CTF in the News

Loading...

Monday, August 31, 2009

Columbus a model for Edmonton?

Battle of Alberta's Andy Grabia put me on to a new report out of the John Glenn School of Public Affairs in Columbus, Ohio.

It looks at the economic benefits of the Arena district in Columbus.

Ironically, Patrick Laforge, newly appointed arena salesman spokesperson for the Katz group also cited Nationwide Arena in Columbus as the model for Edmonton. While, Mr. Laforge and I are likely to disagree on most things about the new arena, here we agree, Columbus is a good model for Edmonton... particularly because it was 100% privately financed.

Anyway, I digress... the new report from Columbus (paid for by the team) makes all kinds of wild claims about the economic benefits of the new arena district. And it goes into detailed calculations showing, what should be completely self-evident. I mean, should it shock anyone that a bunch of vacant lots and former jail grounds on which you put a large real estate development, is now producing more economic benefits than the land did before? However, they fail to look at the rest of the city to see what wasn’t developed instead or what areas have lost tenants to the arena district and therefore have suffered.

It’s all just a big closed loop. There are x number of businesses that can successfully operate in any given economic region. Period. Putting them all in one building or spreading them out around 10 mile radius doesn’t matter, it’s the same economic benefit.

They at least attempted to look at money that was coming in from outside the region, but again, make the wrong assumption that these are new dollars, or are dollars that otherwise wouldn’t have entered the same city. Who’s to say that these same people going to Blue Jacket games wouldn’t otherwise be going to a college football game, a movie or a concert in Columbus if they didn’t have an NHL team. People’s entertainment budgets are fixed, to which entertainment they flow might change, but that’s it. If you stop going to Oilers games, you will likely go to more concerts, Esks games or play more golf. From an overall economic benefit argument, it makes zero difference.

Although, I did find the report interesting, in so much as it provided some financials on the team, and the arena.

For example:

I also found the city spending data on infrastructure info, very interesting as well. Good numbers to use for comparison. Although they still attempted to make the ridiculous Tax Incremented Financing (TIF) argument to suggest that the city is recouping its “investment.” Again, they make the wrong assumption that the number of businesses in any given city is not fixed. The restaurant that’s in the arena district would have been built regardless, whether inside the district or not, and the city would have collected the exact same amount in taxes. It's the same shell game that Mayor Mandel is attempting to pull over on Edmontonians under the name: Community Revitalization Levy (CRL).

The only economic benefit that I can find in the whole report is the $3.8million the city collected in taxes from visiting teams over 6 years. So, thanks to the Blue Jackets and the new arena the city gets a whopping $633,333 per year in additional revenue. At that rate, the City of Edmonton could pay off a $300-m taxpayer-funded investment in 1,000 years or so.

Bottom line: If done right, a new arena (or any land development) can be used to spruce-up a specific area or vacant lot, if that’s your goal. But more often than not it’s done wrong, and you end up having what we currently have in Edmonton with an arena jammed between two freeways and acres of parking lots surrounding it.

But in Columbus, it was done right. It re-shaped a vacant space in the downtown, created a new arena for an NHL team, and didn't cost taxpayers anything (other than public infrastructure).

All the faux economic benefit arguments should be shelved, as should the TIF, CRL shell game schemes.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Alberta: revenues down, deficit soars


Nothing that $6.9 billion won't cure. However, if the Stelmach government had kept spending increases to the rate of inflation plus population, it would still run a $44 million surplus this year.

Ontario may use tax dollars for in-vitro fertilization

Ontario taxpayers could be on the hook for three in-vitro fertilization payments per user at $10,000 a pop. In Quebec, that's how it works already.

Climate change doubters

Two great recent articles on climate change... The first, Farmers lukewarm on global warming theory, shows that Canadian farmers aren't experiencing longer growing seasons as the scientists claim. The second, from a retired chemistry professior and former senior administrator at the University of Regina, says that "a lack of understanding of climate change and its causal factors is leading us to yet more boneheaded economic decisions.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

John Williamson New DComm for Harper and PMO

Former CTF Federal Director John Williamson has been named the new Director of Communications to Prime Minister Harper. The CTF wishes John the best of luck in his new role. We can only hope he will have more influence on the inside in efforts to get taxes lowered, to reduce waste and to make government more accountable.

