Ignatieff's HST stance unmurkified? ITQ wouldn't go that far, but it's a start.

by kadyomalley on Monday, September 21, 2009 4:07pm - 66 Comments

Well, in marked contrast to his reaction to being questioned about his HST stance last week, Michael Ignatieff at least now seems willing to admit that he has, in fact, taken a position on the harmonization plan, and even clarifies — albeit in rather vague terms — how his position differs from that of the current Conservative government.

He also confirms that, as “a party of government”, it would be irresponsible of the Liberals to say that they’d “rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated between a federal … and a provincial government.” That doesn’t, however, mean that, as prime minister, he wouldn’t sit down with those provincial governments to discuss any “problems in the application” of the existing agreement in order to make it “fairer and more equitable for Canadians.”

On the other hand, he still didn’t have an explanation for the Three’s Company-calibre communication meltdown that apparently occurred between OLO and Queen’s Park over where, exactly, his party stood on the HST deal with Ontario, although in his defence, nobody asked him for one.

Anyway, here’s a quick and dirty transcript — and note that the first question is from none other than Colleague Rich Madan of CityTV: 

Question: Last week the premier said he would ask you to clarify your position on the harmonized sales tax. I’m wondering, we have you here in Toronto today — could you clarify whether you support or don’t support the introduction of an HST in Ontario and British Columbia?

Michael Ignatieff: Look, the HST harmonized sales taxing arrangement was initiated by the Harper government. They have sought the cooperation of two provinces. There are a couple of problems. The first problem is, there is no national plan. So Mr. Harper as usual is playing one province against the other. The BC plan looks this way. The Ontario plan is different. We would have done that differently. We think this is one country. And if you’re going to do harmonized sales tax, you ought to have a national plan that has consistent national sense, so that’s the first problem.

The second problem is that if this is a deal done by the Harper government and the McGuinty government and the Campbell government and we come into office, we’re a party of government. We’re serious, professional people. We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in — between a federal government and a provincial government but — and this would be my third and final remark — in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned.

Question: I’m going to ask a follow-up to Mr. Madan’s question. We know what you were saying what would you do but where do you personally stand on this agreement between Prime Minister Harper and the governments of British Columbia and Ontario? Where do you stand on this issue?

Michael Ignatieff: My view of this is — look, Mr. Harper decided to push sales tax harmonization in the middle of a recession. He got two provinces to agree. The right way to do this is to get a national plan with a harmonized sales tax proposal that makes sense for all the provinces. Instead, he’s playing one province against the other. That’s problem number one.

Problem number 2 is, were we in government and this sales tax is in place and the harmonization has occurred, it’s just not responsible for a party of government to say, well, we’ll tear it up and go back to ground zero. What we can do and what we can say to Ontarians and British Columbians is if there is unfairness, if there are problems, if there are things that are really hurting the local economy, of course we’re going to sit down with the province and say, can we correct this? Can we help? Can we make this fairer for Canadians. That, I’m prepared to do.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/kblack1 kblack1

    Seems like a totally reasonable response/position to me.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

      While the words may seem reasonable, it is not a position at all. From this exchange, the only position Ignatieff takes is that the timing of the agreements were bad, and that it should have been 'all for one and one for all'. He knows the 'all for one' approach is nothing more than political fiction because you are never going to get Alberta to suddenly introduce a sales tax, nor does he offer any explanation for why suddenly now asymmetrical federalism will not work.

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

      While the words may seem reasonable, it is not a position at all. From this exchange, the only position Ignatieff takes is that the timing of the agreements were bad, and that it should have been 'all for one and one for all'. He knows the 'all for one' approach is nothing more than political fiction because you are never going to get Alberta to introduce a sales tax, nor does he offer any explanation for why suddenly now asymmetrical federalism will not work.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    Is there any substance to Ignatieff's claim that Harper is "playing one province against the other", or is this just meaningless spin?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

      It would be like saying PST plays one off against the other….it is a meaningless phrase.

      First rule when in a hole, stop digging.

    • Old School Liberal

      Who gets the best deal?

      He/she who waits the longest and ups the ante.

