- Comment on: Kelly McParland: Ignatieff blows smoke on tax threat

- Comment on: Kelly McParland: Ignatieff blows smoke on tax threat
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/18/kelly-mcparland-ignatieff-is-blowing-smoke-on-tax-threat.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

Hi Kelly

Michael Ignatieff’s statements are a question of context. I like your links to the articles you are referring but making links to one’s references regarding another’s statements doesn’t excuse one from accusing that person of saying a lemon’s and orange when he refers to both as fruit or even citrius fruit.

There is a huge difference between “broad based tax cuts” which reduce tax and infinitum as opposed to one to tax relieve explicitly designed to boost spending during economic hard times. One need only compare the Harper and Conservative reduction of the GST by 2% with England’s policy to reduce VAT (same as our GST) for one year to boost spending. These are very different types of tax reductions. The latter is obviously designed, by putting a one year limit on the reduction, precisely so that it doesn’t hobble future goverments and future generations. It should be pointed out that Harper and the Conservatives were very quick to equate their structural reduction in GST with the Englsih temporary reduction by completing ignoring this very important difference.

When Micheal Ignatieff says, "I think it’s going to be important to get stimulus into the Canadian economy fast, so we may be looking at tax cuts very quickly, tax cuts targeted at medium and low income, to boost their purchasing power fast",

You can hardly say that he is referring to the same thing as general “broad based tax cuts” that Harper and the Conservatives are referring to, that have no time limit, will diminish the Federal Government’s capacity, build in a structural deficit, lead to on going structural Federal deficits of the kind we saw with Mulroney and the PC in the early ‘90’s and force the next Liberal government to implement serious program spending cuts of the kind that Jean Chrétien was required to do and even general tax increases to have any hope of saving our children and preserving our nation. Harper's aim here appears to be implementing his right wing agenda, as opposed to truly helping Canadians through a very difficult time and this proposal is not much better than his economic update of November. It is no surprise that the Liberals are reacting this way. Not only is it not contradictory but it is very consistent.

I think all media reporters in Canada should take head of James Travers’ article in the Toronto Star of 10 Jan.’09 vis: “…in October, with the country facing the biggest economic crisis since the great depression, the smallest number of voters in memory went to the polls without knowing very much about the situation or how the next prime minister would respond. …”

In these times of economic severity it is vital that all reporters and newspapers make their best efforts to clarify the message of all politicians and political parties so as ensure that the general public is properly informed and not simply inundated with stories bias to promote one Party over another.