|
Prime Minister Harper unveils grand plan to reshape Canada
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Swamper |
Agree about the issues with OAS but all the other cutbacks.... gonna get ugly!
LINK: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...article2316795/
Prime Minister Harper unveils grand plan to reshape Canada
After five years of minority governments, Stephen Harper finally has the freedom to act.
He’s no longer looking at the limited horizon of the next budget or the next election. He’s planning on transforming Canada for a generation or more. This is Stephen Harper’s blueprint for reform.
Although short on details, Mr. Harper’s speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday made clear the sweep of his ambition. He will change how Canadians finance their retirement. He will overhaul the immigration system. He will make oil and gas exports to Asia a "national priority" and aggressively pursue free trade in India and Europe.
Several times in his speech, Mr. Harper portrayed his agenda as a fix for a generation -- a fix he claimed is necessary to confront the challenges of an aging population. Canada’s demographics, he warned, pose "a threat to the social programs and services that Canadians cherish." Preserving those social programs will likely mean cuts elsewhere.
"Western nations, in particular, face a choice of whether to create the conditions for growth and prosperity, or to risk long-term economic decline. In every decision, or failure to decide, we are choosing our future right now," Mr. Harper said.
"We’ve already taken steps to limit the growth of our health-care spending. ... We must do the same for our retirement-income system."
He said he plans to make Canada’s old-age supplement program sustainable. What that means is unclear. He did not spell out whether seniors will have to wait longer to receive the benefit or whether clawbacks would be increased for higher income earners.
Unlike the Canada Pension Plan -- which is supported by a separate and well-financed pool of savings -- there is no pot of cash to support the OAS program, which is paid out of government revenues. A recent actuarial report pointed out that the cost of OAS will climb 32 per cent between 2010 and 2015, and OAS payouts to retirees will rise to $108-billion in 2030 from $36.5-billion in 2010.
While future changes to OAS were not explained, Mr. Harper said current retirees will not be affected. The major policy reforms are in addition to looming spending cuts, which Treasury Board President Tony Clement said on Thursday could be as much as $8-billion, twice the $4-billion target announced last year.
Mr. Harper further outlined the blueprint for his government by ticking off a list of policy priorities. Harper said Canada’s investments in science and technology had produced poor results and were a "significant problem for our country." He said he intends to pursue free trade with the European Union and India and find new energy markets beyond the United States. Regulatory delays for mines and energy projects are also being targeted.
Mr. Harper said he intends to tackle immigration reform, a thorny issue in a country where one in five is an immigrant. Canada’s humanitarian obligations and its family reunification objectives will be "respected," he said, but the needs of the labour force and the economy will now be central.
Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has been working on significant reforms to the immigration system for several months. Mr. Kenney has said he wants to speed immigrant integration in the labour market by changing the emphasis of selection criteria. He intends to reward applicants who speak English or French, have job offers, Canadian work experience or postgraduate degrees, all of whom tend to fare better economically. The increased emphasis on economic immigrants could lead to reductions in the family class.
As the Canadian population ages, immigration is increasingly the major source of population growth. At the moment, more than 60 per cent of population growth comes from immigration, but that will approach 100 per cent by 2030. If Canada wants to maintain its population structure, or at least the proportion of the population that’s over 65, it would have to start admitting about three to four times its annual intake of roughly 250,000 immigrants, experts say.
As for OAS, previous Liberal and Conservative governments have tried -- and failed spectacularly -- to make the program financially sustainable. Both Brian Mulroney, and Paul Martin when he was finance minister, were forced to back down in the face of public pressure.
C.D. Howe Institute president Bill Robson said he believes the public will support changes if they see MPs and the public service scaling back their benefits as well.
"As seniors get more numerous, it’s clearly more difficult for politicians to take them on," he said. "But I’m encouraged to think Canadians can get together on things like this."
Susan Eng, vice-president of the non-profit retired persons advocacy group CARP, predicts a strong negative reaction to OAS changes, which were never discussed during the election campaign.
