Christian Heritage Party - AND HAVING DONE ALL TO STAND ...a Letter From Prison written by Linda Gibbons

HST Fight Enters Uncharted Waters Vander Zalm: “If the Chief Electoral Officer won’t do his job, we will do it for him.” Delta – Fight HST leader and Initiative proponent Bill Vander Zalm says that given Elections BC’s refusal to follow clear legislation outlining its responsibilities, his group has decided to submit the successful Initiative petition and draft Bill to End the HST directly to the Select Standing Committee for Legislative Initiatives so that the process can continue. Vander Zalm says acting Chief Electoral Officer Craig James’ refusal to forward the successful petition is against the legislation. As a result, he says he was forced to submit it to the Standing Committee himself. “The Initiative Act is very clear. It says the CEO must send a copy of the petition and draft Bill to the Select Standing Committee. And he must do it upon his determination that the petition met the requirements of the Act. This has been done. Therefore, it is not an option on whether he may submit the petition or not,” Vander Zalm explained. Following is Section 10 of the Act, outlining the CEO’s duties: Referral of initiative to select standing committee 10 If the chief electoral officer determines in accordance with the regulations that (a) the initiative petition meets the requirements of section 7, and [the 10% threshold] (b) the proponent has complied with Part 4,[Initiative spending ] the chief electoral officer must send a copy of the petition and draft Bill to the select standing committee. Vander Zalm says the petition does not belong to the CEO, but to the people, and the legislature is the only body directly answerable to the people. “Therefore, we have sent a copy of the CEO’s ruling validating the petition, as well as the draft Bill – “The HST Extinguishment Act” to the head of the Select Standing Committee, Mr. Terry Lake, as well as the other members of the committee.” Vander Zalm says there is nothing in the Initiative Act preventing a third party from submitting the petition to the Select Standing Committee, and that since the CEO will not comply with the Act, his group was morally bound to make the submission instead. “The law requires the Select Standing Committee upon receipt of the petition to meet on or before September 12, 2010. They must then to make a determination on whether to put the draft Bill to the legislature for a vote, or to return it to the Chief Electoral Officer to conduct a non-binding, province wide “Initiative Vote.” Duty of select standing committee 11 (1) The select standing committee must, within 30 days of receiving a copy of the initiative petition and draft Bill under section 10, meet to consider the initiative petition and draft Bill. (2) The select standing committee must, within 90 days of the date of its first meeting, (a) table a report recommending that the draft Bill be introduced at the earliest practicable opportunity, or (b) refer the initiative petition and draft Bill to the chief electoral officer. “We have lost confidence that the CEO can be relied upon to carry out his duties faithfully and impartially. For that reason, and the fact that a non-binding Initiative Vote is a waste of time and money, we are instructing the BC Government that we will accept only one option - a free vote taken immediately in the legislature, resulting in the repeal of the HST,” said Vander Zalm. Vander Zalm pointed out that anything less than the extinguishment of the HST will result in Recalls launched against all 46 sitting members of the BC Government. “The people have spoken, and it is time for the government to listen. We have had enough of their games and slippery maneuvers. We will not let the people be denied justice on their petition,” Vander Zalm promised.Photo from Ward Perrin /Canwest News Service, first printed in the National PostBill Vander Zalm talks to the media, June 30th, before boarding BC Ferries for the trip to Victoria with the HST petition.Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Vander+Zalm+delivers+anti+petition+Elections/3222689/story.html#ixzz0wVj8uOBs Details...