Good luck John.

We wish you luck and success! You will be hearing from us soon and often.

"Hockey Stick" Global Warming Graph Debunked

How did people come to believe that temperatures were radically warming in recent years? Much of it had to do with a so-called hockey stick chart that showed a history of relatively stable temperatures with a sharp increase at the end. This was thoroughly debunked. Click here for a thorough account of how and why.

How much does medicare cost you?

Thanks to the Fraser Institute, you can now know.

Dividing the Canadian population into 10 income groups (income figures are pre-tax) shows what families from various income brackets paid for public health care insurance in 2008:
- Average cash income of $11,309; $389
- Average cash income of $24,271; $1,076 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $32,866; $2,214 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $41,637; $3,449 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $51,298; $4,862 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $64,415; $6,245 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $78,430; $7,750 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $96,217; $9,873 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $122,321; $12,877 paid for public health care insurance
- Average cash income of $232,739; $29,575 paid for public health care insurance

Looking at common family types, this calculation finds that the estimated average payment for public health care insurance in 2008 was:
- $9,572 for the average 2 adult family
- $9,855 for the average 2 adult and 1 child family
- $10,191 for the average 2 adult and 2 child family
- $3,484 for the average unattached (single) individual

It is critical to recognize that these estimates count only the direct costs of Medicare. They do not count administrative costs subsumed by other government departments that support health care through activities such as tax collection, or other privately borne costs related to the financing and operation of Medicare such as tax compliance or the private burden of waiting for health care.

Disharmony in Lotus Land

Among the many broken promises of the B.C. Liberal government was the surprise sales tax harmonization announcement. While harmonization may bring greater investment and more high paying jobs to the province in the long run, the short run reality is that hard-pressed families will be paying more for many goods and services, and the timing couldn't be worse. Harmonization should only proceed if families pay less in total tax.

Citizens are outraged about harmonization, and rightly so. During the recent provincial election, the B.C. Liberals said they would not harmonize the sales tax. This seems to be yet another snap decision made, like the carbon tax, with no consultation by a paternalistic government. This sudden and unexpected turnaround is a slap in the face to all British Columbians.

Families must get a break, as the cost of goods formerly free of PST will go up by 7%. The best option would be a cut to personal income taxes. Reducing the burden of income taxes for all British Columbians could be best achieved by increasing the basic personal income tax exemption. There is plenty of room for the government to leave more money in the pockets of taxpaying families, increase the incentive to work, save and invest, and lower the impact of the HST.

Although the HST may have some positives in the long run, the arrogance of the tax change coupled with higher taxes for consumers make it mandatory for the government cut other taxes. This will get government out of our pockets, and allow hard working families to spend their own income in a way that best serves their needs. Moreover, it should be the only way British Columbians should accept the HST.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

An Open Email to James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage


The following email was sent by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore on August 26, 2009.

>>>

Dear Minister Moore,

I am writing to you today to inquire as to what measures your department has taken to address erroneous comments made by staff to the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights during the approval stage for the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

As you may be aware, on March 3, 2008, Ms. Lyn Sherwood, an official with your department, went before the Committee and had the following exchange with Senator James Cowan:

Senator Cowan: This is not one of those projects where the federal government is left to pick up anything over and above the $165 million that is contributed by other parties, is it?

Ms. Sherwood: The total budget is $265 million. You are putting your finger on a very real risk in the current environment, which is the impact of inflation on construction budgets. That has been factored into planning and is one of the reasons for the urgency of this bill because at the moment the purchasing power of that $265 million is being eroded at the rate of between $800,000 and $1.5 million per month.


As you are aware, on May 22, 2009, the museum announced $45 million in cost overruns, bringing the total cost for the project to $310 million.

However, using the high end, per month inflation figure ($1.5 million) that Ms. Sherwood noted at the March, 2008 Senate hearing, the museum should only have been $22.5 million higher when the overruns were announced in May, 2009 - 15 months later. Thus, cost overruns of $45 million were double the high end figure provided to the Senate.

