Scheer must dare to win
Andrew Scheer’s first economic policy came in on cat’s paws Thursday.
The Conservative leader spent much of last year on the “fundamentals” — letting Conservatives know who he is and what he stands for — with the promise that fresh policy would follow in the new year.
The first effort is underwhelming: a tax credit for people paying federal income tax while on Employment Insurance maternity or parental programs. It scarcely even qualifies as fresh since the Conservative platform in 2015 — the one voters rejected — pledged to expand EI maternity and paternity benefits to increase flexibility for new parents.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea — and it is certainly in keeping with the long- term Conservative goal of making life less expensive for young families.
But it reflects the hallmark of Scheer’s leadership thus far: bashful when it should be bold, timid where it needs to be intrepid.
Caucus members express frustration that the leader has not leapt on what they perceive as a tactical error by the Liberals — funding for the summer jobs program that has upset religious groups, unhappy they have to endorse the government’s line on abortion.
There is also incredulity that Scheer did not question Justin Trudeau’s judgment in meeting the former hostage Joshua Boyle, who two weeks later was arrested for sexual assault.
Substantively, the EI credit would further riddle the tax code with what Scheer’s colleague, Maxime Bernier, called “politically motivated subsidies” during the recent Tory leadership race.
Bernier’s audacious plan was to undertake a root and branch overhaul of the income tax system, raising personal exemption levels to $15,000 (from $11,474) to relieve low- income Canadians from paying income tax. Further, he advocated abolishing the tax brackets and replacing them with one 15 per cent band for the 80 per cent of taxpayers who earn between $15,001 and $100,000, and a 25 per cent rate for those earning over six figures.
He estimated the cost to the Treasury at $ 35 billion — something that he said could be paid for by eliminating some of the $100 billion worth of tax expenditures ( like the one Scheer is proposing) that linger, unmonitored by Parliament or the Department of Finance, in the tax code.
Bernier did not specify which expenditures he’d kill and therein lies a problem. As the Liberals discovered when they looked at taxing health and dental benefit plans, privileged groups enjoy being subsidized by taxpayers — and create merry hell when their privilege is under threat.
The most obvious expenditure to go after would be the $3.4 billion spent every year on the Age Tax Credit, given to seniors just because they reach the age of 65, regardless of whether or not they need the money.
Then there is the $ 14 billion the federal government spends on business subsidies every year, more than half of which is wasted, according to one recent study.
The Liberals are planning to make the situation worse by attempting to pick more winners as part of their $800 million “cluster” experiment. This, despite all the evidence that government spending — from regional development programs to agricultural production subsidies — generally results in a lower level of overall income.
The point is, there are billions of dollars of indefensible spending swirling around the system that could fund a compelling low tax, family-friendly platform that gives Canadians an incentive to work harder and keep more of their own money.
It wasn’t that long ago that Trudeau’s Liberals were in third place in the polls, with a general election looming.
The Liberal leader took the risky decision to commit to deficit financing, just as the NDP said it would play safe and match the Conservatives in balancing the budget.
Canadians decided to take a chance and rewarded Trudeau for his boldness — but it was a decision that might have had a very different outcome.
Scheer does not come across as one of nature’s gamblers.
But in politics, as in life, sometimes those who dare, win.