Atlantic Canadian Politics Thread

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

A generally sound and reasonable budget.

Two words I wouldn't use to describe it, honestly. They're still maintaining a deficit, still adding to the debt, and still increasing spending. Why? There are however a few points I do like that i'll go over when I find the time later.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

- The province had no choice but to go back to a 15% HST. They should have done it last year. Shit, Alward should have done it four years ago!

Agreed, although there's no way Alward would have done that given his mandate.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

- I agree that it was too soon to do anything about road tolls. This requires further discussion and study. Personally, I would put in a blended system with toll booths on the borders at Edmundston, Woodstock, Saint Stephen & Aulac but supplement these with additional toll stations on route 2 between Freddy & Moncton, and route 1 between SJ and Moncton. If you did this, the tolls at each station could be $5 rather than a $10 admission toll to NB.

I'm expecting tolls by the end of the current Liberal mandate, likely next year. They still need to find more revenue.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

- I also think the time has come to close the rural hospitals and convert them into nursing homes with adjoining community health centres. This province only really needs about 9-10 real hospitals to provide competent care. There could be a lot of savings here!

Absolutely.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

- I'm more sympathetic towards maintaining rural schools, at least at the elementary level. Nobody wants to see 6 year olds on a bus for 90 minutes every morning. Small 2-3 room rural schools are fine for younger kids. It's only with the need for more specialized programs in the senior years that consolidation is necessary.

I'm not. If you're living 90 minutes from an area with a school, and paying lower property/lack of municipal taxes as a result, that's the choice you've made, IMO. Rural areas are emptying out regardless, closing rural schools is going to affect fewer and fewer the longer they stay open. I'm actually trying to think of somewhere you could nestle in this province that's 90 minutes one way from a school and it would be very difficult to find.

Also, we're getting a cap on our free and accessible healthcare:

via @poitrasCBC

[JHikka]

Liberal house leader Dominic LeBlanc subject to ethics ‘screen’ involving powerful Irving family

Glen McGregor, Ottawa Citizen | February 11, 2016 4:19 PM ET
More from Glen McGregor, Ottawa Citizen | @glen_mcgregor

Federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson has told Liberal house leader Dominic LeBlanc he must avoid participating in any decisions involving the powerful Irving family of New Brunswick.

LeBlanc, a key political lieutenant to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, cited his friendship with James D. “Jim” Irving as a potential conflict-of-interest in an undertaking filed with Dawson last month.

His chief of staff, Vince MacNeil, must “screen” him from any dealings with Irving’s company, J.D. Irving Ltd., and its affiliates and subsidiaries.

This will “ensure that I will abstain from any participation in any discussions or decision-making processes and any communication with government officials in relation to any matter or issue forming part of the subject matter of the conflict of interest screen,” LeBlanc promised in the written declaration.

LeBlanc refers to Irving as “my friend,” though he is believed to be closer to Irving’s son, Jamie, who runs the family’s chain of newspapers.

Irving is the president and chief executive officer of J.D. Irving Limited, part of the Irving family conglomerate that has interests in numerous industrial sectors, including shipbuilding and oil refining.

The Irvings are involved in the proposed Energy East pipeline, which would bring oil from Western Canada to New Brunswick for refining. The government has promised a new approvals process to consider whether green-lighting the pipeline.

Through Irving Shipbuilding, the company is also the beneficiary of substantial government contracts to build new vessels for the Royal Canadian Navy at its shipyard in Halifax.

The ethics screen set up for LeBlanc covers “J.D. Irving Limited, its subsidiaries, affiliates, associates, divisions and or any legal form of business in which he or his companies may have a private interest.”

The prime minister and the clerk of the privy council have both been told about the conflict screen, according to LeBlanc’s disclosure statement.

But the ethics undertaking will doubtless raise questions about LeBlanc’s unofficial role as the minister at the cabinet table responsible for New Brunswick, as the tentacles of the Irving family’s interests extend throughout the province, from the the pulp and paper sector to the near-total domination of the province’s print media.

So entrenched is the family’s hegemony over the province that the satirical newsmagazine Frank refers to the Irvings as “owners of New Brunswick.”

Irving’s company has engaged in some professional intercourse with LeBlanc in the past. The company’s lobbyists filed a communications report indicating contact with LeBlanc in 2012, when he was as opposition MP and J.D. Iriving was lobbying over the Shipyard Redevelopment and Industrial Diversification Program.

The subject matter of their contact, according the report: “Industry.”

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/li...-irving-family

[Sunnybrae]

About the NB Budget, I noticed this quote from a previous post...