Further, during an August 10, 2009 meeting with museum staff, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation was told the cost overruns were originally $58 million and that changes were made to the design of the facility to reduce the overruns to $45 million.

In other words, the estimate provided to the Senate by Ms. Sherwood was off by $35.5 million or approximately 157%.

Surprisingly, during the meeting with museum officials, staff indicated that they were not aware of any pay cuts or other repercussions to those involved with the project as a result of the $35.5 million mistake.

In addition, it is important to note that the federal government listed the Museum’s cost at $265 million as early as April 20, 2007. However, that same budget figure was presented at the Senate hearing almost a year later. Oddly enough, while department staff spoke at the hearing about the importance of factoring in construction inflation going forward, they appear to have neglected to update their own figure.

As you are aware, taxpayers, through various government bodies, are once again being asked to contribute even more funding towards the museum to help pay for the cost overruns.

Could you please indicate if any staff within your department, or at the Museum, received pay cuts and/or other repercussions as a result of the museum’s cost overruns. Further, was the department aware that the cost of the museum was above $265 million when it provided that figure to the Senate committee? Finally, please indicate what action has been taken to correct the erroneous comments that were made before the Senate Committee.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to receiving your response.

Sincerely,

Colin Craig
Provincial Director, Manitoba
Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Cc: Senator James Cowan

Please note that this email, and your response, will be posted on the Canadian Taxpayers Federation’s blog – www.taxpayerblog.com

Throne restraint to the wind

The B.C. Throne Speech delivered on August 25 sets a tone of fiscal restraint, but that is undermined by a continued commitment to green madness.

When the premier said "I hate budget deficits, I think they take away from future generations," he was right. Deficits tend to spiral out of control, creating a legacy of debt and higher taxes for present and future taxpayers.

This government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and now finally appears to be cutting back on the spending spree, in some areas at least.

What wasn't announced, merely hinted at, was relief to families from the introduction of the Harmonized Sales Tax. That should come on September 1 when the new budget is introduced. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has been calling for income tax cuts to help families bear the burden of increased costs for goods and services now subject to a higher sales tax.

But the government is not jumping off the global warming bandwagon. It will be breaking yet another key election commitment by meddling with the mandate of the B.C. Utilities Commission. The mandate of the BCUC is to keep costs low for electricity users, not approve projects just because the premier thinks they are a good idea.

Remember that the B.C. Utilities Commission rejected BC Hydro's deal with Alcan - that deal was proclaimed by the premier on one of his pedestals. BC Hydro had to renegotiate with Alcan and ended up bringing a $65-120 million in savings for electricity users. If we lose the safeguard against meddling for political purposes, electricity rates will skyrocket.

Continuing to pursue green job creation will mean job destruction, just as it has where it has already been tried. Since 2000, Spain, the country used by President Obama as an example of how to create green jobs, has lost 2.2 jobs in the non subsidized sectors such as mining and food processing for every so called green job created. That's because the tax dollars to create green jobs are diverted from productive sectors of the economy. Subsidized jobs are unsustainable, no matter their colour.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Museum Expenses: Time to Cross Our Fingers



On August 10, 2009, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) met with the CFO and COO with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. A number of interesting details came to light.

First, while the museum's cost overrun figure has publicly been reported at $45 million, the CTF learned the original overrun figure sat at $58 million. To get the overrun figure down to $45 million, a number of changes were made to the project.

Secondly, the CTF asked if the officials were aware of any repercussions or pay cuts to staff as a result of the cost overruns. The museum's officials responded that they weren't aware of any.

Finally, while the museum is covered under federal access to information legislation, the fundraising body for the museum - the Friends of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights - is not. That means that unless a government body makes a formal announcement about its donation to the project, taxpayers will only find out about the contribution if it is leaked or uncovered through information requests. Such was the case when it was discovered that Manitoba's crown corporations had secretly made donations towards the project.

Given the massive cost overruns for the project, it is truly appalling that heads did not roll at the federal government after the debacle was discovered. After all, consider what federal bureaucrat Lyn Sherwood told Senator Cowan during a March 3, 2008 Senate Committee on Human Rights hearing.