      The Liberals set up a program and a clear formula for reimbursement . Harper wants to harmonize sales taxes so much he's beefed up the payments through one-on-one negotiations. Did Nova Scotia get this much? The other HST provinces?

      If he was as indifferent to whether a province harmonizes or not, then why top up the payment? Why not just say, it is fully your choice and you have to decide on your own. We won't treat you any differently than any other province.

      • hosertohoosier

        Isn't that an argument against any change to the formula Chretien initiated long ago? Moreover, if harmonization is in the national interest (and it is), doesn't it make sense to enrich the pot if most provinces (or at least the most populous provinces) are not yet on-side? The irony is that your "clear national program" has resulted in a patchwork quilt of some provinces with harmonized sales taxes and some without.

        Alternately, why offer Nova Scotia harmonization for a billion if they will do it for 500 million?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

      I don't know if it's meaningless spin, though it seems like something of an improvised positon (I can picture the staff pulling feverish all-nighters trying to unify Iggy's utterances into coherent platform planks!),

      That said, it's not a bad line to take. Certainly, Harper's record of haphazzard dealings with the provinces hasn't been helpful (without accusing him of 'divide and conquer' tactics, necessarily). And Iggy might be learning how to boil down mulifaceted, contextual assessments/positions (which are easy to render confusing or incoherent) into reasonably straightforward messages. Which, even for those who oppose the Liberals, has to be a good thing for debate and discussion at the federal level.

    • Anon

      .. meaningless spin <./i>

      Is there such a thing as "meaningful" spin?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

        Apparently not when Iggy's the one doing the spinning.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

          That's why they call rhetorical questions rhetorical.

      • Gawd

        only at 33 1/3 RPM

    • Gawd

      not at all, having a unified HST among all the regions of Canada would serve to put everyone on the same page

    • Irritable Canadian

      "… or is this just meaningless spin?"…

      DING DING DING… We have a winner!

  • anonymoose

    I may be wrong, but I thought the HST program was begun under Martin.

    • hosertohoosier

      I am afraid you are wrong. HST started in 1996 in the three bigger Atlantic provinces. I guess you get partial credit since Martin was minister of finance.

      • anonymoose

        I couldn't remember the year, thanks. I knew martin was involved somehow, couldn't remember if was leader then or not.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

          A helpful rule of thumb re: Martin is that if he got something done, he wasn't PM.

  • anonymoose

    another thing. I don't think that the provinces are being "played" each province is different and has different needs. The big, central mentality doesn't seem to understand this. no wonder he wanted EI 360.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

      EI 360 would have taken us back to the early 70's reforms that took until the Forget commssion to get rid of….essentially 15 years. Yes this whole obsession with single standards belies an ignornace of the country.

      Do we need 58 jursidictions…no……but one standard is both politically impossible unless you drop to the bottom rung.

      I can only conclude that they havent really thought any of this stuff through, its like iteration 1 of their policy proposals.

      They always needed more time…..they still do.

    • Bonnie N

      Well that is the tack that Gordon Campbell told the electorate when this surfaced after the election. Sort of we had to go because of Ontario.I have no idea what one has to with the other but that's how it played out in BC.

      People here are livid..

      • anonymoose

        not all people here are livid. all those with small businesses stand to gain. farmers will be anywhere in the range of up to 5% better off under the HST formula. If memory serves, overall prices declined in the maritimes after the HST was introduced. The only folks that should be livid in BC are the PST employees at the provincial government who will no longer have a job, thus saving the province $130million a year.

        • Gawd

          some of them will get assimilated the others get golden severance at taxpayer expense

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

          protect the moose. We need more of reasoned thought. The knee jerk dimwits and political opportunists have all come crawling out from under their rocks.

        • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

          protect the moose. We need more of that reasoned thought. The knee jerk dimwits and political opportunists have all come crawling out from under their rocks.

        • Bonnie N

          I like how you only mention small business as if they are the only ones to collect PST – a bit disingenuous. It's a tax shift to the consumer and it sounds like you relish the layoff of public employees in BC.