@NickMooreCTV
NB Liquor to develop plan w/ "objective of maximizing net income," meant to add $20M in revenue #NBBudget

I'm curious as to why N.B. is in the business of alcohol given these rough times. Why not eliminate NB Liquor all together and treat alcohol like cigarettes? Just collect the tax and sell off all the assets and eliminate all that bureaucracy? Has there ever been a study into the advantages or disadvantages of doing this? Seems like a no brainer to me.

[mylesmalley]

Originally Posted by Sunnybrae

About the NB Budget, I noticed this quote from a previous post...

@NickMooreCTV
NB Liquor to develop plan w/ "objective of maximizing net income," meant to add $20M in revenue #NBBudget

I'm curious as to why N.B. is in the business of alcohol given these rough times. Why not eliminate NB Liquor all together and treat alcohol like cigarettes? Just collect the tax and sell off all the assets and eliminate all that bureaucracy? Has there ever been a study into the advantages or disadvantages of doing this? Seems like a no brainer to me.

It does make sense for them to keep control over alcohol sales for a few reasons I can think of.

Alcool-NB Liquor makes a big margin on the product they sell. i.e. they buy low and sell high. Being a monopoly, they'd get much stronger buying power than individual retailers buying for themselves. That profit is returned to the province.

Moreover, they charge HST on top of the retail price of the alcohol.

Going the private retailer route, they would continue to get HST, and they might recover extra money through corporate income taxes from higher profits at retailers, but they're losing all that revenue from the margin on selling product themselves.

I think the only real benefit would be selling the company outright or privatizing it's operation - but that would only really be good in the short term and would end up costing us lost revenue later.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

It does make sense for them to keep control over alcohol sales for a few reasons I can think of.

Alcool-NB Liquor makes a big margin on the product they sell. i.e. they buy low and sell high. Being a monopoly, they'd get much stronger buying power than individual retailers buying for themselves. That profit is returned to the province.

Moreover, they charge HST on top of the retail price of the alcohol.

Going the private retailer route, they would continue to get HST, and they might recover extra money through corporate income taxes from higher profits at retailers, but they're losing all that revenue from the margin on selling product themselves.

I think the only real benefit would be selling the company outright or privatizing it's operation - but that would only really be good in the short term and would end up costing us lost revenue later.

Alberta has privatized liquor sales but all purchases are still done via a government agency so the buying power is retained.

They also wouldn't be losing all the revenue because there would be additional taxes on liquor.

Furthermore the operational costs of NB Liquor must be quite high considering their retail employees are unionized and make pretty decent salaries.

[Sunnybrae]

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

It does make sense for them to keep control over alcohol sales for a few reasons I can think of.

Alcool-NB Liquor makes a big margin on the product they sell. i.e. they buy low and sell high. Being a monopoly, they'd get much stronger buying power than individual retailers buying for themselves. That profit is returned to the province.

Moreover, they charge HST on top of the retail price of the alcohol.

Going the private retailer route, they would continue to get HST, and they might recover extra money through corporate income taxes from higher profits at retailers, but they're losing all that revenue from the margin on selling product themselves.

I think the only real benefit would be selling the company outright or privatizing it's operation - but that would only really be good in the short term and would end up costing us lost revenue later.

Interesting article about Alberta and how they privatized liquor stores. I find it weird that it is not even discussed in N.B. at any level given the problems we have financially.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mark-mi...b_3984754.html

[JHikka]

Given how NB Liquor treats the craft brewery business in NB (see: poorly) it may be a wise venture to look into it. Myles is mostly correct in the lost profit margins of NB Liquor itself.

Rather than NB selling its stake in liquor I would rather it look in to creating a Maritime Liquor Corporation by merging the control boards of NB, NS, and PEI into one large retailer. I'd rather see the provinces attempt that first before selling off entirely.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Given how NB Liquor treats the craft brewery business in NB (see: poorly) it may be a wise venture to look into it. Myles is mostly correct in the lost profit margins of NB Liquor itself.

Rather than NB selling its stake in liquor I would rather it look in to creating a Maritime Liquor Corporation by merging the control boards of NB, NS, and PEI into one large retailer. I'd rather see the provinces attempt that first before selling off entirely.

So you want one monopoly to become even larger? What exactly would that solve?

[mylesmalley]

Originally Posted by OliverD

So you want one monopoly to become even larger? What exactly would that solve?

In theory, better buying power and therefore lower costs. If prices stayed the same, overall profit would increase.

You could also, in theory, streamline operations to lower costs further but generally that would mean a lot of jobs becoming redundant. Government isn't all that great at actually letting people go.

