to their vision and design, which is why it is so critically important to unpack the ideas about gender, family and government that inform each proposal—and to look at what kind of money is on the table.

This is also crucial to moving forward with reforms to Canada’s grievously flawed system of long-term care. On this key file, the Conservative party is proposing to target $3 billion of infrastructure funding over the next three years to help renovate facilities and to bring in a new Canada Seniors Care Benefit, paying $200 per month per household to any person living with and caring for a parent over the age of 70. A Conservative government will also prioritize immigrants applying to work as Personal Support Workers in long-term care or home care. ...

The Conservative Party is also proposing a much larger funding envelope for strengthening mental health and addictions services, boosting the annual growth rate of the Canada Health Transfer to at least 6% and dedicating a portion of these funds to mental health. Likewise, the NDP has committed to making large scale investments in mental health, extending mental health care for uninsured Canadians as a first step and establishing a new national pharmacare program that would expand access to crucial medications. This is the scale of investment needed to drive change. Where these parties differ is in approach, with Conservatives favouring untied funds and private market delivery and the NDP favouring strong public services. ...

Emissions reductions in the Conservative plan hinge mainly on a zero-emission vehicle mandate by 2030, an enhanced Low Carbon Fuel Standard and energy efficiency retrofits for buildings. These are smart and proven policies, although most other parties have since made similar commitments.

The Conservative plan is mainly distinguished by its enthusiastic support of lower-carbon fossil fuel production and carbon offsets in lieu of actual reductions in oil and gas production. The plan includes $5 billion for carbon capture technology and $3 billion for natural carbon sinks. ...

Emissions reductions in the Conservative plan hinge mainly on a zero-emission vehicle mandate by 2030, an enhanced Low Carbon Fuel Standard and energy efficiency retrofits for buildings. These are smart and proven policies, although most other parties have since made similar commitments.

The Conservative plan is mainly distinguished by its enthusiastic support of lower-carbon fossil fuel production and carbon offsets in lieu of actual reductions in oil and gas production. The plan includes $5 billion for carbon capture technology and $3 billion for natural carbon sinks. ...

On housing, the Conservative platform bets heavily on supporting the real estate industry while failing to explain how such support would translate into lower rents for low- and moderate-income tenants or reasonable prices for first-time home buyers. ...

The platform’s main plank is to “build 1 million homes in the next three years.” To achieve this goal, the Conservative Party promises to “build transit infrastructure that connects homes and jobs by bringing public transit to where people are buying homes.” If those homes already exist, and people are already buying them, it is unclear how improving transit will increase supply. ...

A second set of proposals focus on corruption activities and foreigner speculation driving up housing prices. While the dismantling of money laundering and terrorism financing schemas are goals worth pursuing, these targeted law enforcement measures will not have a notable impact on a housing market of more than 14 million households. ...

Like the Liberal Party and the NDP, the Conservative Party didn’t resist the temptation of offering cheaper and easier-to-get mortgages to first-time home buyers. This is not the place to unpack this broader and fundamental issue; suffice to say that making it easier for families to take on ever-larger debt is no solution to housing insecurity....

The Conservative platform promises to continue trade and investment negotiations with India and “[a]nimate the full potential of the Canada-UK trade deal.” The current government is already trying to conclude a free trade agreement with India and is about to start negotiating a post-CETA deal with Britain. The current government also launched free trade talks with Indonesia this year, but this free trade agreement is not mentioned in the Conservative platform. ...

In a section called “Supporting Workers,” the Conservatives propose to “give unions standing at the Canada International Trade Tribunal to allow them to bring actions on issues like dumping.” This proposal, which is supported by labour unions in Canada, would give unions similar rights as in the United States to request investigations into the dumping of surplus foreign products at below-market prices on the Canadian market. On its own, though, a trade remedies update will not fix the corporate bias in Canada’s trade deals, which give investors hard and enforceable rights while putting hurdles in front of effective worker- and climate-focused policy.

By and large, though, the Conservative platform offers a status quo vision for trade policy: protection of supply managed farming sectors, new markets for Canada’s export-oriented farming sectors, a promise to “[r]esolve the Softwood Lumber Dispute with the United States” (good luck to them), and much closer trade, security and digital policy co-ordination with “free” (suspiciously white and anglo) countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Ukraine and the U.K.