          You cannot keep taxing the middle class (especially in a recession) as if they are a bottomless pit. At some point your precious small businesses will have no goods to sell if you tax consumers to death in a weak economy.

          Of course business is in favour of this but you miss the mark if you underestimate the outrage of consumers in BC.

          • anonymoose

            personal income tax in BC has gone down 32% in the last 5 years. I am a consumer in BC. I would much rather on any day of the year pay a consumption tax than an income tax. I pay PST on most things I buy now, excluding books, which will still be exempt, as will groceries and kids clothes…the three things I spend most on.

            I mention small business because it it the largest employer in BC. Small businesses have to contend with the overhead of collecting and making sure that it is collected right. One business that I am quite familiar with spends upwards of $30K a year administering the PST due to various exemptions and making sure that it is collected properly. This reduction in overhead will result in lower prices at the check out for the end user.

            Never assume that everyone believes the same as you do Bonnie. there are a multitude of differences in this province.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

            All taxes are ultimately paid by the consumer, so a shift to taxing consumers only makes the process more transparent, which is a good thing.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

            Ironically, it is usually those people shouting loudest for increased spending that also shout loudest at new taxes. It doesn't matter to them that the changes make sense. It must be Monday, usually I can ignore those people.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

            You know, I know we "all" like to say that it is usually those people shouting loudest for increased spending that also shout loudest at new taxes, but is there really any evidence to support that theory?

            In extremely general terms isn't it the lefties who want more spending and the righties who want less spending?

            How to increase understanding of the government finances…

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

            Y'know, I know we "all" like to say that it is usually those people shouting loudest for increased spending that also shout loudest at new taxes, but is there really any evidence to support that theory?

            In extremely general terms isn't it the lefties who want more spending and the righties who want less spending?

            How to increase understanding of the government finances…

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

            Y'know, we "all" like to say that it is usually those people shouting loudest for increased spending that also shout loudest at new taxes, but is there really any evidence to support that theory?

            In extremely general terms isn't it the lefties who want more spending and the righties who want less spending?

            How to increase understanding of the government finances…

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

            Who has brought in the most sweeping tax changes in Canada, and who has complained most about them?

            I think you are stating the obvious ideology, but not looking at the practice. In Canada, the NDP seldom form government, so they have the luxury of claiming that they would bring in broad new social programs and NOT raise taxes. They are also the first to shout down GST, HST or any tax other that one that is directly applied to corporations. Somehow the concept that those corporation taxes won't be directly passed on to the consumer, with the only net effect that those companies are at a competitive disadvantage in trade, escapes them.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

            I don't have an answer to your question, since I don't understand where you are heading; please clarify if you have time.

            Wrt the federal NDP, they do at least seem to recognize that extra revenue will be required to fund new programs, so they aren't completely disconnected from reality. But you make a good point about corporate taxes and who ultimately pays those expenses and the NDP's fascinating obliviousness to that reality.

            Just one quibble: I'm not sure that it is correct to say that 100% of additional corporate taxes would be passed on to the consumers who would otherwise pay the taxes themselves. Corporations will try to pass additional expenses on to consumers but they may find that the market won't "allow" the full cost to be passed along, and they may have to reduce earnings or adopt other strategies, or most likely a bit of all available options.

  • Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

    I don’t get the sense that Ontarians are upset. There was a byelection recently where the government won with ease, against a candidate whose main issue was HST.

    • Frankie Fritz

      People in St. Paul's–one of Canada's most affluent ridings–don't have much reason to worry about paying for Harper's tax on everything.

      As for the rest of us, I'd suspect that's gonna change once we start paying for it in January 2010!

  • Gawd

    ladies and gentle men straight rom the canadian press, Bubbles (Mr Mike Smith) is going to run for Prime Minister

    http://www.torontosun.com/entertainment/movies/20…

    he says so right at the end.

  • Gill

    Here's the whole video

    [youtube 2oZ-LsBKM3U http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oZ-LsBKM3U youtube]

  • oppo guy

    "The right way to do this is to get a national plan with a harmonized sales tax proposal that makes sense for all the provinces."