BC: Government must come clean on total Olympic costs by Maureen Bader    Canadian Taxpayers Federation VANCOUVER: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) today called for full disclosure of all Olympic-related costs in the wake of the B.C. government's release of its Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games cost estimate. The government report showed a financial commitment of $765 million and a hosting activity cost $160 million for, for a total of $925 million. This figure, however, leaves out many additional Olympic-related costs such as crown corporation tickets, paid ‘volunteers,’ the Olympic Secretariat and any of the Olympic-spawned capital projects. "This cost estimate is an insult to the taxpayers of British Columbia and is chump change because it doesn't include the Olympic-sized spending blowout on projects promised in the original bid," said Maureen Bader, B.C. Director of the CTF. "We know the Convention Centre, the Canada Line and the Sea-to-Sky highway upgrade together cost almost $4 billion dollars -- its time the government admitted these were Olympic costs and give taxpayers a full account of the Games." The CTF is not alone in calling for complete transparency on all taxpayer-funded costs. A December 2008 letter from the Auditor General to the provincial government said that the "full cost of staging the Games should include a number if items that are not included in the official budget." In 2006, the Auditor General's report estimated the costs of the 2010 Olympic Games at $2.5 billion and outlined risks that showed the costs could go much higher. "The government must stop downplaying the total cost of the Games and come clean," said Bader. "If we start adding up all the extras such as: the $560,000 to pay bureaucrats to volunteer at the Games; the tens of millions paid out by BC Crown Corporations for Olympic tickets and sponsorships; and the $600 million cost of the 2010 Secretariat, we'll get a better idea of the true cost of the Games." By: Maureen Bader Contact the regional director Maureen Bader for further information. Details...
FED: Canada Middle of PIGS Pack – Deficit Tough Talk Should Start at Home by Kevin Gaudet   Canadian Taxpayers Federation The G8 and G20 summits are now over. While we are closer to knowing the final costs, it’s unclear if there will be any long-term benefits for Canadian taxpayers in exchange for the large amounts of tax dollars that were spent. That is unless Mr. Harper decides to send the same anti-deficit message to our provinces as was sent to debt-laden countries like Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain (PIGS) during the summits. (image: flickr/subterrainea tourist board) As for the summit costs, the final figures aren’t all in, but direct costs alone to host the three day G8 and G20 summits are projected to range from $1.2 to $1.4 billion. However, the total summit cost is substantially higher. There are indirect costs due to damaged property, prosecution costs of those arrested and of course the promises our politicians made to spend even more taxpayer money. Money was committed by Canada -- $400 million -- to fund developing world efforts to reduce so-called man-made climate change. As well, Canada has committed another $1.1 billion over five years to improve maternal health in the developing world. This puts taxpayers on the hook for around a $3 billion summit. It is hard to relate to a number with nine zeros on the end, especially, it seems, for summit organizers. Consider this: taxpayers paid as much for the summit as it costs to fund the whole budget of the province of Prince Edward Island for a whole year or the same amount of money the United Nations spends on water and sanitation sectors in sub-Saharan Africa for more than 18 months. The alleged crown jewel from the summit was the austerity clause. It’s an agreement that governments cut their deficits in half over three years. It shouldn’t take a $1.4 billion meeting to get governments around the world to understand the same premise families all around the world know very well: you can’t continue to spend more than you earn. Yet, if other countries do not get their spending under control they will likely come begging for more from Canada. Remember, Canada just committed up to $10 billion in loans for Greece. Importantly, these deficit targets are not nearly aggressive enough for Canada. The federal government is already in its third year of deficits with at least four or five more years projected in the red. Prime Minister Harper projects Canada will beat the meager deficit target in two years -- based on promises made in the last two budgets. Ironically, the cost of this summit and the subsequent spending promises will only add more to Canada’s $49.2 billion federal debt this year. While Canada is often heralded as the poster-boy of fiscal austerity, it’s only partially true if you look strictly at the federal government. When other levels of government are brought into the picture, the poster-boy starts to look more like an aging rocker than Justin Bieber. Canada’s per capita total public indebtedness ($32,506) in fact, is a lot better than Italy ($44,657) but is only a little better than Greece ($35,403). Worse still, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, Canada ranks 21st worst of the 30 OECD countries, worse than two of the PIGS, Portugal ($18,959) and Spain ($23,962). The reason for this is that our provinces are running up huge deficits as well. With only one taxpayer, total public debt is what matters, not just that of the federal government. Perhaps instead of only focusing on the federal debt Mr. Harper should consider the G20 commitment to apply to total public debt in Canada. This would require him to push the provinces hard to get their budgets back under control. After all, if it is important for Greece and Italy, it should be just as important for Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia. By: Kevin Gaudet Posted: June 30, 2010 Contact the regional director Kevin Gaudet for further information. Details...
