Conservatives continue the positive campaign of personal responsibility
Stephen Harper and the Conservatives continue to reveal policy after policy, holding the title of the Party of Ideas and Personal Responsibility:
Conservative Leader Stephen Harper today did what he admitted was a rarity for him — jumping off a city bus before announcing a plan to give transit riders a tax break.
Mr. Harper said his proposal would save the average Canadian transit user $153 a year. He said that should be enough to ease traffic congestion and pollution by moving people from their cars and onto buses, subway cars and commuter trains.
Harper's plan would allow holders of monthly transit passes to claim a 16-per-cent tax credit. Parents would also be able to claim the credit on behalf of dependent children.
The party decided to target monthly pass holders because it makes the credit easier to administer, he said.
"The idea here is to get people to shift to regular transit usage, particularly for transport to-and-from work or to-and-from education," said Mr. Harper, who acknowledged he hasn't taken public transit to work since he was a private citizen years ago in Toronto, Edmonton and Calgary.
So if you buy the odd ticket for the odd trip, you don't save. The plan is to encourage people to buy passes, which means that the person is encouraged to use transit in order to maximize the value earned from owning the pass in the first place.
Clever.
The standard approach is to hand over a big chuck of money to the transit authority, or maybe to the city and then to the transit authority, or maybe to the province which gives it to the city which gives it to the transit authority. One or more layers of bureaucracy leach away at the money.
And money to special interest groups, the Friends-of-Mass-Transit crowd, who will use the money to "encourage" mass transit, usually by using the money to fund lobbying for government decisions designed to make life more miserable for motorists.
For instance, in 2004, the Liberals handed the Canadian Urban Transit Association in Toronto almost $400,000. This is a transfer, not a contract for specific services, which means they are not subject to audits. And what do we get for $400,000? Well, this issue paper, for example, encouraging the government to raise gasoline taxes even higher, implement road tolls, use zoning to eliminate parking spaces, all "directed at creating a general understanding and acceptance of the importance of public transit among the people who won't use it."
In case you were wondering, the Canadian Automobile Association received no money from the government according to the 2003-2004 Public Accounts of Canada -- Transfer Payments. Its activities representing the interests of drivers were paid for entirely by drivers.
I feel a hankering for beer and popcorn coming over me. Oh save me, CUTA, for my own willfull blindess, even though there is no rapid transit between my house and my job that will take less than two hours for a one way trip. Will that earn me a break for high gasoline taxes, since I don't have a choice but to drive? Hell no. Instead, the Liberal government is handing my tax dollars over to CUTA so that CUTA can encourage the Liberal government to raise my taxes until I give up in desperation.
Again, the Conservative approach is to hand money, or in this case, the tax credit, directly to the individual citizen. We get to weigh the pros and cons of personal versus private transit on an individual basis, and make a decision whether to take advantage of the program.
The cost of the program grows or shrinks based on its popularity, but never costs more than exactly what it costs to run and fund it. No waste.
No middleman eager to pad his expense account with my money.
It's a direct contract between you, the taxpayer, and the government you've elected. Unelected and elitist organizations like CUTA and other organizations shouldn't be speaking on your behalf. They should speak on behalf of their members only, the various transit authorities that pay for CUTA's research and training services.
For those who make a living by finding ways to get government money and spending it on our behalf, this sort of thing must be infuriating.
Update: I've changed the post from "personal empowerment" to "personal responsibility". My readers have convinced me that it better captures the tone of the Conservative platform.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
I'm sorry to pick on one expression out of all the good things that you are saying, Angry, but "personal empowerment" sounds like such a Bolshevik thing to say. It's such an empty and "neutral" term. We are not the party of social workers. You may as well be saying self-esteem. We recently have heard of people empowering themselves by stealing money from the state, btw.
Posted by: Civitatensis at December 29, 2005 04:07 PM
Hey Angry, thought your readers may find this amusing: http://www3.telus.net/public/safework/blog/working.swf
Posted by: Richard Evans at December 29, 2005 04:11 PM
I'm sorry to pick on one expression...