    WHHhh-aaaaat?? So, not only is Ignatieff NOW peachy-keen for Harper's HST, he thinks the whole country should be saddled with it? I think I liked it better when he thought Opposition leaders "didn't have to have a position" on matters of public policy.

    PS: One wonders, how does Ujjal Dosanjh feel about developments?

    • wilson

      'get a national plan'
      as in mandatory hst instead of the government's 'voluntary' program?
      Sask, Man and PEI are the only provinces that haven't signed up for the hst (Alberta and Territories don't have a sales tax),
      Libs hold 1 seat in Sask, 1 seat in Manitoba, 3 seats (2 firmly) in PEI, 0 in Alberta….yes, he meant mandatory!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

    Iggy has been bouncing around in the enchanted forest too long. Was he actually going into an election where the economy is top of mind with this tripe that he delivered today? I think he still live in the 70's. The man is out to lunch.__There was not much new here. A lot of the usual Liberal platitudes and abstract rhetoric that doesn't allow anyone to discuss specifics. His press conference was equally vapid. He, like Jack Layton, is swallowing himself whole, trying to explain his positions. He is absolutely terrified of Harper because that is all he can talk about. Ask a question about the Liberal plan and it all comes back to Harper.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

    Iggy has been bouncing around in the enchanted forest too long. Was he actually going into an election where the economy is top of mind with this tripe that he delivered today? I think he still lives in the 70's. The man is out to lunch.__There was not much new here. A lot of the usual Liberal platitudes and abstract rhetoric that doesn't allow anyone to discuss specifics. His press conference was equally vapid. He, like Jack Layton, is swallowing himself whole, trying to explain his positions. He is absolutely terrified of Harper because that is all he can talk about. Ask a question about the Liberal plan and it all comes back to Harper.

    • an online reader

      It wasn’t long ago that Brian Mulroney fudged the numbers. And let’s not forget—Mike Harris and Ernie Eves fudged them too. And I’ll tell you who remembers, better than anyone—Jim Flaherty. He was there.

      We’ll also make the Parliamentary Budget Officer independent, so that we never have to go through this again. No more wishful projections. No more false promises.

      Next, we’ll develop a prudent and transparent plan to get our finances in order. ( promises made , promises kept without mentioning the " h " word )

      • an online reader

        harper was talking about scary Liberal surplus makers & the need for PBO to control them .

        Iggy was talking about scary conservative deficet hiders and did not mention reform alliance " destroy the surplus so liberal won't spend theory guy " .

  • Riley Robertson

    Hollinm wrote … “I think he still lives in the 70′s” —————————– I’ve read this exact line in two columns today from different columnists in the Canwest chain, as well as from posters on several other forums. Let me guess … you’re one of those puffy 30 year old fratboys in pajamas living in your parent’s basement and collecting a conservative party stipend, to post talking points on forums aren’t you?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

      Some of us were out pounding the pavement during Dief's push for a majority in 1958 and Mike Pearson's drive "for a Liberal majority" in 1965 and are able to remember the 1970s all on our own. We don't need Libertrolls telling us they read in their history books.

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

      Some of us were out pounding the pavement during Dief's push for a majority in 1958 and Mike Pearson's drive "for a Liberal majority" in 1965 and are able to remember the 1970s all on our own. We don't need Libertrolls telling us what they read in their history books.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

      Riley Robertson……..Wrong!!!!!!!!! I am 70 years old but thanks for considering me to be a fratboy. When you have nothing to say I guess you simply attack. Juvenile. You need to grow up buddy.____I don't know anything about the other columns or posters but I can tell you after 70 years on this planet I can think for myself while the Liberal sycophants simply recite Liberal spin lines.____See how wrong you can be when you start inferring things on people who you disagree with.____Now how about talking about Iggy's flip flop on the HST. Ask him if he wants all the provinces to participate including Alberta who has no sales tax. Will Iggy insist that Alberta conform. Why don't you talk about the wonderful economic speech Iggy gave today. It was embarassing.