Senator Cowan: This is not one of those projects where the federal government is left to pick up anything over and above the $165 million that is contributed by other parties, is it?

Ms. Sherwood: The total budget is $265 million. You are putting your finger on a very real risk in the current environment, which is the impact of inflation on construction budgets. That has been factored into planning and is one of the reasons for the urgency of this bill because at the moment the purchasing power of that $265 million is being eroded at the rate of between $800,000 and $1.5 million per month.


Using Ms. Sherwood's high end figure for inflation costs ($1.5 million per month), the project should have been only $22.5 million higher by May 22, 2009; the day the overruns were announced. However, as noted earlier, the project was actually $58 million higher than expected. In other words, Ms. Sherwood was only off in her estimate by 157% or approximately $35.5 million.

Imagine that - federal bureaucrats make a $35.5 million budgetary mistake and no one is held accountable for the blunder. Only in government.

The museum's officials told the CTF they don't have any expectation for cost overruns in the future. However, given the last price tag for the museum was off substantially and no elected official seemed to care, it seems like we'll just have to sit back and cross our fingers.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Anti-Bloc coalition proposed

Mark Milke, former CTF Alberta Director, has said there's no better time to cut the vote subsidy to the Bloc. Funding to the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, and even the Greens was healthy, while Bloc donations were not. It is a party that is in a financial sense overwhelmingly reliant on the federal government and Canadian taxpayers--two institutions they exist to separate from.

Click here to read Milke's article.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Taxpayer-funded BC tattoo removal



A government program to remove gang tattoos has been launched in British Columbia. Scott Hennig of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation says the program is a waste of tax dollars. Removing a tattoo takes as many as 15 treatments, each of which cost $100.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Generous Sask health worker pensions

On his blog "Fair Pensions for All", Bill Tufts has done a great breakdown of the Saskatchewan Healthcare Employees Pension Plan (SHEPP). For every dollar contributed by a health care employee, the province puts in $1.12. This is a pretty sweet deal for SHEPP pensioners.

The average wage in the health care sector in Saskatchewan is $46,742 per year. The average pension from SHEPP is based on a 2% per year with maximum pension at 35 years. This means a benefit of close to 70% of retiring income or $32,719 including CPP.

Of this pension of $32,719 the CPP would contribute $10,905 and the pension plan contributes about $21,814.

The big question is …
A private sector employee pays 4.95% of annual income into the CPP plan to get $10,905 per year in pension income.

The public sector employee in SHEPP pays 5.58% to get $21,814. How can the public sector employee pay in the same and twice as much in taxpayer funded pension?

Canada is addressing pension reform at all levels of government. Fairness between the public sector and public sector pensions is one the key issues that needs to be addressed.

Monday, August 17, 2009

No Pota$h? No stadium


The Saskatchewan government budgeted $1.9 billion of revenue from Potash this year, but now expects to get just $637 million. It's just one more reason to think twice about building a new domed stadium for the Roughriders. Saskatoon resident Bob Heidt makes the case well in his letter to the Star-Phoenix, "Dome a private venture."

Next Convention: Drop the “Democratic” from NDP


After a contentious debate in the federal New Democratic Party over if it should drop the “New” from its 48 year old name, the party refused to allow a vote over the issue. What a party decides to call itself - even if it happens to be the 2nd oldest party in the House of Commons - is not normally a matter of concern to most people, but it does speak to the NDP’s interesting conception of both “new” and “democratic”.

Next convention, it should allow a vote on the issue, but perhaps on dropping the word “democratic”.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

What the duck?


What inspired this video? Click here to find out.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

TransLink is inefficient and must reform

It's time to elevate the discussion on public transit in the Lower Mainland from who pays - transit riders or taxpayers, to who is the transit system supposed to serve - transit riders or a bloated government bureaucracy.

Ever wondered why airline fares have fallen dramatically over the past few decades but public transit fares have gone nowhere but up? It's because the airline industry has gone through dramatic reforms while public transit providers, such as the Lower Mainland's TransLink, have not. Until TransLink is reformed, transit riders and taxpayers can expect to continue to pay more for less.