Oh, you'll be sorry. If it's the last thing I do...
OK, that moment has passed. I agree that the phrase seems trite. But I chose it on purpose -- these programs that the Conservatives are pushing are all two-way contracts -- between the private citizen and the government he helped elect. Special interest groups and lobbyists can wait outside.
It's a very personal relationship in which you are empowered to say yea or nay to what the government is offering. Seemed like the right phrase after all.
Posted by: Angry in T.O. at December 29, 2005 04:21 PM
"Personal Responsibility" is perhaps a better description. Using tax credits to promote desired behaviour is simple and very effective. This is what the Kyoto plan should be based on - not throwing $10B of our tax dollars at Librano friendly advertising agencies and consulting companies to waste and give back to the Libranos.
Posted by: taxpayer at December 29, 2005 04:25 PM
Agreed. You guys have convinced me. Change made.
Posted by: Angry in T.O. at December 29, 2005 04:39 PM
What a wonderful idea Harper et al are proposing! But isn't Harper supposed to be scary? Where's his hidden agenda?? Is that a Bible in his pocket or is he just glad to see us???
Here in Vancouver, pubic transit is always a hot topic because the infrastructure has been deliberately under-developed for decades, hoping to force people to use public transit. At the same time, the public transit system has inconvenient schedules and is so problematic that many who live in the outlying areas can't depend on it. Within the city, it's not bad but go outside of city boundary and public transit becomes hit or miss.
The result? Massive ongoing gridlock at the main choke points- usually river crossings like Port Mann Bridge (TransCanada Hwy 1), Massey Tunnel (Hwy 99), Alex Frazer Bridge (Hwy 99a) and no solutions in sight.
While Harper's proposal might not solve these issues, if it takes 5% of the single occupancy vehicles off the road, it was well worth the lost tax revenue.
Posted by: Mac at December 29, 2005 05:17 PM
Mac, even if that 5% were only 1% or 2%, think of the added revenue to the transit commissions. We might actually get rid of those mocking signs in every bus that say this transit commission is sponsored by the Ministry of Transportation.
Ministry nothing. Those signs should say "Your $2 ride was subsidized by the person in the car a lane over via their gas tax....and the tax on that gas tax.....and it would have cost you $3 if we didn't gouge him/her so much at the pump"
Posted by: TrustOnlyMulder at December 29, 2005 05:38 PM
Good suggestion, taxpayer. That sounds much better, Angry. I have tripled passworded my site anticipating your angry revenge. (;
Posted by: Civitatensis at December 29, 2005 06:09 PM
MAC,
I found the HIDDEN agenda. It took perhaps 2 minutes with a google search. I was amazed, nay SHOCKED, to discover that the HIDDEN agenda is HIDDEN in front of my face (if I am willing to admit that I can read).
How can people in good conscience support this group of thieves who have now wrapped themselves in our flag. They simply refuse to understand that they ARE the CAUSE of the problems that we now face nationally.
These are my thoughts but maybe I'm just a bitter transplanted old westerner.
Cheers
Gerry
Posted by: Gerryinmontreal at December 30, 2005 02:00 AM
I'm pretty indifferent to the tax credit on bus passes. I've been a public transit user for close to 10 years and passes are already relatively affordable ($71.25 per month where I live) compared to owning a car. The issue isn't really the cost, it's the reliability and frequency of routes. Besides, for me, the maximum tax cut I would receive is about $137 a year - money that I would prefer to see used to improve the transit system.
Besides, you're not going to promote use of the transit system unless you make it just as easy and convenient as driving to work. No one's going to shrug off their cars to wait 40 minutes in the snow because the damn bus is late again!
Mac is right - you need to create a system that is convenient for people outside the city to encourage them to take transit. Otherwise, what's the point?
Posted by: smangler at January 7, 2006 12:12 PM
 
|
|