      • the realist

        A whole lot less embarassing than Mr. "technical recession" Harper's rambling pronouncements on the economy. No wonder he never actually worked in his chosen field of economics. From the idiotic reduction in the Gst to the repeated failures to manage our finances (no Virginia there will not be a deficit). If a doctor were as incompetent in performing surgery as Harper is at managing the government finances, the college of physicians and surgeons would long ago have revoked his licence. Hopefully we wont wait until the patient (in this case our national finances)is on life support before we revoke the license of such an obvious incompetent as Harper. Only amongst conservatives is managerial competence considered to be less importance than ideological purity.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

    Ignatieff's position on HST seemed pretty clear to me.

    He essentially says that he hopes that it will be implemented by Ontario and BC before any election so that he doesn't have to take any political heat but that he won't undo it it in the event he were ever to become PM.

    In other words, he thinks it's a good idea since he needs someone else to take the blame for raising taxes needed to pay for all the Liberal promises.

    As for his insistence that it be a national plan, it just goes to show he is not yet ready to fight an election in Quebec and that he probably has never bought anything in Alberta since he appears to be unaware that Alberta does not have a PST.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

    Ignatieff's position on HST seems pretty clear to me.

    He essentially says that he hopes that it will be implemented by Ontario and BC before any election so that he doesn't have to take any political heat but that he won't undo it it in the event he were ever to become PM.

    In other words, he thinks it's a good idea since he needs someone else to take the blame for raising taxes needed to pay for all the Liberal promises.

    As for his insistence that it be a national plan, it just goes to show he is not yet ready to fight an election in Quebec and that he probably has never bought anything in Alberta since he appears to be unaware that Alberta does not have a PST.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/mecheng1388 mecheng

      Yeah, a national HST will fly like a lead balloon in Alberta. Man, am I ever glad I don't pay taxes in Canada anymore.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    "We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in… in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned."<i/>

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but he seems to be saying that (a) he would not renegotiate the agreement once it's in place, but (b) he would renegotiate the agreement if it's unfair.

    Help me out here Liberals. I want to believe.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    "We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in… in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned."

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but he seems to be saying that (a) he would not renegotiate the agreement once it's in place, but (b) he would renegotiate the agreement if it's unfair.

    Help me out here Liberals. I want to believe.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

    By the way, Kady, what does unmurkified mean?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

      It means demurked. You know, the murk having been removed. You're welcome.

    • Gawd

      unmurkified: an invented word a la shakespeare, kind of like cutting the cheese and the taxpayer licking the knife or more accurately like s#!% hitting the fan and putting a frame everything that sticks to the wall and calling it art.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    "We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in… in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned."

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but he seems to be saying that (a) he would not renegotiate the agreement once it's in place, but (b) he would renegotiate the agreement once it's in place if it's unfair. Murktastic!

    Help me out here Liberals. I want to believe.

    • even flow

      Your better than this.

      *point a) is not even true. Unless of course, 'rip up' (get rid of) and renegotiate have know become synonymous with each other?

    • even flow

      Your better than this.

      When did 'rip up' (get rid of) become synonymous with renegotiate?

      • Gawd

        when it's unilateral decision.

  • http://skinnydips.blogspot.com Skinny Dipper

    I'll believe Iggy about the HST when I see Jean Chrétien's GST pigs fly.

    • an online reader

      harper created the PBO to control Liberal surpluses . Iggy said he would make the PBO independant to stop Conservatives like Mulroney , Harris and Eaves from hiding deficets .

      Not implementing the HST as revenue neutral is function of Federal / Provincial negotiations and Provincial taxation policy not flying H1N1's .

  • c brown

    Peter the Great, czar of Russia, imposed a tax on souls in 1718…meaning everybody had to pay it (it’s similar to a head tax or a poll tax). Peter was anti-religious (he was an avid fan of Voltaire and other secular humanist philosophers), but agreeing with him didn’t excuse anyone from paying the tax—if you didn’t believe humans had a soul, you still had to pay a “religious dissenters” tax. Peter also taxed beards, beehives, horse collars, hats, boots, basements, chimneys, food, clothing, all males, as well as birth, marriage, and even burial.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

      In other words he was an earlier model of the Pelosinator, version 1.0 .

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

      In other words he was an earlier model of the Pelosi5000 currently operating in the US Congress.

From Macleans