The single most important reform in the airline industry - increased competition - helped bring down fares for consumers. Falling airline fares meant airlines had to bring down costs, which improved productivity - airlines got more from less.

TransLink has no such cost discipline. This means management caves in to any excess salary demand because any cost increase is just passed along to bus riders as higher fares or to taxpayers as higher taxes. Productivity falls because we get the same or less for more.

But is the airline industry special? Can the same reforms happen with public transit? Reforms in Europe show how public transit can be improved for the benefit of both taxpayers and transit riders.

In England, the City of London tendered-out the operation of its bus service. Between 1984 and 1999 productivity of the bus service increased by 3.7 per cent -- meaning it cost less to transport passengers for every dollar of capital and operating expense -- and ridership increased by 11.7 per cent. Thanks to this success, London continues to tender-out bus services.

For TransLink, between 2005 and 2008 the cost to transport one passenger one kilometer increased by 19.1 per cent. TransLink's own ten-year plan shows ridership is estimated to increase by only 2.3 per cent per year to 2012 and 1.5 per cent annually thereafter.

As both the Canadian airline industry the European transit experience show, transportation is a service that can achieve higher productivity with the right type of reform. Instead of continuing to be a high cost supplier of transit services, TransLink needs to tender competitively to reduce both its costs and its fares to boost unsubsidized ridership.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Olympics Hire Civil Servants Through Tax Dollars


Given the times, our own Maureen Bader calls this a ridiculous and outrageous idea.

An Open Letter to Minister Selinger on HST




The following letter was sent today to Manitoba's Minister of Finance on the issue of sales tax harmonization.

In short, the CTF will only support harmonization if governments can demonstrate it will be revenue neutral for families.

Further, as noted in the letter, any funds the province receives from the federal government for moving to harmonization should be put towards debt repayment.

HST Consequences

A harmonized sales tax is a reality in BC and a possibility for Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Check out these TV reports for more.


Canadian tax dollars give Bloc 86% of their funds

The staggering truth about the per vote subsidy and who pays the $9.4 million to pring MP propaganda is here.

Scott Hennig, a spokesperson for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, which is opposed to all forms of federal government financial support for political parties, called the Ten Percenter program "bizarre," and decried what he called the perpetual election campaign being waged on the taxpayer's dime.

"I think it's bizarre that a B.C. MP would be sending [a flyer] to someone in P.E.I. ... We're in a perpetual campaign and regardless of whether we're in a campaign or not taxpayers' money shouldn't be spent buying election ads. I think most people pay their taxes with the hope that they're going to get services for them, not attack ads, or brochures, or streets littered with signs and campaign buses all over the place, that's not what taxpayers pay their money for."

Monday, August 10, 2009

HST Interview on 570 Kitchener

The following radio interview was broadcasted live on 570 AM Kitchener, August 7, 2009.

Click Here To Listen

More paid volunteers for the Olympics

A week or so ago, the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee, VANOC, called out to the private sector for 1,500 more highly skilled "paid volunteers."

But let's get real here. What company in the private sector, even in good times, has extra employees hanging around that it could send off to work someplace else at their cost? Probably not too many because if they did, they wouldn't be in business for long.

That means what VANOC is really talking about is more paid volunteers courtesy of the taxpayer.

And sure enough, the taxpayer is going to have to cough up for more paid volunteers for VANOC. The B.C. government is scouting around right now for 250 bureaucrats to start working full-time for VANOC, and the salaries will be picked up by the taxpayer.

This is yet another hidden cost of the Olympics. The finance minister said last year, when the whole notion of paid volunteers was first conjured up by the brain trust in Victoria, that the salaries of paid volunteers will not be included in the accounting of total Olympic costs.

Frankly, if we have that many bureaucrats hanging around in Victoria, it's time for more cuts.

It's also time for government to get out of big, so-called legacy projects. They are nothing more than a boondoggle for politicians, and a burden for taxpayers.

Wednesday, August 05, 2009

The climate changes - always has, always will

The global warming orthodoxy is breaking down. As temperatures start on their downward trend, more people are noticing and more scientists are speaking out against the so-called consensus belief that man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) is causing catastrophic global warming. The globe has experienced no warming since 2002, while CO2 levels continue to rise.