FED: Pension Reform Must Start with MPs' Plan by Kevin Gaudet Canadian Taxpayers FederationAnxiety over retirement planning and inadequate pension security are on the minds of many Canadians these days. For about two-thirds of Canadians the focus is on how to deal with not having a pension at all, (other than the CPP). In stark contrast 75 more lucky Members of Parliament can now focus on how comfortable their retirement will be. On June 28th, 75 MPs elected in 2004 will enter the rarified pension elite. These MPs become eligible for their gold-plated pensions after having served only six years in office. Meanwhile, Canada’s Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, is trying to drum up support to hike CPP taxes for the rest of taxpayers. Instead of focusing on how to squeeze more out of taxpayers to boost a lackluster CPP, MPs should lead by example and reform their own pensions to bring them in line with those in the private sector.Members of Parliament do not share the suffering of most working Canadians. Their pay, perks and pensions are some of the most lucrative in the country. Despite a pay freeze, the minimum salary remains $157,700, putting MPs in the top 2 per cent of Canadian wage earners. In addition to this generous salary they have an obscenely generous pension plan. An MP earns 3 per cent for each year of service times the average of the best five years of earnings. For even the most junior back bench MP, this means the plan pays out a pension (in 2010 dollars) of a minimum of $28,000 a year. For every dollar an MP contributes taxpayers contribute between $4.5 and $7. The plan is also indexed for life. Right now it is indexed at 3.3 per cent a year, which is two to three times the rate of inflation.In contrast, CPP pays a maximum of $11,000 per year. You have to work your whole life to earn it and only get it fully at age 65. The minimum MP pension plan pays 2.5 times more. An MP gets it after only working for six years and is entitled to take it as early as age 55.Of course, the MP pension grows the longer an MP has been elected. As well, extra duties increase the earnings average, which in turn drives up the pension amount. Extra duties include serving as a committee chairman, party whip, caucus chairman, party leader, parliamentary secretary, cabinet minister and prime minister. For example, Jean Chrétienserved for over 30 years and spent ten as Prime Minister. His pension is at least $325,000 a year. Gilles Duceppe, the leader of the separatist Bloc Québécoisis eligible for a pension of $139,270. In 2025 when PM Harper turns 65 and gains both his MP and PM pension he will be entitled to at least $177,977 a year (2010 dollars).Roughly only a third of Canadians have some kind of employment pension plan. For those who do, the majority have a plan where their employer matches employee contributions dollar for dollar, putting it all into an RRSP. When the employee retires of leaves he or she takes the account and draws off of it as needs or desires warrant. This is a defined contribution plan. This is what MPs should have. Provincial elected officials in Ontario have this kind of plan.There’s lots of work to be done on reforming public pensions in Canada, but our MPs will lack any moral authority to take real action until they reform their own plan first. By: Kevin Gaudet Contact CTF regional director Kevin Gaudet for further information. Details...
High Speed Debt by Jim Hnatiuk, National Leader CHP CanadaBefore you can read this sentence our Canadian debt will increase by an incredible $9,000.Today, most Canadians have legitimate concerns regarding our economy; most of us are thriftier than in the past. We need to be! Parents, student, seniors and businesses are all making sacrifices; with one exception--our government.Wasteful has become the common denominator of our government spending. This is not only disheartening but it is also embarrassing on an international scale. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has calculated that our federal government spending is adding an incredible $135 million per day to our Canadian debt which already stands at $528 billion dollars. That's like the government pulling a $5 bill out of your wallet every day. Every Canadian...every day...and if you don't have the $5, they will take it from your children and grandchildren...and you don't have any choice about it...every day.Can this adding machine be stopped? It's like our high speed technological advances are having an effect on parliamentary thinking. Our current government has embarked on a ten day wasteful G20 Summit which is expected to cost $2 billion. Wow...now that is high speed--an unbelievable $2,315 per second. The $2 billion summit is actually costing you, personally, and each person you love, $60--and you don't get a ticket... in fact, your $60 goes to put up barriers to keep you out!It's obvious why the Auditor General's recent request to MP spending is being denied. Canadians can swallow only so much waste.The core of the problem of our national debt is the failure of all parties serving in our House of Commons to recognize that deficit spending and government debt is a moral problem. It is the theft of money from our children and grandchildren to buy votes today. Most Canadians are willing to do their part. It's hard to believe that our so-called "conservative" government has our best interests in mind when they recklessly spend money we don't have causing our national indebtedness to skyrocket. The conclusion is simple: they don't. Today our debt is costing us $3 billion a month on interest payments alone; we're paying $1,157 every second. That is gross waste!With all the rumors of the NDP joining the Liberals, I can only remind Mr. Layton that he is standing in line -- behind Mr. Harper.CHP Canada recognizes that the National Debt must be treated like a national mortgage. Return to balanced budgets, cut spending, reduce the money created by commercial banks, restore to the Bank of Canada to its proper role in the creation of money and re-instate statutory reserve requirements. That would truly be a fiscally conservative solution! And the first major cut-the size of government. Details...
