Tim Houston Says: $15 Million More For CBRM In Equalization

Joe Ward Follow Me

Posted this 2018-06-09 11:05 AM ADT (updated 2018-06-09 12:14 PM ADT)

Tim Houston is the only candidate for the leadership of the PC Party that is exploring any kind of innovative new approach to turning the Province of Nova Scotia around. He's been surging in popularity right here in the CBRM. The basis for that support was simple. He's smart. He has business experience. He communicates clearly and doesn't dodge questions. And he's been routinely holding the current government accountable.

He was also the first to go on record that the provincial Equalization transfer to the CBRM and other municipalities is unfair. For many, there was a reluctance to let any politician off the hook with just that alone. But Houston cautioned that he wasn't about just making promises that people wanted to hear. He needed time to investigate for himself and determine a solution.

Houston has now committed to doubling the Equalization transfer. That means an extra $15 Million to the CBRM, no strings attached.

I'm a non-partisan, but we have to support candidates from all parties if and only if they are willing to commit to the things that we need. The CBRM has no other pathway to $15 Million a year in increased resources to spend on our needs. Houston is the only one that has made the commitment. Mayor Clarke has worked against it, the CBRM council thinks it's for us to figure out on our own, and MLAs Momborquette and MacLellan listen to their boss and won't give us a penny more.

Houston hasn't been declared PC leader yet. Become a PC member for $10 and vote for him (so that we have the best shot possible at changing things here in Cape Breton).

An article in the print copy of the Cape Breton Post today outlined how he wants to do the doubling immediately as a stop-gap strategy.

It's not the full ask of groups like Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness (NSEF). However, it's a practical first step, and a massive leap forward in a municipality whose leaders have either been in opposition to us getting more (Clarke) or mostly all talk. Houston is committing to analyzing the shared services agreement and determining what the right path is long-term.

The uprising of community support for Equalization fairness is the precursor to this step. The NSEF lead the community to get the message out. Houston is the only one with the political courage to actually commit to a big dollar figure on increasing the transfer to the CBRM and other municipalities in desperate need of more resources.

Houston is in North Sydney today at the Firemen's Club at 2 PM. Go see him and hear what he has to say, and see why he's the best option for the PC leadership.

Beyond Equalization, here's some insight into why Houston's support is so strong and so fast rising in Cape Breton:

NOTE: The views expressed above are my own and do not represent lokol (goCapeBreton.com). Read more