The two data sets used by global warming alarmists, from NASA and the Hadley Centre, show no global warming has occurred since 2002. The British Meterological Office (the Met) is home to the Hadley Centre. The Met has so far predicted 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005 and 2007 would be the world's hottest or second-hottest year on record, but nine of the past 10 years its predictions were wrong.

That makes 1998 the hottest year on record since the Medieval Warm Period some 1,000 years ago (apparently they had lots of SUV's back then). Yes, temperatures were rising for much of the past century (except when they were falling between the late 1940's and the late 1970's), but since 2002, temperatures have started falling again. All the while, global carbon dioxide levels – the colourless odorless gas global warming alarmists blame for global warming –continue to rise. This is something global warming alarmists assured us would never happen on the road to global warming Armageddon.

As Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology at MIT explains, "the public discourse on global warming has little in common with the standards of scientific discourse. Rather, it is part of political discourse where comments are made to secure the political base and frighten the opposition rather than to illuminate issues. In political discourse, information is to be “spun” to reinforce pre-existing beliefs, and to discourage opposition. The chief example of the latter is the perpetual claim of universal scientific agreement. This claim was part of the media treatment of global cooling (in the 1970’s) and has been part of the treatment of global warming since 1988 (well before most climate change institutes were created). The consensus preceded the research."

The global warming hysteria has reached a turning point. Government's in response to fear-driven demands created by global warming alarmists have already wasted billions of dollars to reduce CO2 levels, and all the while, CO2 levels continue to rise. Meanwhile, real pollution, such as contaminated water leading to boiled water advisories, gets less attention. Common sense is increasingly leading people to question the claims of global warming alarmists and the assault on our wallets and economy. The winter of 2008-09 may prove to be an important turning point in what has been to-date, a one-sided debate.

UK Holds It’s First Open Primary

The birthplace of parliamentary democracy - Great Britain - has just held its first open primary in the selection of a Conservative candidate for a by-election. In what saw a massive turnout - larger than the turnout for most actual by-elections - everyone in the riding had a say in choosing who the candidate will be in the next election. This ensures that should the candidate be elected to Westminster, he or she will owe their primary allegance to their electors, not leaders.

Across the pond, Preston Manning has moved in to support this initiative, and it may well be time that we considered it as the next big push for democratic reform. As as always eloqount British MEP Daniel Hannan said on the development, “[the candidate] will be almost impossible to beat. Indeed, the only way that the LibDems could even dream of taking her on is by selecting their own candidate through a similar method.”

Who will open the floodgates here?

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

BC parties on taxpayer dime

More than half a million dollars was spent on civil service parties in BC during the first three months of 2009 alone.The full article is posted on the Squamish Chief, but this excerpt is bad enough:

Squamish – The provincial government was living it up as the economy was crashing, spending more than half-a-million dollars on parties celebrating civil service excellence.

But the government has said those celebrations were necessary to maintain a “high performing workforce” – something that’s “even more important during these challenging times.”

And it has no plans to be a party pooper by discontinuing the annual premier’s innovation and excellence awards, which are meant to recognize the “positive impact the BC Public Service’s work is having across the province.”

According to records exclusively obtained by Public Eye via a freedom of information request, this year’s awards cost $562,741.52.

They included four regional parties and one provincial party, taking place between January 21 and March 26.

The biggest ticket item was the $137,414.29 spent on videos showcasing nominees and their accomplishments.

But catering and facility costs came in a close second at $125,511.70.

That money bought the ceremonies’ 1,864 attendees some yummy-sounding food.

In Vancouver, for example, civil servants dined on “wedge of romaine hearts with grape tomatoes” featuring “baked pancetta anchovy toasted brioche” and “Parmigiano-Reggiano buttermilk Caesar dressing.”

And that was just the first course.

Coyne on Real EI Reform

Andrew Coyne hits the ball out of the park again in his Macleans column on Employment Insurance reform. It's a good read.

CTF You Tube Channel

Canadian Taxpayers Federation's Fan Box