Summitscam - Harper Joins Billion Dollar Boondoggle Club: Audit Required Reposted from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation Prime Minister Harper has become the newest member of the notorious Billion Dollar Boondoggle Club thanks to Summitscam. He joins the ranks of Jean Chretien, Jane Stewart, Allan Rock and Dalton McGuinty. Mr. Harper’s entry to the club comes as a result of the giant cost overruns for the upcoming G8 and G20 leaders’ summit, leaving taxpayers on the hook for $1 billion or more.The ballooning costs for the upcoming chin-wag sessions came to light this week as the federal government released the Supplementary Estimates to the Budget. These are departmental requests for more cash than they had budgeted for the fiscal year. Such requests are indications of bad planning or unforeseen circumstances. The Estimates reveal that costs for the G8 and G20 gabfest are 420 per cent over-budget.Spending for the summit originally had been projected at $179 million. The new requests for cash stand at a staggering $930 million -- and not all costs are yet known.This summit spending boondoggle is a mess that requires investigation. If parliamentary committees weren’t such a farce of political mayhem, that would be the place for it to happen. Instead, the Auditor General needs to be tasked with the job, as the Liberals and NDP appropriately have requested.Many important, questions deserve good, clear and detailed answers. How did the government underestimate costs in the first place? What has driven up the costs of the program so alarmingly? Who was supposed to mind the budget and why didn’t they? What companies received contracts? Were they tendered? Did the contracts stay on budget?Certainly, hosting the summit did not come as a surprise. The government has known for a long time that the event was coming. Equally known were the tremendous costs and challenges of security for such an event. Canada had just finished hosting the Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver. Security there was so large and challenging that a cruise ship was contracted just to house security forces.This spending fiasco shows our politicians have failed to learn from billion dollar spending mistakes of the recent past.Allan Rock’s federal long-gun registry has cost more than $2 billion. Plus, it still costs taxpayers more than $106 million per year in direct and indirect costs. In 2002, Audit General Sheila Fraser uncovered waste in excess of $1 billion.There was the HRDC training boondoggle under Minister Jane Stewart where her ministry made grants and contributions to projects designed to provide skills training through local organizations. In 2000, auditors suggested potential problems in the handling of up to $1 billion. Since this came to light charges were filed against at least 27 individuals.In 2009, Ontario Premier McGuinty’s government got caught allowing an eHealth program to balloon out of control. A special audit discovered massive waste of $1 billion and said there were no results to show for the money spent.Of course, there is the famous Adscam fiasco under Jean Chretien where players have ended up in jail. In 2004, an audit investigated the $250 million program. Given of the widespread corruption and not just waste, Adscam deserves not-so-honourable mention.It was probably only a matter of time that the Harper government joined the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Club. Many cabinet ministers spend a lot of their time bragging about how much taxpayer money they spend. If, instead, they focused more time on how to reduce spending and balance the budget, this Summitscam might have been avoided. Posted: June 01, 2010 Contact the regional director Kevin Gaudet for further information. Details...