As usually happens when any kind of regional cooperation gets proposed, it'd turn into a big ruckus about where the head office would be and who'd be benefiting more and at the expense of whom.

[McKay]

Originally Posted by OliverD

Alberta has privatized liquor sales but all purchases are still done via a government agency so the buying power is retained.

They also wouldn't be losing all the revenue because there would be additional taxes on liquor.

Furthermore the operational costs of NB Liquor must be quite high considering their retail employees are unionized and make pretty decent salaries.

The government would be giving away the profit on alcohol sales, which currently goes into the government's general revenue. If additional taxes were imposed on liquor to make up the lost revenue, the price of liquor would almost certainly rise. (The only way for it not to rise would be if there were enough competition from several private-sector retailers to drive the price below the value of the new tax. If that were to happen, it would be necessary to raise the new tax in order to keep the same level of revenue.)

Stable, secure jobs with reasonable benefits would largely be replaced by casual jobs, perhaps not paying much (if any) more than the minimum wage. That would have economic consequences for other businesses that serve ANBL employees. It's always popular to look for ways to make public servants take it in the neck, but the truth is that ANBL provides good jobs and still makes a profit that directly reduces the amount of tax everyone pays — drinkers and non-drinkers alike. It might be the most successful public enterprise in New Brunswick. Selling it would be a classic example of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by mylesmalley

In theory, better buying power and therefore lower costs. If prices stayed the same, overall profit would increase.

You could also, in theory, streamline operations to lower costs further but generally that would mean a lot of jobs becoming redundant. Government isn't all that great at actually letting people go.

As usually happens when any kind of regional cooperation gets proposed, it'd turn into a big ruckus about where the head office would be and who'd be benefiting more and at the expense of whom.

That doesn't sound like it's very beneficial for the consumer.

Originally Posted by McKay

The government would be giving away the profit on alcohol sales, which currently goes into the government's general revenue. If additional taxes were imposed on liquor to make up the lost revenue, the price of liquor would almost certainly rise. (The only way for it not to rise would be if there were enough competition from several private-sector retailers to drive the price below the value of the new tax. If that were to happen, it would be necessary to raise the new tax in order to keep the same level of revenue.)

Stable, secure jobs with reasonable benefits would largely be replaced by casual jobs, perhaps not paying much (if any) more than the minimum wage. That would have economic consequences for other businesses that serve ANBL employees. It's always popular to look for ways to make public servants take it in the neck, but the truth is that ANBL provides good jobs and still makes a profit that directly reduces the amount of tax everyone pays — drinkers and non-drinkers alike. It might be the most successful public enterprise in New Brunswick. Selling it would be a classic example of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Of course government revenue would go down. But they also wouldn't be running a freaking retail operation which as far as I'm concerned is way outside of bounds of what any federal or provincial government should do.

As for the current jobs, the flip side is that we would be removing red tape for liquor producers and the few private retail enterprises that are currently allowed to sell alcohol. We would also be opening up opportunities for entrepreneurs to open specialized stores and bring in more varied products.

Just because NB Liquor brings in revenue doesn't make it right. I'm sure we could also have NB Groceries to replace private grocery store chains and bring in revenue. Is that an acceptable way to raise money?

[McKay]

Originally Posted by OliverD

Of course government revenue would go down. But they also wouldn't be running a freaking retail operation which as far as I'm concerned is way outside of bounds of what any federal or provincial government should do.

There are all sorts of government activities on which people might have different opinions, but all it is is an opinion. Some argue that ANBL shouldn't do retail sales but should still be the wholesaler, but what makes wholesale operations any more or less appropriate as a government activity than retail operations?

As for the current jobs, the flip side is that we would be removing red tape for liquor producers and the few private retail enterprises that are currently allowed to sell alcohol. We would also be opening up opportunities for entrepreneurs to open specialized stores and bring in more varied products.

Those are two unrelated issues. Regulations to do with producers and private specialty stores can both be dealt with without dismantling the retail stores. In Halifax, for example, there are several private stores selling wine and premium products in addition to the provincial system.

Just because NB Liquor brings in revenue doesn't make it right. I'm sure we could also have NB Groceries to replace private grocery store chains and bring in revenue. Is that an acceptable way to raise money?

The essential difference between alcohol and groceries is that alcohol has a significant social responsibility issue connected to it. That's actually part of ANBL's mandate. Grocery stores, on the other hand, don't attract the same kind of concern.

[Sunnybrae]

Originally Posted by McKay

The government would be giving away the profit on alcohol sales, which currently goes into the government's general revenue. If additional taxes were imposed on liquor to make up the lost revenue, the price of liquor would almost certainly rise. (The only way for it not to rise would be if there were enough competition from several private-sector retailers to drive the price below the value of the new tax. If that were to happen, it would be necessary to raise the new tax in order to keep the same level of revenue.)

