[TOareaFan]

Increase the GST back to 7% and skip everything else. Easy to do, no new work needed and the world was perfectly fine a few years back when it already was 7%.

The GST was last @ 7% in 2006. A lot has changed in the world since then. Ontario/Canada has weathered the world's financial crisis much better than most developed nations.....surely our balance between taxes and expenditures have something to do with that....how much of a contributing factor our lowered GST was in that is beyond my knowledge but I do know it is far too simplistic to say the world was fine in 2006 so lets put one element of 2006 back in the mix.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the Globe:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ve-toronto-area-transit-plan/article12186064/

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

So what happens now?

Both, the NDP and the Conservatives have stated they will oppose the plan by Metrolinx to raise taxes to raise the $2B a year they need to fund the Big Move*. Since ML opted for, mostly, an increase of existing taxes (gas and HST) does this mean that this will all have to wait until a new budget (presumably the spring of 2014) is brought forward? Does this mean that when that new budget is brought forward that the government will fall? If the government falls on a new budget and does not win re-election does that mean the Big Move is dead?

*I have never understood why the target is $2B a year for the next 25 years....raising $50B when, by all accounts, the first $16B has been funded out of general revenues.....does that mean the general revenue fund will be getting, over time, a $16B refund on their transit expenditures?

 

[innsertnamehere]

The 25 years is for more than the current phase. The current phase (phase 2) is scheduled to be completed in 15 years, with additional programs to make up the rest.

 

[TOareaFan]

The 25 years is for more than the current phase. The current phase (phase 2) is scheduled to be completed in 15 years, with additional programs to make up the rest.

I thought the estimated cost of the entire big move was $50B...with $16B already funded and under construction/final development

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

2B @ 15 years gives you 30B + 16B is close enough to the 50B quoted.

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

2B @ 15 years gives you 30B + 16B is close enough to the 50B quoted.

AoD

Sure, but I keep reading/hearing...."$2B a year for 25 years".....anyway it was just a minor point in my first post....what happens now if the NDP and the Tories oppose?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Oh I am sure NDP will come to a consensus with the Liberals. What are they going to do? Bring down a government they just help prop up?

Hell, I will go further than that - personally I would proposing striking an independent oversight body staffed with individuals with a keen eye on the books from all political stripes to oversee the collection of new revenues and disembursement of funds. Transparency is paramount given the ask.

AoD

 

[TOareaFan]

Oh I am sure NDP will come to a consensus with the Liberals. What are they going to do? Bring down a government they just help prop up?

AoD

That was my question....but since ML opted for, mostly, increases in existing taxes as their funding tools, I am pretty sure these cannot be introduced without a new budget...since that is likely a year away the NDP optics of bringing down a government they just propped up will have had a year to evolve.

 

[nfitz]

That was my question....but since ML opted for, mostly, increases in existing taxes as their funding tools, I am pretty sure these cannot be introduced without a new budget...since that is likely a year away the NDP optics of bringing down a government they just propped up will have had a year to evolve.

The government can raise or lower taxes any time it wants. It just has to introduce the legislation. There's nothing that restricts this to a particular annual event. Also they did indicate in the budget speech that they would be putting something in place for transit revenue - so not like it wasn't covered. Nothing says that the budget has to be implemented by a single omnibus bill at one time.

Historically when there's been a simple change to a tax rate, it's been done immediately when it's announced in the legislature, rather than when the legislation has passed.

Do they even need legislation to change the HST rate? Which law and/or regulation prescribes this? Could some of this be implemented simply by cabinet?

 

[TOareaFan]

The government can raise or lower taxes any time it wants. It just has to introduce the legislation. There's nothing that restricts this to a particular annual event. Also they did indicate in the budget speech that they would be putting something in place for transit revenue - so not like it wasn't covered. Nothing says that the budget has to be implemented by a single omnibus bill at one time.

Historically when there's been a simple change to a tax rate, it's been done immediately when it's announced in the legislature, rather than when the legislation has passed.