The cancellation of the $10-a-day child care plan is the biggest single funder of the Conservative platform.

https://monitormag.ca/articles/platform-crunch-conservatives-release-fiv...

Sun, 2021-09-12 14:40

jerrym

Here's another review of the NDP platform and its costing.

the NDP is attempting to frame what this election should be about. Its commitments include, among other things:

COVID-19 response items;

Care economy items, such as a national child care plan, pharmacare, and dental care programs;

Climate emergency response, starting with a cabinet committee;

Affordability issues, such as housing, high-speed internet and cell phone service, as well as targeted student debt forgiveness;

A national action plan for reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, to which the NDP devotes considerable space in its 115-page document.

The NDP is promising to establish a crown corporation charged with domestic vaccine production, to maintain an adequate personal protective equipment stockpile (including support for domestic production), and more support for the Public Health Agency of Canada. In contrast, the Conservatives announced a pledge earlier this summer to implement a new Canada Emergency Preparedness Plan, which would include partnering with pharmaceutical companies to increase domestic manufacturing of medicines and vaccines, addressing supply chain issues, and overhauling Canada’s emergency stockpile system. ...

Low-income, racialized and marginalized women, in particular, have bore the brunt of economic losses and continue to wait for September to roll around, hoping that their children will be safe in schools as the fourth COVID-19 wave takes hold. For its part, the NDP is promising to deliver affordable child care for all families, to help support women’s employment and spur the economic recovery. In the short term, it will extend support to not-for-profit centres at risk of closure to preserve the supply of valuable child care spaces. The NDP will not be ripping up the new child care agreements being negotiated this summer by the sitting government. ...

The NDP is also promising to make parental leave more flexible for eligible families (allowing parents to take shorter leaves at a higher replacement rate) and for self-employed parents wishing to opt into the system before the birth of a child. As part of its Employment Insurance (EI) reform plans, the NDP will make EI available to people who quit their jobs to go back to school, to provide necessary child care, or to protect their health or the health of immunocompromised family members. Like the current suite of emergency benefits, this proposal adopts a more expansive approach to caregiving. ...

The NDP commits to tackle wait times and improve access to primary care—a commitment that is a constant for many parties during an election but this time, due to COVID-19, there is a longer than usual backlog for many procedures and surgeries. We’ll say this of all parties: it’s going to take a major federal funding commitment to make this promise a reality, and it’s worth it.

The commitments document is not very precise on the crucial question of long-term care reform. It promises to work with stakeholders to develop national care standards for home care and long-term care and to provide the resources needed to enforce them. This, along with several other programs, is designed to support seniors—including a national pharmacare plan, more supported housing, pension protections and the full restoration of home-to-home mail delivery. ...

There are a number of interesting and novel ideas in the document—at least for Canadian politics—that could potentially differentiate the NDP from other parties. The NDP proposes a Canadian Climate Bank to finance the green economy while creating a Civilian Climate Corps to hire young workers for in-demand green jobs. An Office of Environmental Justice would lead the charge to address environmental racism and advance the idea of a just transition.

Where the platform most obviously comes up short is on oil and gas production. A commitment to phase out fossil fuel subsidies is welcome, but the NDP commits neither to stopping new oil and gas projects nor setting an end date for the extraction and processing of fossil fuels. There is no place for oil, gas and coal in our zero-carbon future. The question in this election is: will any party name this elephant in the room? ...

Affordability is a perennial NDP plank. Aside from child care, housing is one of the biggest expenses that a household faces.

Housing: The NDP promises to, among other things, create at least 500,000 units of quality, affordable housing over the next 10 years and fully fund an Indigenous National Housing Strategy. Given the prominence of affordable housing as an issue, we’ll be watching for more specifics on this file and whether other political parties will step up to create more affordable housing, including rental units.

Child care: That second big household expense, child care, gets covered in the NDP’s promise of a universal $10-a-day child care system—something the governing Liberals have already begun to negotiate with a number of provinces.