https://www.facebook.com/pg/TimHoustonNS/

Posted by Joe Ward
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW

Like 3 Dislike 0

FOLLOW 22

4,451 65

Gov Political Commentary

65

Depth
Blair Gushue Follow Me 2018-06-09 1:06 PM ADT Reply 1 0 How fast politicians can come up with $ around election time especially when we should of had this money years ago. I would like to see a plan where they are committed to reducing unemployment by 5% over the next 4 yrs. A commitment to increase infrastructure and resolve outmigration. Maybe tax incentives for new business start ups offering a reduction for 5 years. Or at least open communication to discuss this Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:18 PM ADT Reply 1 0 All of these candidates are describing what they are doing as "grassroots" and/or listening tours right now. Reducing unemployment is a high-level goal. That would be a very difficult commitment to make unless they had a highly specific action plan. That's a tough one in the near-term. Houston's platform has an innovative approach for slowing outmigration of young people, offering those under 25 years no income tax up to their first $50k of income. Will it work? Not sure. I don't know if there is a precedent in action somewhere in North America that suggests it would.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-09 5:16 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Out of power making a "promise." What is this worth? The provincial equalization program is already greatly inadequate in meeting the expenditures of municipal units. The feds provide approximately 26 percent of the total Equalization payments for the municipal deficiency in tax capacity. Count the years that this has been done and settling for $15 million more is hardly going to address this municipal deficiency to deal with the problems accumulated over all these years of deliberate under funding municipalities. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:20 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Just for the record, since we've chatted extensively on Facebook on this topic today, receiving the $15 Million would be "accepting" additional resources, not "settling" for only that amount. Everything else is still on the table and $15 Million closer to the full ask.
Christian Murphy Follow Me 2018-06-10 7:45 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Joe Ward has again did some great work and I have been reviewing a number of comments from people both pro and against Tim Houston and his most recent revelation regarding the issue surrounding equalization. Here is what saddens me regarding the discourse; already we are at odds regarding this promise of doubling "Provincial Equalization", not to be confused with "Federal Equalization", with many assuming CBRM will see an increase from $15 million to $30 million with negotiations to follow. Here is the fundamental reality....the promises are flying and we the citizens are being "divided and conquered" debating and arguing over tens of millions when we as an Island have been denied hundreds of millions. That ladies and gentlemen is the problem here. We must stop being divided over what is fundamentally a meaningless gesture; what is truly short of what the people of Cape Breton deserve.....200 years of mismanagement must stop and will only stop by supporting the Cape Breton United Party. I will be sharing this on various threads in a real effort to stop the bleeding out of our beautiful home because you, the people of Cape Breton, have suffered enough under provincial rule. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:26 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Note: While there is a very little a politician (newbie or career versions) don't do with foresight as to how it increases their electability, I don't see this as a divide and conquer strategy. If anything, this move would be intended to consolidate major pockets of support across the entire province, minus Halifax. There were a couple of key risks that Houston would be up against with introducing a policy like this: (a) rejection of the idea as not enough, or (b) objections from the mainland/Halifax who don't see the benefit of providing more resources to municipalities like the CBRM who speak the loudest about it. I wouldn't include objections based on it just being political promises, because that's ambient. There will never be anything suggested by any politician that won't meet with that response from many people because we've been well trained in disappointment over the decades.
Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-10 8:37 AM ADT Reply 0 0 So you are suggesting that we do nothing and allow the new leader of the PC party to be maybe Cecil??? who stated that we are getting enough when he was a minister. The Cape Breton United Party that dosnt even exist will save us and get every cent of money owed to us. That is quite the promise with no back up plan. I will stick to the Tim Houston strategy Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:46 AM ADT Reply 0 0 For the love of Cape Breton please make sure Tim Houston becomes the next leader of the PC party. It doesn't matter if you are Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Green party or the Cape Breton United Party. Make sure we have a strong back up plan https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timhouston.ca%2Fmember&h=ATMxjbdojDJ9PTHGca3z7EOZAYtoCxLDZJM8Ixf47WMG6m6aqYpDQmGRxSiuXkgn698-8SRd9_E2byPoViKDa59px9a8r5u3hc4&s=1&hc_location=ufi Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:32 PM ADT Reply 2 0 For hardcore partisan Liberal and NDP supporters, they may prefer Cecil Clarke as the PC leader to make the party easier to beat in the next election. Does a mayor who carried just over 50% of support (a major slide) in his own municipality really have the stuff to win the entire province? Early on, I thought the risk might have been ok to expel him as mayor, and expecting the PCs to lose. However, that was based on a feeling that the Liberals could maintain their majority (based on having done so last time despite intense criticism). But I'm not so sure anymore, especially with what happened in Ontario. I'd rather have a much better candidate for the leadership in place, just in case they get there. And Tim does have leadership abilities that encourage optimism.
