The NDP, Linda McQuaig writes, is sitting in the catbird seat:
Trudeau’s prorogation seems to be a self-centred attempt to avoid further parliamentary scrutiny over WE. Still, the PM’s suddenly shaky fortune could be turned to good use, if the NDP uses its leverage to compel the minority Liberals to be as progressive as they like to portray themselves to an increasingly progressive Canadian public.
The NDP could follow in the footsteps of its feisty, one-time leader David Lewis, who in the 1970s successfully coerced Pierre Trudeau’s minority Liberals, pushing them to create a national, publicly owned oil company (Petro-Canada, unfortunately later privatized), more generous public pensions and election finance legislation aimed at curbing the political clout of the wealthy.
Today’s situation — with the pandemic worsening Canada’s already extreme inequality — cries out more than ever for bold, progressive action.
The usual resistance has surfaced:
The C.D. Howe Institute, representing Bay Street, has begun pushing for the reduction of Canada’s pandemic-related debt, while making clear that such debt reduction must not include higher taxes on the rich (even though that’s where all the money is).
But, in the United States, things are moving in the opposite direction:
Yet, with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders likely to be prominent in a Joe Biden administration, wealth taxes could well be on the government agenda, moving the U.S. tax system closer to the fairer one designed by Franklin Roosevelt. It is a system Canada copied, with great results, until the 1980s.
Furthermore, even moderate Joe Biden has embraced a Green New Deal, a massive government-led effort to transition away from fossil fuels and create a national clean-energy infrastructure, creating millions of jobs in the process.
And, make no mistake, there is similar movement here:
An Abacus poll last year found that 67 per cent of Canadians supported a wealth tax — and that’s before the pandemic drastically reduced the incomes of our most vulnerable workers. Meanwhile, the stock market soars, making a mockery of the refrain “we’re all in this together.” Depends on what you mean by together.
Trudeau has read the signs. But he's going to need a kick in the pants to get him to move. That's where the NDP comes in:
If the NDP could push Trudeau to embrace a Canadian Green New Deal, it could be an inspiring counterpoint to calls for austerity from Bay Street and Conservatives. With borrowing costs near zero, Ottawa could invest massively, as it did during the war, again fighting a crucial battle, putting Canadians to work, and growing our way out of debt.
The opportunity is clearly there. Whether we will seize it or not is the open question.
Image: socialist.ca
10 comments:
Trudeau has taken a chance because he wants to restructure and revitalize the safety net and move to a greener economy. Freeland has written as if she is in favour of better service through wealth taxes. The Morneau leaks indicate most of the Liberal caucus wants a progressive shift.
The NDP lately has been bad tempered and obstructive. If they decide, instead, to resume their historic role as futurists and idealogical leaders the remake Trudeau wants could happen. Introspection and good will on both sides are necessary but possible. The NDP has always been proud when their proposals become legislation and the Liberals have long adopted and furthered these policies.
rumleyfips
Historically, rumley, the Liberals have been wise enough to adopt several NDP policies. Pierre Trudeau and David Lewis -- both from Montreal -- spoke a common language. Let's hope that Justin and Jagmeet can speak the same language.
I left the Cons out of the previous comment because they only want to destroy society. The Bloc didn't get mentioned because I have been unsure what they are thinking. Blanchet's speech just now has clarified things. It was a separatist manifesto. Lately he has opposed any programme that would benefit all Canadian and supported support for Quebecers only as long as nobody else benefits. Party polling must show a loss of support for Blanchet.
Both the Conservatives and the Bloc are stuck in old paradigms, rumley. How much the world has changed is just dawning on almost all of us. The Conservatives and the Bloc still haven't figured out what has happened.
I have been saying for a long time now that a fair tax is a flat tax. Tax everyone by the same amount then there should be no argument.Fifteen percent of a billion still leaves a lot to go shopping for toys. Despite Hong Kong's troubles at the moment they had a flat tax and still have plenty of Tycoons to go around.
One of the problems with flat taxes has to with public investment, zoombats. There are those whose wealth very much depends on public investment in infrastructure. Those who benefit more from that public investment should pay more in taxes.
Unfortunately, for those of us who diligently pay our taxes throughout our life because we believe that this is what good Canadian citizens do. However, there are untold numbers out there who pay little to no taxes because they have perfected the art of the "underground" economy.
That's true, Lulymay. And then there are those who have worked hard to elect politicians who have vowed to lessen their tax burden. It's simple. When your tax burden continues to go down, you get richer. And you continue to benefit from public investments.
Flat taxes are not a solution Owen, because they benefit those that are well off from those that are not. Neither a fixed amount or fixed percentage aids those with low income. A flat tax might be more useful if all of the loop holes were eliminated and taxes were levied on more than income. A flat tax shifts the burden from those that have more to those that have less. If income is the primary basis of taxation, I'd rather have a progressive tax structure that rises as income rises and instead of the current limited ranges, it should be expanded to say ten brackets. As I recall the Mulroney regime reduced the number of tax brackets which shifted the tax burden to those that receive less than those at the top. Tax reform is not an easy process. As in the past we've seen changes regarding the underground economy and non-taxable benefits and entitled taxpayers finding ways to escape their responsibilities. RG
I agree, RG. Flat taxes are not a solution -- if the basis of the tax is income -- simply because differences in income are huge.
Post a Comment