Tuition: For post-secondary students, the NDP is promising a targeted program to forgive up to $20,000 in student debt, remove interest from federal student loans, and move toward non-repayable grants. This promise could possibly differentiate the NDP or condition the field for other parties to follow suit.

Transit: The NDP is also committing to help provinces and municipalities “build towards fare-free transit” and to replace Greyhound bus routes with “a public inter-city bus system.” Given the need, it will be interesting to see if other parties go here too or if the best they can do is offer high-speed rail between the Quebec-Windsor corridor, which seems to get trotted out at election time but never delivered on. For its part, the NDP is promising “high-frequency rail” along that corridor and expanding rail options in other regions.

Telecommunications: Making high-speed broadband available everywhere by 2025, not 2030 as the federal government currently plans, is a step that recognizes the essential role of the internet in Canadians’ lives and the Canadian economy, and the significant gaps that currently exist. The Conservatives have promised to meet this target by 2025 as well. The idea of a telecom Crown corporation, as included in the NDP commitments document, could address a key issue: Right now, the federal government and the provinces generally expand broadband by giving money to private corporations that then own the assets we helped them pay for. Why not just have our own company and own the assets ourselves? ...

A guaranteed livable income: The idea of a basic income has grown more traction in recent years. The NDP’s answer is to promise a guaranteed livable income, starting by lifting seniors and people with disabilities out of poverty. This basic income proposal, like many others, is aspirational in intent but thin on details.

Security reform: The document sets out several income security reforms designed to tackle some of the holes in Canada’s current safety net, which were blown wide open by the pandemic. This includes setting a new floor for EI benefits of $2,000/month and extending the Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit until such time as a permanent “safety net of paid sick leave across the country” can be established.

Other anti-poverty measures: New investments in affordable and supported housing, universal child care and food security round out its list of top anti-poverty priorities—all essential to ensuring that people caught on the wrong side of the pandemic are not left further behind.

How we pay for it

The NDP has a lot to say about making Canada’s tax system more progressive, including taxes that we normally put forward in our annual Alternative Federal Budget:

Increasing the capital gains inclusion rate to 75%;

Adding an additional 15% tax on large corporate windfall profits during COVID-19;

Boosting the top marginal tax rate by two points;

Creating a 1% wealth tax;

Returning the corporate income tax to 2010 levels.

https://monitormag.ca/articles/platform-crunch-ndp-releases-commitments-...

Sun, 2021-09-12 20:54

melovesproles

It was so obvious what the media narrative would be on the NDP, I just don't understand why they didn't do their homework and find some rightwing spending programs that they would cut. Not pull a Mulclair but find examples where the government is spending on things that a leftwing environmental party would oppose. Fighter jets would have been an obvious slamdunk and could have gained them credibility with the environmental movement. More revenue sources are great but it should have been one prong of a serious economic program.

Mon, 2021-09-13 00:46

jerrym

In response to the NDP costed budget Trudeau tonight said the country needs economic growth, not just higher taxes. On the CBC National He then said "The idea that you can go with unlimited zeal against the successful and wealthy in this country to pay for everything else is an idea that reaches its limits at one point".

Alex Hemingway of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), "shows that a 1-percent tax on Canadians with wealth over $20 million could generate some $10 billion in revenue during its first year. That’s almost twice the oft-cited $5.6 billion from the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO)." (https://www.bcbusiness.ca/Tax-the-richwell-the-richest-of-them-anyway-re...)

"If you’re a billionaire is looking to pass on your fortune tax-free to your kids, Canada is a great place to do it. ...Consider Tobias Lutke. According to Forbes, Lutke is now one of the richest billionaires in Canada, with an estimated net worth of $8.4 billion (U.S.). While he is of course free to give away all his money to charity, under Canada’s supposedly progressive tax system, his estate wouldn’t have to pay a cent in tax. Lutke wouldn’t be so lucky if he resided in any other Group of Seven country." (https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/08/22/why-do-canadas-w...)