Reveal MP Expenses Reprinted from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation websiteOur politicians in Ottawa are denying Auditor General Shelia Fraser's request to examine nearly half-a-billion being spent to run Parliament.In what world can one deny their employer asking how company funds are being spent. Or, telling Canada Revenue Agency that "there's no need to see receipts; just take my word for it."Clearly, this is not acceptable. Increasingly, federal government spending has come under the purview of the auditor general and spending by our MPs and senators should be subject to the same scrutiny. Parliament's spending has not been reviewed since 1991.The Conservatives, NDP and Liberals oppose an audit, while the Bloc Quebecois is open to one. While politicians claim they have "guidelines" in place to ensure the proper use of funds, "guidelines" didn't stop politicians in Nova Scotia from expensing video games or a UK politician from expensing his moat cleaning! Media/related ... Latest coverage, continually updatedCheck out the Lame-O-Excuse TrackerAn audit of expense accounts of Nova Scotia MLAs uncovers widespread spending abuse.England uncovers massive abuse of political expense accounts including MPs expensing moat cleaning and pornography.A 2006 audit of political constituency allowances in Newfoundland uncovered widespread abuse. Expenses included the purchase of 79 gold rings for MHAs at a cost of $750 each plus tax!Support the campaign to open the booksSIGN OUR PETITION -- and forward to your contact list!Join our facebook group "Make Canadian MP Expenses Public"Contact Members of the Board of Internal Economy Details...
BC: Spiraling government spending means higher taxes - sooner or later Canadian Taxpayers FederationThe math is quite simple. Spending, by three levels of government, drives tax levels, and – as one comparison in the Lower Mainland demonstrates, drives economic outcomes as well.Since taking office, the Harper government has increased program spending by 42 per cent, more than three times the combined inflation and population growth rate. It is the largest five-year increase in spending since the Trudeau era. Deficit spending has sent the federal debt back over the half-trillion-dollar mark, from $458-million in 2007. By 2011, each person in Canada will owe almost $17,000 for their portion of the federal debt.In B.C., spending restraint flew out the window in 2005. Spending ballooned from $30 billion that year to $40 billion in 2009. Deficit spending will drive the provincial debt to almost $53 billion by 2011, about $11,600 per person.Of course these numbers are so ridiculously mind boggling as to be meaningless to the average taxpayer. What is not so meaningless however is the impact that will be felt when federal EI premiums go up in 2011 and provincial health and carbon taxes rise again in 2011 and beyond.Yet these tax increases don’t tell the whole story. Because so much of federal and provincial government spending is done with borrowed money, the taxes to pay for that spending are deferred. Municipalities on the other hand – thankfully -- don’t have that luxury. Local governments cannot run operating deficits and therefore must raise in taxes what they spend each year. The tax pinch is more immediately felt, as are the outcomes.If we compare local government spending in the Lower Mainland’s two largest cities, Surrey and Vancouver, we find spending in Surrey, at $702 per person, is half that of spending in Vancouver, at $1,433. It seems unlikely local government services in Vancouver are twice as good as they are Surrey.Vancouver's taxpayers should take a look at Surrey's spending priorities because Surrey had the lowest per capita cost of service delivery of all municipalities with a population over 25,000 in B.C.Spending creates a very different tax burden, which is particularly acute when it comes to property taxes paid by business owners.Unlike Vancouver, Surrey has done a good job of keeping business property taxes competitive. In fact, Surrey boasts one of the lowest business property tax burdens in the province.This burden drives economic outcomes and as a result, Surrey is growing faster than Vancouver in terms of population, the labour force, and even school enrollment. Will Surrey keep that advantage? Once again, spending tells the story. Between 2007 and 2009, Surrey spending went up by about 11%. Between 2009 and 2013, the city forecasts that spending will go up by another 22%, that's more than 4% each year. Surrey citizens and business owners need to keep an eye out on what's happening at City Hall or Surrey's tax advantage could be lost in the future. So, the lesson here is clear. If a city can control its spending, it is reflected in a competitive tax regime that results in people moving there, setting up business there, sending their kids to school there and above all, paying taxes there. Provinces and the federal government could learn a similar lesson. By: Maureen Bader Posted: April 20, 2010 Contact the regional director Maureen Bader for further information. Details...