Do they even need legislation to change the HST rate? Which law and/or regulation prescribes this? Could some of this be implemented simply by cabinet?

Well, traditionally, a budget is where you lay out how much money you need to run the province for the next year and what your financial projections for revenue and expenses are. A fairly significant increase (is a 1.6% of the annual budget significant?) outside of the budget would be unusual.

Even if introduced between budgets, I would suspect that if the two opposition parties are seriously opposed (rather than just making political hay) to these new/increased taxes that we would see a motion of non-confidence around them.

 

[gweed123]

Oh I am sure NDP will come to a consensus with the Liberals. What are they going to do? Bring down a government they just help prop up?

Hell, I will go further than that - personally I would proposing striking an independent oversight body staffed with individuals with a keen eye on the books from all political stripes to oversee the collection of new revenues and disembursement of funds. Transparency is paramount given the ask.

AoD

Would the Metrolinx revenue tools even be a confidence motion? I would think it would just be a normal piece of legislation, although it could have been bundled in with the budget.

But yes, you're right, hopefully the NDP will drop this faux populist crap and come to their senses.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Any action involving taxes (whether removing or adding) is prone to a confidence vote, regardless of size.

 

[nfitz]

Well, traditionally, a budget is where you lay out how much money you need to run the province for the next year and what your financial projections for revenue and expenses are. A fairly significant increase (is a 1.6% of the annual budget significant?) outside of the budget would be unusual.

The income was already in the budget speech. As was the spending. Not sure what the is here.

Even if introduced between budgets, I would suspect that if the two opposition parties are seriously opposed (rather than just making political hay) to these new/increased taxes that we would see a motion of non-confidence around them.

It wasn't introduced between budgets. The new Metrolinx funding was explictly mentioned in the budget.

Almost any financial motion is a vote of non-confidence ... not sure how that's any different than many other votes. But is a vote needed to change an HST rate? What is the mechanism for changing that?

 

[TOareaFan]

The income was already in the budget speech. As was the spending. Not sure what the is here.

It wasn't introduced between budgets. The new Metrolinx funding was explictly mentioned in the budget.

Almost any financial motion is a vote of non-confidence ... not sure how that's any different than many other votes. But is a vote needed to change an HST rate? What is the mechanism for changing that?

Here is what the budget says about the new revenue tools (note, this is from the government's budget web page......I am not crazy enough to delve into the actual budget legislation but it would be unusual if a $2B a year item was in that but not in the government's public summary)

New Revenue Tools to Support Transit Infrastructure

The government will be guided by a number of principles when it comes to new transportation and public transit investments, and the revenue that will be raised to pay for them.

Transportation needs vary across the province, and new investments should reflect the needs of different communities and regions.
New revenue generated from transportation-related activities should be dedicated to transportation projects in a clear and transparent manner so that the investment is directly tied to measurable results.
Any new revenue tool should not unfairly impact one type of commute or community over another.
New revenue tools should enable choice among the different transportation options available, while encouraging the use of public transit.
New transportation investments must be tied to smart city- and region-building and efficient land use planning, and endeavour to accommodate each region's changing population in the most efficient way possible.

These principles will help guide the Province's deliberations after it receives Metrolinx's June report on revenue tools for public transit investment in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA).

Recognizing the growing challenge of congestion in the GTHA, the Province created Metrolinx in 2006 to lead the coordination and delivery of a transportation plan, The Big Move, for this critical region. Metrolinx has estimated the capital costs of projects under The Big Move to be $50 billion. There will also be associated financing costs and, as these projects come into service, they will require ongoing funding to maintain and operate over their lifetime.

Any government (particularly a minority government) would be on pretty shaky grounds to raise the taxes that ML have proposed without a vote/debate on the basis that the above covered them as "in the budget".

As for the HST...it is a harmonized tax and it is way beyond my pay scale to be able to comment if the harmonization agreement between Ontario and Ottawa required any consultation with the feds before varying (in either direction) the provincial portion of the tax.