As more and more Canadians fall into poverty during Covid from layoffs and other measures, "One year into the COVID-19 pandemic that has upended the lives of millions of people in this country, Canadian billionaires have increased their wealth by $78 billion. ... Together, 47 Canadian billionaires now control $270 billion in total wealth. ... Meanwhile, 5.5 million Canadian workers lost their jobs or had more than half of their hours cut at the pandemic’s peak. Inequality in Canada had already reached new extremes prior to the pandemic. The richest 1% controlled 26% of Canada’s wealth in 2016, according to a Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) report. Recent academic research suggests that figure may be even higher at 29% of wealth. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has published research showing that Canada’s 87 richest families each hold, on average, 4,448 times more wealth than the typical family. Together these 87 families hold more wealth than the bottom 12 million Canadians combined." (https://www.policynote.ca/the-rich-and-the-rest-of-us/)

Trudeau stands up for Canada's hard-done-to billionaires and makes it clear he will give them even more corporate and personal welfare, carefully hidden behind pious promises to help out the middle class and poor.

Mon, 2021-09-13 15:50

jerrym

Here's more evidence that Trudeau's comment said yesterday and shown on CBC National News that "The idea that you can go with unlimited zeal against the successful and wealthy in this country to pay for everything else is an idea that reaches its limits at one point". is BS.

Canada’s tax policies are regressive. We lag behind other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in the rates of tax levelled at those in high income brackets. Canada lacks an inheritance tax, meaning estates can be passed on to heirs with minimal tax liability, and there is special tax treatment for money earned from previously accumulated wealth. Federal tax policies are paralleled at the provincial and local levels in Ontario and Toronto. Provincially, Ontario has one of the lowest tax rates in the country (and is also among the lowest spenders on health among the provinces) and Toronto has the lowest property taxes of all the cities in the province.

Where tax policies disproportionately benefit high income groups in this country, there are promising signs of increasing public and political support for the redesign of these policies in the interest of fairness. In a 2019 OECD survey, results showed that approximately 70 per cent of Canadians felt that the rich should be taxed more, the wealth tax has become part of some political platforms in Canada, and was introduced, and voted down, as a motion in the House of Commons in November 2020. ...

Studies demonstrate that within countries in the Global North, income inequality is one of the most important determinants of health status, and impacts health at the population level, with people being healthier where there is more equal income distribution. ...

There have been multiple reports detailing how certain groups have fared poorly throughout the first and second waves of COVID-19. Low-income earners have been negatively impacted through job loss and reduced hours in many sectors. Increasingly, studies show that low-income earners, workers in precarious employment, and racialized groups have also experienced significantly higher COVID-19 infection rates compared to the rest of the population. As of November 2020, 79 per cent of reported COVID-19 cases in Toronto identified with a racialized group, while only 52 per cent of the overall population identify as belonging to a racialized group based on 2016 data.

In contrast, we have heard little about the experiences of the rich beyond depictions of the pandemic as a struggle for everyone. One exception was a report released in September by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives which found that Canada’s 20 richest billionaires had amassed $37 billion in wealth since the beginning of the pandemic in March. ...

The issue is not simply that some groups have lower income levels and experiences of economic deprivation, but that these social positions are interconnected with the extreme fortune of a much smaller group of people within our society. By framing the problem in this way, we also acknowledge that solutions are needed that focus on increasing the income levels or resources of individuals at the bottom, as well as the redistribution of the wealth accumulated at the top. ...

There is also a growing realization that the economic impacts of the pandemic will be long-lasting, with frequent comparisons to the Great Depression of the 1930s and continued uncertainty with respect to what the future holds. To endure these conditions, the need for investment into necessary social programs – housing, income security, childcare, education, and pharmacare – is clear. Tax revenue is needed to fund the social infrastructure required to offset economic precarity caused by the pandemic. ...

In this light, a wealth tax on the very rich is an important practical and symbolic step forward in our response to COVID-19. If considered as a part of a broader set of programs and policies aimed at resource redistribution – such as broader tax reform to increase fairness, universal social programs, and policies that target safe and equitable work environments – then a wealth tax could significantly reduce health and social inequities within Canada. It has been estimated that a modest one per cent tax on the wealthiest 13, 800 Canadian economic families with net wealth above $20 million (well below one per cent of the population), would generate $5.6 billion of revenue for investment into social programs.

https://www.wellesleyinstitute.com/economic-inequality/a-new-normal-for-...