Stable, secure jobs with reasonable benefits would largely be replaced by casual jobs, perhaps not paying much (if any) more than the minimum wage. That would have economic consequences for other businesses that serve ANBL employees. It's always popular to look for ways to make public servants take it in the neck, but the truth is that ANBL provides good jobs and still makes a profit that directly reduces the amount of tax everyone pays — drinkers and non-drinkers alike. It might be the most successful public enterprise in New Brunswick. Selling it would be a classic example of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I think it is time for the discussion at least. Saying it won't work and can't be done without performing a study that is not bias is irresponsible. If Alberta can do it and do it successfully then we need to at least put all the cards on the table and look at all options. N.B. can't afford not too.

[MonctonRad]

So I see that Gallant's Liberals have suspended sitting of the legislature for six weeks, apparently to escape embarrassment during question period. This isn't exactly a prorogation (like Harper), but is an indication that the Liberals are just as adept at playing loosey goosey with the rules as Harper was (federally).

Add this to the way that they clumsily muzzled Elish Cleary (because they couldn't control her - after all, who wants a loose cannon Chief Medical Officer of Health - She might actually tell the truth!!!), and the Liberals would appear to be rapidly losing the moral high ground.

If the Tories can chose an effective and presentable leader, I predict this government will be another one term wonder.......

[Taeolas]

Three One Term Governments in a row; after we never had one (or never had one for a long long time); All of the provincial parties are in a mess it seems and no one wants to step up to the plate. It's embarrassing really; I'm beginning to think we might as well get on with Maritime Unification with the hope that in a pool of ~2 million we might have a better chance of getting a decent leader. (But even then the chances seem slim.)

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by McKay

There are all sorts of government activities on which people might have different opinions, but all it is is an opinion. Some argue that ANBL shouldn't do retail sales but should still be the wholesaler, but what makes wholesale operations any more or less appropriate as a government activity than retail operations?

You're right. In my opinion the government shouldn't act as the wholesaler either. But it is better than being an actual retailer and thus I would be open to it. And as the article that Sunnybrae indicates, it actually works fairly well in AB and is advantageous for both the government and for consumers. Currently this is not the case in NB.

And let's face it: If you asked the average citizen if it is the government's responsibility to own and operate retail establishments for certain products, how do you think they would respond?

Those are two unrelated issues. Regulations to do with producers and private specialty stores can both be dealt with without dismantling the retail stores. In Halifax, for example, there are several private stores selling wine and premium products in addition to the provincial system.

Those private stores are still competing with NSLC, are limited in what items they can sell (they can't sell products from outside of the province that NSLC already sells, for example), and I believe there's only four stores, all in the HRM.

As long as a government owned and run retail network is in place it will be difficult if not impossible for private stores to thrive aside from in certain urban areas.

The essential difference between alcohol and groceries is that alcohol has a significant social responsibility issue connected to it. That's actually part of ANBL's mandate. Grocery stores, on the other hand, don't attract the same kind of concern.

And yet, the vast majority of jurisdictions worldwide trust the free market to provide alcohol to consumers. Why can't we?

One could also argue that there is a social responsibility attached to food sales. After all, it would in the government's best interest to ensure access to healthy and affordable food.

[Taeolas]

Municipal Elections are today in NB, so remember to get out and vote (if you have something to vote for. )

All of the cities seem to have Mayoral races, and almost all of them will have new Mayors. Even Mayor-For-Life Woodside seems to have a close race brewing here in Freddy, so we could potentially end up with a clean sweep of new blood leading our cities tomorrow.

[Taeolas]

And with Mike's defeat of Brad in Freddy NB's Big-3 cities all have new mayors.

Let's hope it's the start of an exciting and refreshing new era across the board.

[Taeolas]

So, New Brunswick is looking into electoral reform as well

Most likely nothing will come of it, especially since they're willing to give up the majority vote for it; but who knows?

Personally, this is feeling like they want NB to be ready to jump if the Feds jump too. If Trudeau brings in a new voting system, it feels like Gallant wants NB ready to copy it.

[Taeolas]

It is an obvious attempt to get votes / distract from all the scandals going on... but I don't give a damn.

Gallant is bringing in Family Day for New Brunswick.

It's about time we got that break in. That winter stretch is way too long without a break; especially since it's at the start of the year. I know I loathe to spend a vacation or sick day during the time of year I might need it the most because I don't know if I'll need/want them for later in the year.