Brenda Durdle Follow Me 2018-06-10 9:17 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Please don't forget that back in early March NDP leader Gary Burrill spported equalization with a plan when votes weren't the immediate goal. Give credit where credit is due. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ndp-burrill-coombes-martin-cbrm-equalization-legislation-1.4563169 Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-10 9:39 AM ADT Reply 2 0 Brenda you're correct and I think that Kendra nailed it when she stated "While Coombes acknowledged the proposed legislation will likely go nowhere, she's hopeful it will reinvigorate the fight for equalization fairness. "If it doesn't do anything at the provincial level with regards to the other parties' support, what it will do is get people talking," she said, "and hopefully put pressure on the government to say, 'We need help here.… We're not receiving our fair payments in equalization, and we haven't for a long time, and that needs to come to the forefront.'"
Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness Follow Me 2018-06-10 12:49 PM ADT Reply 2 0 The NSEF rarely comments on political commentary as we, like most here we are nonpartisan. We must look at the simple facts and apply them to the big picture here. CAPE Breton has had over 20 years of serious neglect with no funds spent on infrastructure or investment in our future. We have some of the highest port taxes on the globe and we know you can't attract business with these rates. We would need about $100 million per year just to lower our property taxes to the same rate as HRM. Then we need some serious spending on our failing infrastructure immediately. When you factor in the spending needed to develop business plans and create jobs here at home, $15 million or $50 million will not achieve any of this. It is a bandaid on a gaping wound. Let's not forget that 26% of the almost 2 $2 billion (over $500 million) transfer payment from the equalization, is provided for the sole purpose of the items I mention above, Cape Bretons share of this would be around $230 to $250 million just from the 26%. The remaining 74% is intended to be used to deliver services to all Nova Scotians at a comparable level to the rest of Canada. We have been abused by the Nova Scotia Provincial Government for far too long and it needs to stop or Cape Breton and the rest of rural Nova Scotia will fail to exist. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 12:00 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Obviously, this clearly does not meet the full ask of the NSEF. However, from the perspective of the CBRM, $15 Million per year in additional resources changes things. It's not a negligible amount by any means. Napkin math: * Average price of a Cape Breton home: $166,498 * Sydney residential tax rate: 2.266% (2016/2017) In order to raise $15 Million a year in revenue for the CBRM, we would have to build 3,975 new houses in Sydney at the average price. They'd have to all be built in 1-year. And everyone that owned them would have to be fully up to date on their tax payments. That would increase our tax base by approximately $661,829,550 by way of new residential housing value. And 2.266% of that new tax base would get us our $15 Million a year. * If I messed up the napkin math, please correct me. It's late * If I didn't mess up the napkin math, suddenly that $15 Million doesn't look all that insignificant anymore for those that suggest that it is (I hope). Just watch the CBRM presentations for Sustainability funds from community representatives and see what these kinds of resources would mean. And, no, receiving $15 Million in additional capital doesn't mean the NSEF disbands and stops fighting for full Equalization fairness, based on the model calculated by the group (26%). In terms of putting leaders in place in all parties to maximize the chances of the full Equalization ask, assuming that they all have about equal reliability on follow through, the one more likely to consider the full ask is: (a) the one who's offering $15 Million immediately and then to do a further analysis, or (b) the ones who are not making any commitment, talk about Equalization review as being a part of municipal "modernization" and one of the things they'll look at.
Blair Gushue Follow Me 2018-06-10 3:35 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Mr. Houston playing politics has certainly stirred up a lot of attention and debate over a mere $15million. Mr. Michael MacNeil says "make sure we have a backup plan select Houston." Not always good to put all your eggs in one basket. Mr. Murphy says lets not get led astray by the politics. This is true, we have to grow and stay focused. NSEF has been trying for a lot of years to bring this injustice by all provincial governments to the people's attention. Finally more and more people are starting to realize this. it still needs to grow and we have to be all on the same page. More debates, information whatever it takes. The light is getting brighter. Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-10 3:54 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Blair I wish I had of thought of " Not always good to put all your eggs in one basket" because that is pretty much what I am trying to point out and also the fact that we all need to be on the same page. We are a small population and getting smaller. After the PC party elects a new leader we have the opportunity to play poker because we now have a good hand thanks to the NSEF and all the work that they have done.