Canadian Taxpayers Federation Urges the Government to Balance The Budget The federal government has taken Canada back to the days of spending borrowed money, running the largest deficits ever. Instead of raising our taxes it is time to get spending back under control with a plan to balance the budget. Already the federal debt is past a half-trillion dollars--a per-capita burden of more than $15,300. Visit DebtClock.ca for the current debt total, your personal share, and more background. By: Kevin Gaudet Posted: March 12, 2010 Canadian Taxpayers Federation Details...
Bill Vander Zalm Comments on Northern BC Tour By Bill Vander Zalm* I have just returned from the first leg of a provincewide tour to promote the Fight HST citizen initiative petition to repeal the harmonized sales tax. The response has been nothing short of phenomenal. Hundreds upon hundreds of people have turned up on short notice at meeting after meeting across the north to sign up as canvassers, captains, and organizers for our petition. In my entire 25 years in B.C. politics, as a councillor, mayor, MLA, cabinet minister, and premier, I have never seen anything even remotely like it. The campaign to defeat the HST has ballooned into something much bigger and even more significant than protesting an unjust, illegal, and unethical tax. As profound as those arguments are, there is something deeper and even more powerful afoot. People are rising up to take back their democracy. There is a sense by many, many voters that what precious little democracy we have is rapidly disappearing. A sense that if they don’t take a stand now, they may never be able to hold politicians accountable again in the future. Everywhere, people tell me that, if over 85 percent of the citizens are against something and not one single member of the government will stand up to represent them, there is something desperately wrong. They fear that the democratic system is collapsing before their very eyes. They sense that an agenda is unfolding which they neither approve of nor even understand at times. They watch TV, turn on the radio, or pick up a newspaper, and can’t make sense of anything they see or hear. And they sense that it is not an accident. The effort to stop the HST has become an effort to prevent a dictatorial and out-of-control government from running roughshod over the people, their Constitution, and their rights as citizens in a free and democratic country. I had no idea when I began my simple “letter to the editor” protest against the HST that I would unleash such a force. I hoped people would get as angry as I was and speak to their MLA or write the premier to let them know how they felt. Instead, they are lining up to make this initiative process work for the sake of their freedom and the future of their democracy. It is both humbling and inspiring at the same time. To those who have given up and think it can’t be done, I say come and join us. We have a three-phase strategy to defeat this tax and take back our democracy. First, we will complete the first successful citizen initiative petition in Canadian history. Second, we will launch a legal challenge to the HST, which we believe contravenes Section 92 of the Constitution Act that grants exclusive authority to the B.C. legislature to set and collect direct taxes for the raising of provincial revenues. Finally, we will initiate recalls of specifically targeted MLAs and perhaps even the premier himself should they reject the wishes of those who pay their salaries—the voters—as expressed in the citizen initiative. This three-phase plan will only work if we make it work. It is that hard. But when our very democracy is at stake, what do we have to lose by trying? It is time for the people to be heard instead of the politicians. It is time for the people to set the agenda instead of the politicians. It is time for the people to stand up and take back their democracy. For the first time in Canadian history, that is about to happen. Bill Vander Zalm is the leader of Fight HST and a former B.C. premier.For a video clip of Bill Vander Zalm's Speech in Terrace as well as Chris Delaney's Explanation of the Fight HST Campaign, visit Terrace Daily Online at this link.* This article and other references to the Fight HST campaign posted on this site (where they may be deemed to be promotional in nature, rather than simply newsworthy) are published under the provisions of the Recall and Initiative Act (Elections BC regulations) whereby a third party can be identified as an "initiative petition advertising sponsor". The Christian Heritage Party Skeena-Bulkley Valley Electoral District Association has applied for and received approval under these provisions. The registration number for the  Christian Heritage Party Skeena-Bulkley Valley Electoral District Association is IPA-2010-002-012 "This posting is authorized by Rod Taylor, Christian Heritage Party Skeena-Bulkley Valley Electoral District Association, registered sponsor under Recall and Initiative Act, contact phone number is 250-846-5432."   Details...