The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Everything except missile defence Paul Martin's February budget, definitely a "pie in the sky" document, provided promises of money for everything but missile defence. After more than a year of dithering, Mr. Martin announced that Canada would not take part in the American plan to defend North America from "rogue missile strikes," or rather that we would not help pay for it Ð getting a free ride, so to speak. Martin did not tell President Bush personally, but had his defence minister phone Condaleeza Rice. However, according to the new Ambassador to the U.S., Frank McKenna, Canada is already in the system. Apparently Canada has signed on with NORAD to the missile shield, and all we have done is given up any say if the missiles start flying. Martin, however, said that the U.S. would have to consult Canada for permission to fire a defensive missile over our airspace (there's a 20 minute lead time warning), for which the Conservatives call him "delusional" to think that NORAD will consult him before firing. In any case "Mr. Dithers" could never make up his mind Ð yes or no. It looks like Martin wants to be on both sides of the issue. His refusal will please the NDP, the Bloc and the peace activists, but many say that Canada's opting out makes the country more irrelevant in terms of our own defence. Reports on the Liberal's "futuristic" budget were many in all Canadian papers and ranged from government news releases saying how wonderful it was, to critics on the left ruing the lack of more public money for social programs. It contained $50 billion in spending promises as long as we are willing to wait at least five years (and of course re-elect the Liberals). The military finally gets a chunk of money Ð nearly $13 billion for new equipment and more troops, or at least Liberal promises of the same. Much of the money is weighted toward the end of the five-year term or even later. Tax cuts, which could have been substantial given the budget surpluses, were instead minimal Ð $16 per Canadian per year according to one commentator, but did get support from the Conservatives, who had promised much more in the election campaign. Environment The environment even got a billion dollars in promised money to reduce greenhouse gases, promote wind power, and support hydro (a good promise for Manitoba), but a 'not mentioned' provision put in by some bureaucrat is a healthy tax on minivans, SUVs and trucks, with the money supposedly going to small car owners. The auto industry is hostile, claiming people will not buy new vehicles, causing layoffs and shutdowns. The child-care provision pleases no one on the right or left. The plan, an election promise, is to spend $5 billion in five years to set up a national system with $700 million now ($25 million for Manitoba). The left wants to see a government-run, publicly-financed program while the right wants money to go directly to parents to choose their day-care provider or help stay-at-home-moms. So far even Ken Dryden could not get the provinces to agree, so don't hold your breath on this promise. Besides, there is no continuing promise of money after five years, so the provinces could be left paying all the bills after 2010. The promise of a relatively small amount of additional cash for health care beyond the $41 billion agreed to last fall appears to be an excellent idea and should receive all-party support. There is $300 million to encourage healthy lifestyles to prevent chronic diseases, $15 million to study waiting lists, and $34 million to prepare for a predicted flu epidemic Ð all over five years. The new money will be welcome, but the Feds still contribute only 25 per cent of the costs Canada's health care. It is transparent what the Martin government is up to Ð they want to stay in power and get re-elected indefinitely, thus the scattergun approach to Canada's spending. It is just as obvious that the opposition cannot, and do not, want to face an early election. Will the Liberals deliver on their promises? What is your bet?