Bill Fiander Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:19 PM ADT Reply 1 0 For any politician a promise is easy it's the commitment that is difficult. Perhaps Mr Houston will come through with this promise, and that'd be great, but haven't we all heard the same sort of promise before? Only the rhetoric and characters have changed. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-10 11:36 PM ADT Reply 3 0 The more specific the commitment we can get them on, the better. Plain language, dollar amounts, dates of completion, etc. Houston makes this one pretty easy to measure in terms of the $15 Million in year 1. We should try to lock him down on that. It needs to show up on his campaign website now, and the NSEF should request confirmation via correspondence. By comparison, what Mombourquette and Cecil Clarke are talking about is abstract and non-specific, making it very easy for them to wiggle out of whatever it is they're actually trying to say later. Martha Ross Follow Me 2018-06-11 12:24 AM ADT Reply 2 0 I am here reading all the comments from each person, I am really glad for the conservation. Yes, I am sure we all realize these politicians / all stripes will say anything to get elected. I am non-partisan, I have had my fill over the years of the deceit that comes out of the mouth of these politicians. I agree with your last comment here Joe, where Houston should have this about the equalization on his campaign website. Further more he should have this $15 million in the first year, put on his platform.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 2:55 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Looks like some have taken the $15 million Houston bait with his promise from his position of being without the power to deliver anything. In the last 20 years, approximately $30,000,000,000 in federal Equalization Payments have been received by this province’s government’s by the three political parties. Approximately, $610 million or a mere 2 percent has been distributed in the provincial Equalization grant. If approx. 26 percent of the total transfer is federally provided for the municipal deficiency in their fiscal tax capacity related to property, where did it vanish to under the political manipulation provided by putting it in the General Revenues basket? We are now supposed to believe Houston doesn’t know this has occurred...and that his promise to deal with the past amount of under-funding can seriously be dealt with by a mere $15 million promise. No mention of auditing this federal transfer or even to keep these federal Equalization payments separate from General Revenues. Without that level of transparency and accountability, what real change does he represent? Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-11 3:10 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Wow You want it all and you think that you are going to get it. Good luck with that my friend but please don't drag the rest of us Capers down while doing so. My opinion only How can you call it bait? The man is listening and is the only one to respond. Why would you resist that start? I dont understand the logic in doing so. If you want to play poker wait until the PC party elect a leader, otherwise you are throwing your hand down way too soon. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 4:57 PM ADT Reply 2 0 You have assumed that my position is all or nothing. Where have you gotten that conclusion from what I have said? I don’t trust politicians’ promise. I am not a member of any political party. All of them have demonstrated when in power, this issue was not tackled because there was no intention to do so. If you are going to accept Houston offer, that is your decision. You have already laid your hand down in this game with this offer, I have not, contrary to your saying I have. Further, unless there is some accountability and transparency for these transfers, what prevents any new government from manipulating these transfers minus the additional $15 million if it is honoured by the Houston team if they win government? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 3:29 PM ADT Reply 3 0 He called the $15 Million a stop gap amount, a way to get additional resources quickly to municipalities that need them, without having to wait for further analysis (aka delay). A good step for the NSEF would now be to correspond with Houston and ask for further details on his commitment. What does success look like for the NSEF? If, for instance, Houston said he committed to giving the full 26% of Federal Equalization directly to municipalities, that would be a campaign promise that could be declared as "bait with his promise from his position of being without power to deliver anything". I.e. even the full ask can be offered, but represents only a promise. If he was Premier and setting the agenda for the party, with a majority government, and suggested the same, but said they were working on it and expected it to happen in 2 to 5 years, it would then be a promise, because despite having power, we'd have to wait to see if they followed through with it. I.e. even with legislative power, if the timeframe for implementation is in the future, the full ask can be offered but represents only a promise. While skepticism is owed to politicians because of how frequently they renege on campaign commitments, in what manner can they actually support anything fully or partially that would be considered progress towards a larger goal? What is the probability that the full ask is going to be achieved without a series of intermediary steps? $15 Million a year in increased revenue for the CBRM is roughly equivalent to 4,000 new homes being built in Sydney in 1-year. Despite it representing only about 1/20th of what the NSEF calculates (based on the 26%) as being a fair distribution for the CBRM, it's difficult not to see $15 Million in leverageable money to use at our discretion without a waiting period as being non-beneficial to us. Will any politician follow through? If we have none that will, what's our backup plan? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 5:20 PM ADT Reply 2 0 You do a lot reflecting after promoting acceptance of the $15 million promise. Why? Why shouldn’t you contact Houston to get your information firsthand as to any further developments he is considering to promise? Again, the 26% doen’t originate with or from NSEF. And, have you heard any politician even reference that 26% other than what one provincial finance minister provided and which was confirmed by an official in the federal finance department? Why do you think they don’t acknowledge that part of the total transfer? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 6:16 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I'm sharing some perspective and posing a few questions for your benefit, Charles. With respect, I already know how to structure practical solutions, and how incremental (not all-or-nothing, black or white) solutions work. You may surprise me, but the probability of achieving the 26% without incremental steps in that direction is next to nil. If you're not finding politicians getting onboard, maybe you should consider that your ask may be politically insurmountable for all of them. I would love to be wrong here. You don't seem to realize that your group has had a major success in getting a potential PC leadership candidate/Premier, and an NDP MLA to start endorsing multi-million dollar increases in the provincial Equalization transfer. You dismissed $15 Million in additional resources even if Houston actually comes through with it. And yet, it would require us to build about 4,000 homes in Sydney (and somehow get enough people to move here to fill them) in order to generate $15 Million in revenue for the CBRM. I watched the CBRM Council during the community Sustainability proposals and the budget sessions, and I'm fully aware of how desperately needed that money is here. And you dismiss it as insignificant because he didn't immediately agree to sign over $245 Million dollars (which would just be another promise until it happened anyway). You have a high profile political leader moving towards your position. Not quite as quickly as you'd like, but you don't see this as an opportunity to ask him for clarity on whether he'll consider the 26% in his study and get him on record, via correspondence in his response? Derek Mombourquette should send his thanks. As long as NSEF completely dismisses Houston's offer, the Liberals aren't going to be heavily influenced to make a better proposition to outdo him. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 8:00 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Again, you conclude I and NSEF ARE presenting an all or nothing position. You may be right that the all or nothing may not be possible. But have you seen any data on where the Equalization IS being spent? Tell me the name of any politician that has been upfront with the citizens or NSEF on this file? You should be aware by now that any information has to be forced from government and the Opposition. Why? Again, you conclude something for me on the $15 million when it is only a promise. Again, you draw your conclusion of my position because council needs money, which is not in question. You again, on the basis of a promise, conclude Ouston is moving towards “our position. Really! As I said previously, you can get clarification from Houston on his promises, if he is inclined to offer anything further. Again, in your view Mombourquette will be happy because I (not speaking for NSEF) don’t fall over myself in embracing a political promise. What sources tell you so? The best the three local Tories could drum up is to call upon Premier McNeil to do an audit. Mombourquette is not the real problem, he is the symptom of a corrupt and unresponsive political system. That goes for all these candidates. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 10:06 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Something that could alleviate my confusion, is you giving some insight as to a sequence of events (which politician, what action, what amount, what time frame) would, in your opinion, be consistent with what you see as a positive step forward? Whereas you consider my enthusiasm for getting a potential leadership candidate/Premier hopeful to pledge money allocated as specifically to address Equalization unfairness as too quickly supportive, what would be the scenario where you would be optimistic? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 11:13 PM ADT Reply 0 0 What is there to be optimistic about a political system that creates winners and losers by intentionally not complying with a constitutional commitment pursuant to s.36? Why has it been necessary for governments to hide these Equalization in General Revenues? What have they been doing that they do not want people to see or know about? Government today does not serve the public but does its best to keep the public uninformed of what it is doing? Why? NSEF should not have been necessary to assemble information that the public should have had total access to. It is public money. You can get excited over being played by a political system that has us crawling to obtain our information that the politicians hide from us, I cannot. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:37 AM ADT Reply 0 0 We live in Canada. Change is possible. I spend a great deal of time being critical of our political system and its representatives. Nonetheless, I still believe progress can be made. If you create no measure by which anyone can meet your expectations, then the political system will always seem like a complete failure. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:40 AM ADT Reply 0 0 My expectations are very basic: after placing my trust in an elected person who is very well compensated for getting my vote to represent this community only to support a party’s policy that cheats the residents who trusted him/her on his/her promise to represent those who put him/her in that position of trust. Apparently, you consider that too high of an expectation. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 2:01 AM ADT Reply 0 0 So you've shifted to a focus on political ethics, not economic equalization. You say your expectation is having a politician you can trust to do what they tell you they will do once elected. Based on our conversation, it would appear that it's you that has repeatedly suggested that trusting a politician's promise is "too high of an expectation". Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:36 AM ADT Reply 0 0 I don’t regard having an honest person as a political representative separates economic considerations from his/her ethical behaviour. I don’t think it is necessary to detail the number of politically broken promises for citizens to have no trust in situations of a politician seeking a higher position within a political party. Furthermore, I think it was in Britain that a court ruled promises by a politician cannot be held accountable. So, with a more serious Constitutional committment the courts safeguard politicians from having to be held accountable for their behaviour. Although the Constitutional non-compliance is a much more serious matter given the economic discrimination against the municipalities in this province with the manipulation by all parties of the Equalization billions over many years. How can you even question under the history of broken promises by politicians that not having trust in another politician’s promise becomes “too high of an expectation?” That is even more startling when Equalization distribution within this province is the point of discussion. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 9:33 AM ADT Reply 0 0 You want politicians you can trust, but you don't trust any of them. You've basically locked yourself inside of a catch 22. If you had 10 politicians, all of whom lied 9/10 statements, and told the truth only 1/10 statements, consider the following. Politician X says she will provide $15 Million in increased Equalization transfer to your community. All of the others make no commitment. Though they each tell the truth only 10% of the time, which of the 10 politicians has the highest likelihood of coming through with something, even though the chances are low for all? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:59 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Let’s have this Houston politician when he wins government then tell the citizens he will separate the Equalization payments and account for where it is spent. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:05 PM ADT Reply 1 0 I see your conclusion from the perspective that if there were no lying politicians, I would have no lack of trust in politicians. Since my lack of trust originates from lying politicians, the fault lies with them. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:09 PM ADT Reply 0 0 I don't know why you waste any time lobbying politicians for change when you don't allow for the possibility of any of them ever fulfilling any of your requests. Time to get the blockade up at the Causeway. Start raiding the colonial supply houses on the mainland. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:36 PM ADT Reply 0 0 We are lobbying government that has the power to change. If we had honest government we would not have to do any lobbying. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:40 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Since when in reality, is politics divorced from economics? That. “too high of an expectation” to trust a politican’s promise who seeks an office or the power to govern is based on far too many examples of broken promises. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:06 PM ADT Reply 0 0 At this point, we're not really adding any more value to the discussion. We're getting into the weeds. Change can't happen if every attempt is completely dismissed. If he offered something, and that something is not enough, instead of just dismissing it as another promise from another politician who can't be trusted, why not ask him to commit more, to clarify, or just inform him of the deficiency in his offer so far? $15 Million does not resolve the Equalization Fairness issue. Nonetheless, $15 Million is a major injection of desperately needed funds to the CBRM. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:53 PM ADT Reply 1 0 If Houston is the one looking for approval with his offer and is not getting many takers, he can up his offer himself. You apparently have given your approval with your characterizing it as a “major injection” of funds. When the amount of under funding over the so many years is positioned alongside this promise, I would suggest most taxpayers would consider your description of Houston promise as insignificant. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 4:18 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Is he not getting any takers? Viewed on its own, without any bias towards what the full Equalization ask is from the NSEF, $15 Million is definitely a major injection of capital to the CBRM, who desperately need it. You can position it against the full ask. That's a great form of persuasion to make it seem less significant. In online marketing, when this is applied to pricing, we call it "anchoring". Objectively speaking, it's obviously significant. Name another way the CBRM could raise their income by that amount in 1-year. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:31 PM ADT Reply 1 0 If we had honest and transparent governments -both provincially and federally, this issue would not be an issue. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:53 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Update: If you thought $15 Million extra was a bad deal, wait until you see Cecil Clarke's latest campaign pledge. He now says he wants to eliminate the entire Equalization transfer to municipalities. And they wonder why people don't like politicians. Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-12 8:04 PM ADT Reply 1 0 No way Joe It must be false news. why would the mayor of the CBRM say such a thing? It doesn't make sense he is still being paid by the CBRM municipal tax dollar. Brenda Durdle Follow Me 2018-06-12 10:26 PM ADT Reply 0 0 If you check on Cecil's Facebook page you will see his position which is more about fixing a broken system than eliminating the payments. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-12 8:15 PM ADT Reply 0 0 The federal transfer IS unconditional. Brenda Durdle Follow Me 2018-06-12 9:23 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Where have you heard this? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 9:27 PM ADT Reply 1 0 https://capebreton.lokol.me/clarke-goes-negative-wants-to-cancel-equalization-completely Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-13 1:38 PM ADT Reply 1 0 Check the federal website. That is what enables the provincial governments to manipulate these billions of federal dollars all these years and there is no record or a separate accounting for the billions received by Nova Scotia and the other have not province’s. It’s time the public demanded from the federal government such an accounting...it is OUR money and it must be accounted for. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-13 2:01 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Agree. I think they should also provide a framework that outlines expectations on how it should be allocated, how performance is to be allocated, and what key economic indicators are to be used to measure performance. And that all should be tracked with quarterly, or semi-annual updates. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-13 4:46 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Joe, it appears there has been no accounting for the lifetime Equalization payments that total $393,092,000,000. Do you know the story behind such monies being transferred “unconditionally?” And this becomes more significant legally after this commitment was enshrined in OUR Constitution. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 6:21 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Please note: I"m not rejecting your argument that greater Equalization is due. I'm not rejecting your argument that politicians notoriously make promises that they don't keep, and that there's a chance Houston could turn out to do the same. TBD. But I fully reject the idea that $15 Million in additional resources isn't a break through, and vitally needed resources for the CBRM. I'm not even endorsing Houston as Premier. That decision will come much later depending on all the other offers on the table, regarding everything the province and the CBRM needs, and who is making the best offer. For now, he's the only PC candidate that is moving in the right direction on Equalization, and so it would be strategically beneficial to have him secure the leadership position. What's the alternative? Cecil Clarke? We already know his history on Equalization, and I can't imagine the NSEF would want to take the risk of having him as a candidate for Premier. Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 7:32 PM ADT Reply 2 0 You do a lot of writing stating the obvious.. Nothing profound stated in first paragraph. I ‘m not saying any amount of money in not needed. You seem to imply that I do. Whether it is “a break through” is not determined yet, although you have concluded it is. You have concluded Houston is the best bet considering it could be Clarke. You have already banked on the Tories winning the next election with Houston. I’m not speaking for NSEF’s political strategy or political gambling on the future. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-11 10:25 PM ADT Reply 0 0 It may be necessary to reemphasize the obvious here: $15 Million in additional resources to the CBRM is much needed and would be a huge breakthrough. It is the equivalent of adding about 4,000 new houses to our tax base in a single year. What other near-term pathways do we have to that kind of increase in capital? If Houston was elected and followed through, this would be an amazing milestone for us with real impact. I've concluded that Houston is (a) a better leader and policy maker than Clarke and (b) is more much more likely to support increased Equalization transfers than Clarke. He's made a considerable commitment in his campaign at present. Clarke opposed it, said we were getting our fair share and mocked Mayor John Morgan. I haven't banked on the Tories winning. I've observed that during the last election they gained seats and that they are the party that has the greatest potential to challenge the Liberals if their popularity continues to decline into the next election. In the event that they do win the next election, I have concluded that the best opportunity for Cape Breton is if Houston becomes the Premier versus Clarke. Note: I've made an assumption that other candidates are not viable, and that may be subject to error (TBD; insufficient information). I also believe that it is highly unlikely the Liberals are going to support any significant increase in Equalization and will continue to avoid it. If any commitment comes from them pre-election, it will likely only be because the PCs are closing in on them, and an Equalization pledge is factoring in their support (if that's the case). If you were tasked with choosing which candidates within each party are more likely to give something more for Equalization (at any level of government) would you have an idea of who might be best to work with? Aren't we (strategically) best off with the most "cooperative" candidates in every party? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-06-11 11:23 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Here you go again on your political promotion. And that is based on a foundation of “if.” Why are you so subservient to a political system that has cheated most Nova Scotians? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:53 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Why are you put off by conditional thinking? If Action a, then Outcome a If Action b, then Outcome b These are just the very basics of strategy. You think of a set of possible actions, what their likely outcomes are, and what the chances (probability) of each occurring are. Then you determine which you can influence. Either a PC or Liberal government is most likely. Of the three Premier candidates, Houston is the most likely to increase Equalization. Clarke and McNeil are about equal in their unlikeliness to offer anything related to Equalization. These are present conditions, and they may change significantly prior to the next election. Using Houston's commitment, the others may be compelled to make their version of a better offer. TBD. If Houston was elected And he fulfilled his commitment, the CBRM would receive $15 Million or the equivalent of expanding our tax base by ~4,000 new homes. If he isn't elected and/or doesn't fulfill his commitment, we'll be in the same place then we are in now. Unless someone else comes