The recent federal budget doesn\u2019t appear to be getting rave reviews from Canadians.<\/p>\n
This past week the Globe and Mail<\/em> published results of a poll<\/a> asking 1,000 people whether they had a positive or negative view of the March 22 federal budget. According to the Globe, 52% had negative or somewhat negative opinions. Only five per cent said they had a positive view, 33 % said their opinion was somewhat positive.<\/p>\n With only one out of twenty firmly positive, participants were clearly unimpressed with the budget, and its lack of a plan for eliminating the deficit seems to be a sore point. On the balanced budget question, four in five said it was important to have a plan for eliminating the deficit. Less than one in ten said having such a plan was unimportant.<\/p>\n Normally I would be inclined to regard the findings as just more evidence of the unfortunate triumph of right wing anti-tax, anti-government ideology. However, in this case the opposition parties and the people polled by Nanos research for the Globe<\/em> may be on to something.<\/p>\n The two main opposition parties approach the matter differently \u2013 for the Conservatives it\u2019s mostly about the evils of public debt,\u00a0period. During the brief budget debate in the House of Commons the Conservatives harped on about the debt burden being passed to our children and grandchildren. (Amazing how Conservatives can fret about that burden while ignoring the legacy of a fossil-fuel degraded environment being handed to the next generation).The NDP\u2019s take was more salient, boiling down to \u201cdeficits for what?\u201d Good question.<\/p>\n No there there<\/strong><\/p>\n During the 2015 campaign the Liberals probably swung more than a few votes by promising \u2013 in contrast to the Conservatives and NDP – modest deficits for a few years followed by a balanced budget in time for the next election. That promise has disappeared with no explanation from the Liberals and we\u2019re now witnessing deficits north of $25 billion for this year and last, and no balanced budgets in sight.<\/p>\n The (upper) middle class tax cut and the increases in child benefits are responsible for some of the deficits. But aside from those two measures from last year and a lot of announcements about things that may happen in the future, there is very little to show for the deficit spending. The 2017 budget does nothing to change that.<\/p>\n The Liberals may try to tout the new deals with provincial governments on home care and mental health, but they will be unable to hide the fact that the \u201cnew\u201d spending was made possible by sharply curtailing other transfers to the provinces. Major transfers for health, social programs and equalization, up an average of 4.4% a year during the deficit-obsessed Harper years, are up just 2.7% in free-spending year two of the Trudeau regime. There\u2019s irony for you.<\/p>\n But at least the provinces are getting their transfers, diminished though they are. Many initiatives highlighted in the budget are not being funded at all this year. Others are getting a small down payment over the next couple of years, with most of the spending earmarked for after the 2019 election.<\/p>\n In the latter category, housing is the best (or worst) example. The Liberals talk about spending big bucks -$11 billion – on housing over the next ten years. But there\u2019s a catch. Only about seven per cent of that will be spent between now and the next election. The other 93% will roll out only if you re-elect the Liberals \u2013 twice – in 2019 and 2023.<\/p>\n MP Nathan Cullen\u2019s description \u2013 \u201ca backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget\u201d seems particularly apt when you look at the second category \u2013 initiatives mentioned in the budget for which no spending is allocated this year. There are dozens of examples, some of which invite the question, \u201cWhy wait?\u201d<\/p>\n Why no money in this year\u2019s budget to \u201ctackle homelessness? Why wait for two years to put some serious dollars into that problem? How about \u201cImproving Indigenous Communities.\u201d The Liberals say they\u2019ll eventually spend $2 billion on that, but this year? Nothing – and only $54million budgeted for next year. And then there is \u201cHousing for Indigenous Peoples not On-Reserve\u201d. The feds will spend $25 million per annum on that, but nothing this year. Same with the \u201cEnabling Accessibility Fund.\u201d That\u2019s slated to get a modest $8 million a year, but not until some time after next April.<\/p>\n Waiting for Child Care \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Perhaps the most transparent deception is the budget\u2019s trumpeting of $7 billion for early learning and child care. Recall that universal $15-a-day child care and creation of 370,000 new spaces over four years was a central $4 billion plank in the NDP\u2019s 2015 campaign platform. The Liberals responded to that with a commitment to spend $20 billion over the next decade on \u201csocial infrastructure,\u201d including creation of a \u201cNational Early Learning and Child Care Framework to ensure that affordable, high-quality, fully inclusive child care is available to all families who need it.\u201d<\/p>\n That was great campaign rhetoric \u2013 accompanied with a big dollar number – to counter the NDP\u2019s day care plank. But the reality revealed in budget documents show in detail the extent to which the Liberal plank was driven not by a plan to significantly improve day care, but by the political need to checkmate the NDP.<\/p>\n There was no money in the 2016 budget for child care and none in the 2017 budget either. The promised \u201cFramework\u201d has not yet materialized as the feds reportedly try to convince the provinces to agree to a plan that would target Ottawa\u2019s support to low-income parents. If the provinces and feds do reach agreement, the promised $7 billion will start to flow in next year\u2019s budget but will total only about $1.1 billion by 2020.<\/p>\n It’s obvious the Liberal day care plan doesn\u2019t hold a candle to the NDP proposal it was meant to neutralize. Instead of the $4 billion committed over a four-year mandate proposed by the NDP, the Liberals may spend about $1.1 billion. Instead of creating 370,000 spaces at $15 a day, the Liberals may create about 25,000 subsidized ones before their mandate expires. And their plan does nothing to bring down costs which can be as high as $80 a day in Toronto and $40-$50 a day in places like Halifax.<\/p>\n And here\u2019s more irony for you. The Liberal child care plan of 2017 doesn\u2019t even measure up to the one that Ken Dryden negotiated with the provinces on behalf of the Paul Martin government back in 2005. That plan, subsequently torpedoed for ideological reasons by the Harper government, was worth $5 billion over five years.\u00a0The Dryden plan works out to about $30 a head for each province \u2013 or nearly $30 million for Nova Scotia. The Trudeau plan works out to about $15 per capita before it increases a bit in 2022. But when inflation \u00a0taken into account, the Trudeau plan is worth less than half what the feds put on the table for child care a dozen years ago.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n It\u2019s highly likely that none of those Canadians polled about last month\u2019s budget had the time or inclination to read its fine print. But they caught the drift, and details in the budget certainly bear out their ho-hum reaction.<\/p>\n -30-<\/p>\n