Ms. Eng said her group’s surveys show strong opposition to changing the OAS. |
|
|
| GGM |
| Ugh. When I hear about a conservative talk about the problems I start cringing. The solution is always cuts and privatization. Their version of today's "problems" are always a justification of what they want to do regardless of whats going on at that point in time. |
|
|
| Ferg |
| quote: | Originally posted by GGM
Ugh. When I hear about a conservative talk about the problems I start cringing. The solution is always cuts and privatization. Their version of today's "problems" are always a justification of what they want to do regardless of whats going on at that point in time. |
Totally agree. The logic behind their decisions does not benefit us in an way. |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by GGM
Ugh. When I hear about a conservative talk about the problems I start cringing. The solution is always cuts and privatization. Their version of today's "problems" are always a justification of what they want to do regardless of whats going on at that point in time. |
OK, but what happens when you have limited amounts of money, and you have to try and pay for one service over another? What do you do? It makes a lot of sense to cut spending in one department to pay for another.
I don't agree with everything they are doing, but hell, we ARE in much better shape than the rest of the world...let's keep it that way.
Cutting spending is the only way to cut a deficit and debt load. |
|
|
| GGM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orko
OK, but what happens when you have limited amounts of money, and you have to try and pay for one service over another? What do you do? It makes a lot of sense to cut spending in one department to pay for another.
I don't agree with everything they are doing, but hell, we ARE in much better shape than the rest of the world...let's keep it that way.
Cutting spending is the only way to cut a deficit and debt load. |
I'm not against cutting or privatization. But when you use it as a blanket answer to all problems like the conservatives do then I'm highly skeptical. I think Advil is great and has some amazing uses. Works perfectly on a headache but you're not going to take it when you have a cold, vitamin deficiency, infection etc.
This whole article barely speaks of the solution but you can tell the way it's worded and the emotions it tries to inspire it's just paving the road for cuts and privatization. I would say lets watch and see, revisit the issue in a year but you don't even need to do that to see what bull he's going to pull because he's already started it. Increasing things that really have minimal justification to be increased (corrections), and cutting things that are pretty important (environment). These cuts are nothing new, but articles like this imo are just being tossed out there so he takes less heat for what he plans on doing regardless of the situation.
 |
|
|
| CMR |
| Ah, a good old "Grand Plan", typically characteristic of dictators. |
|
|
| malek |
| 4 times the immigration?? one million a year?? 250k is alot of people!! 1million!?!?! |
|
|
| Adam420 |
| yea that's crazy...he is worse than I thought...I really don't want Canada to become more like the U.S. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
4 times the immigration?? one million a year?? 250k is alot of people!! 1million!?!?! |
I don't have a problem with the number. I do have a problem with where those immigrants will want to live, meaning, toronto, van, mtl. Those cities do not need more immigrant population.
And the fact that Canada has no real program for assimilating immigrants into Canadian culture and society |
|
|
| Ferg |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orko
OK, but what happens when you have limited amounts of money, and you have to try and pay for one service over another? What do you do? It makes a lot of sense to cut spending in one department to pay for another.
I don't agree with everything they are doing, but hell, we ARE in much better shape than the rest of the world...let's keep it that way.
Cutting spending is the only way to cut a deficit and debt load. |
I don't know if you saw the recent article about crime on the decline in Canada. This means we in theory should end up spending less on jailing people anyways, leaving more money for other things.
Also I would like to add the reason canada is in such good shape is because the conservatives inherited a strong economy country. We have progressively gotten worse since harper took over, but I won t blame it all on him since the global economy garbage.
I don't blame people for believing the conservatives, they have a very smart way of making people look at things from their side. Not everyone is able to think for themselves
*@Yohan - Depends where the immigrants are coming from, some are good for us. The refugees showing up at our shore can F right off tho |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ferg
*@Yohan - Depends where the immigrants are coming from, some are good for us. The refugees showing up at our shore can F right off tho |
I want immigrants who respect our customs and laws, tries to integrate themselves into Canadian culture and society, even if that sometimes clashes with their heritage, and take the duties of Canadian citizenship seriously, regardless of where they come from.
Not a bunch who want to leech off Canada, treat Canadian citizenship as a joke or matters only at their convenience and give back as little as possible, and impose their values and systems on Canada (like that Sharia nonsense) |
|
|
| Vivid Boy |
| or like funkycrew |
|
|
|
|