through. Blair Gushue Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:01 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Some good arguments but starting to sound like partisan politics. What happens if there is a minority government Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:27 AM ADT Reply 1 0 Both Charles and I are non-partisan. I'm generally a Liberal-leaning independent. Good question. A Houston-lead PC minority could work with the NDP to follow through on his campaign commitment. They have some compatibility in that regard. TBD. Mike Johnson Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:05 AM ADT Reply 1 0 I think that we would find that Houston is a social Liberal himself, while remaining an economic Conservative. Meaning that on Healthcare, Education, and Equalization he would spend whatever is required to develop a LT Plan, but would compensate by ending all partisan or wasteful spending, such as the Yarmouth Ferry, and the CB&CNS Railway. He knows that the NSHA is huge, stagnant bureaucracy that sucks up $, and accomplishes little. It will be a major indicator for me personally if he deals aggressively with that elephant.
Blair Gushue Follow Me 2018-06-12 2:27 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Mr. Ward I asked you about Mr. Houston maybe having a commitment to reduce unemployment by 5% in 4yrs and discuss how to stop outmigration. You replied: “Reducing unemployment is a high-level goal. That would be a very difficult commitment to make unless they had a highly specific action plan, that's a tough one in the near-term. Houston's platform has an innovative approach for slowing outmigration of young people, offering those under 25 years no income tax up to their first $50k of income.” Another debate your discussing is $15milliion comparing it to 4000 new homes at a high tax rate of 2.2% to generate CBRM revenue. If we had 4000 (highly unlikely) new people to build them it would be great and definitely generate a lot more revenue for us and the province. No Jobs, no taxes , no revenue = no tax incentives. We need a highly specific action plan to provide a stimulus to create jobs which will stop the outmigration. We need infrastructure to attract new business and we need a healthy municipality to provide services by way of fair equalization. Great corporations have think tanks and action plans to save their good people and ideas to generate revenue. We need an action plan for our survival! Not Politics. This is just a statement, not an attack on your ideas. Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 9:18 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Which action plan won't involve interfacing with our political system? Short of a government make work project, the government can only endeavor to create economic conditions that promote economic activity. Or they move a department here of government employees like Citizenship. My comparison to 4,000 new homes is only to emphasize how significant $15 Million is to the CBRM, by demonstrating how hard it would be to obtain ourselves through growth of our tax base.
Bill Fiander Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:43 AM ADT Reply 1 0 The amount owed Cape Breton and other regions throughout NS appears daunting by NSEF figures. So far, however, every reach out to Federal and Provincial officials have been hit with a road block. I just don't foresee where the Provincial gov't is going to pass over billions of dollars to the municipalities of NS unless the federal gov't steps in, and that's not going to happen anytime soon. Politicians are seen as being one of the least trustworthy of people, but 'if' Tim Houston's promise becomes a reality, I would think that is a base to start from, and then try to build on it. But that is still a pretty big 'if' at the moment.
Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-12 7:55 AM ADT Reply 0 0 Wow 39 comments in 2 days. All of them intelligent views and opinions from people who care. Dan Christmas stated let the discussion begin. Thanks to the hard work of NSEF the discussion has started. I think it's important to remember that this discussion is going to include people that care about many different issues that tend to overlap in Cape Breton. That was proven when 600 people showed up at the first protest. Not an easy task to get that many involved. Let's hope that the people that can make change are reading each and every comment.
[comment deleted] Posted 2018-06-12 7:55 AM ADT
[comment deleted] Posted 2018-06-12 7:55 AM ADT
[comment deleted] Posted 2018-06-12 7:55 AM ADT [comment deleted] Posted 2018-06-12 8:28 AM ADT
Bill Fiander Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:44 PM ADT Reply 2 0 If Mr Houston is going to go so far as to promise to double up the amount to CBRM, why not make the extra promise to an audit? What would be the difference in making one of these promises over the other? Of course the last time an audit was promised it wasn't committed to. But lets say this particular politician committed to every promise he made, why not commit to an audit? Joe Ward My Post Follow Me 2018-06-12 12:59 PM ADT Reply 1 0 The Cape Breton Post article definitely references only working on a new "shared services agreement", and while this could include an audit in the process, it clearly wasn't noted or emphasized. And that's an important point to follow up on. There are many ways to make a position on shared services agreements ranging from only correcting the clawback to a larger scale Equalization discussion. And it's important to know what his basis is. I was not at the North Sydney meeting to hear his speech, so I'm aware if there were further details that discussed the idea of an audit as well. There is a short clip somewhere that I need to track down. Michael MacNeil Follow Me 2018-06-12 1:10 PM ADT Reply 0 0 That's actually a great idea Bill. Mr. Houston is a chartered accountant by trade and I am sure his approach will be many audits to get a clearer picture of what's going on if he ever became premier. I would guess the first audit will be performed on the NSHA because he already suggested poor management is the problem with Health care.