Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - July 31, 2015, Winnipeg, Manitoba C M Y K PAGE A9 IDEAS �o ISSUES �o INSIGHTS THINK- TANK A 9 Winnipeg Free Press Friday, July 31, 2015 G OVERNMENTS spend money on all kinds of foolish things, from robotic Christmas trees to beer growlers to pensions for former members of Parliament who are criminals. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation works hard to reduce government waste and we're not going to run out of work any time soon. But accountability is another key pillar of our work, so we don't quibble over the funding for one government function: democratic institutions. A debate is raging as to whether it's right for Prime Minister Stephen Harper to call a very early election and some people are concerned about additional costs incurred by a long campaign. The reality is that the most expensive day of an election is the last one. Most of the public money is spent to collect and count the votes on election day. It's like farming: whether the growing season is long or short most of the expenses come at seeding and harvest and the days in the middle don't impact the cost very much. We don't begrudge the money spent by Elections Canada regardless of the length of the campaign because elections are worth it. But we certainly do begrudge the money political parties siphon out of taxpayers' pockets. For every dollar a political party spends during a campaign, taxpayers end up paying 60 cents. That's because political parties get a rebate of 60 per cent for campaign costs from government coffers after the election is over. A longer campaign would give political parties the chance to spend more and therefore bill taxpayers for more costs. That's not right. However, the problem isn't the length of the campaign. If political parties want to spend their own money, they're welcome to campaign as long as they like. The problem is the ridiculous rebate they take from taxpayers afterwards. We need to get rid of those rebates and force political parties to raise money on their own merits. While we're on the topic, there's another campaign finance issue that needs to be fixed. When people donate $ 400 to a charity, they might get about $ 140 back on their taxes. If people give $ 400 to a political party, they get $ 300 back on their taxes. The House of Commons can turn almost any issue into a desk- thumping, opponent- heckling roar of debate. Ask why political donations should get a better deal than charitable donations and it's quiet enough to hear crickets chirping. Political parties are good for society and even heated debates are healthy, but surely nobody thinks the work they're doing is more important than the care charitable organizations provide for people who desperately need it. Political donations get big rebates simply because politicians are the ones making the rules. Whether political candidates are on the campaign trail for a few weeks or a few months, they should spend their own money. Right now they take donations and spend money with a wink and a nod because taxpayers will be footing most of the bill anyway. A longer election will make that bill bigger. But the problem isn't the bill itself, the problem is the wrong people are paying for it. Political parties will be more accountable if they have to earn donations by persuading people to buy into their vision for the country rather than reaching for rebates from taxpayers. Todd MacKay is prairie director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. TODD MACKAY Political parties should pay their own way B RANDON - The Harper government is about to sign a massive trade treaty that could cost thousands of Canadians their jobs, drive thousands of farm families and businesses into bankruptcy and deepen the recession, but three- quarters of Canadians don't even see it coming. The Trans- Pacific Partnership ( TPP) is a proposed trade arrangement between Canada, the United States, Mexico, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Collectively, those 12 Pacific Rim nations have a population of almost 800 million citizens and an annual GDP of more than $ 28 trillion. Though the text of the draft TPP agreement has not been released to the public, multiple reports indicate it is a comprehensive deal that will cover a wide range of issues, including labour standards, intellectual property rights, environmental protection, automobile manufacturing, forestry and agriculture. Given the sweeping scope of the agreement and enormous barrier- free market that would be created, TPP would dwarf NAFTA and potentially impact every segment of the Canadian economy. Despite that fact, a poll of more than 1,000 Canadians conducted in June by Environics found that 75 per cent of respondents knew nothing about the TPP. That's not surprising, given the treaty negotiations have been conducted under a blanket of secrecy. What is surprising, however, is the scant attention politicians and the media have given the TPP up to now. That is about to change. On Wednesday, the Canadian Press reported " The Conservatives are anxiously hoping to sign off on ( the TPP) deal before kicking off an election campaign that's expected to start as early as Sunday... the governing Tories want to launch the campaign with the deal in hand - an agreement they could brandish as evidence of their economic stewardship." The final round of TPP negotiations are scheduled to be completed today and, if an agreement is reached as expected, the text of the agreement could be made public shortly thereafter. When that happens, it will create both an opportunity and a danger for the governing Conservatives. The TPP treaty would be the greatest achievement of Stephen Harper's tenure as prime minister, but it will arbitrarily create winners and losers within the Canadian economy. While jobs may eventually emerge in some sectors, they will be lost in others. At the top of the list of those most vulnerable are Canada's egg, milk, cheese and poultry producers, who are currently protected by the national supply management system. According to multiple reports, Canada's membership in the TPP would be conditional on its willingness to abandon supply management, and it was reported last week that the Harper government was prepared to make that concession in order to push the deal over the finish line. In a response that offers little comfort to those whose livelihoods depend upon supply management, Harper said the government will protect the interests of every Canadian industry " as best we can", but added that Canada " cannot be left out of this kind of trade arrangement." That underscores one risk of the TPP agreement for the Harper Tories. Thousands of family farms and hundreds of thousands of Canadians' jobs exist because of supply management. A deal that ends decades of protection for Canada's dairy and poultry industry will put all those jobs and all those families in jeopardy. In Quebec, the majority of those families reside in ridings represented by NDP MPs. Outside of Quebec, however, most have Conservative MPs. That explains why the Liberals and NDP oppose a TPP agreement that abandons supply management. They aren't as willing as Harper to turn their backs on so many voters. Factor in other potentially controversial areas of the agreement - Will it cost jobs in the forestry, auto, manufacturing and energy sectors? Will it make prescription drugs more expensive? Will it impair Canadians' privacy rights? Will Canada's fresh water become available for bulk export? - and the Tories could find themselves on the defensive throughout the election campaign. Canadians may not know what the TPP is today, but they will in the coming days and weeks. When that happens, they will have some tough questions for Conservatives candidates. The outcome of the election could hinge on whether those candidates' answers assuage nervous voters' concerns. Deveryn Ross is a political commentator living in Brandon. deverynrossletters@ gmail. com Twitter: @ deverynross W ESTERN Canadian access to vital new commodities markets hinges on the federal government's willingness to stop giving dairy and poultry farmers special protection. With the U. S. pushing to conclude talks in Hawaii this week, Canada needs to move quickly. Protection of the dairy industry is an as- yet unresolved stumbling block that threatens to exclude our country from one of the most important trade agreements of the early 21st century. Canada sells most of its commodities to the United States, but the 12- nation Trans- Pacific Partnership ( TPP) under negotiation would expand market access to New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Japan and improve access to the U. S., Mexico, Peru, and Chile. About 83 per cent of western Canada's merchandise and commodity exports go to the U. S. and the other 11 TPP countries. If Canada is not part of the partnership, however, it may find even its trading relationship with the U. S. at risk. The U. S. has made it clear that the 20- yearold NAFTA will not be updated as it shifts its trading focus toward the TPP countries. This new agreement will, in effect, grant the TPP partners " NAFTA- plus" access to its market. That means the privileged access to the U. S. market that Canada and Mexico have enjoyed will largely disappear. In short, being on the outside looking in could disastrously erode Canada's trade balance. Which is why Canada's reluctance until this week to open its dairy market to other TPP countries is such a high- stakes gamble. All the other partners are prepared to make tradeoffs. New Zealand and Australia have already opened their agricultural sectors, as have, to a lesser degree, the Latin American TPP countries. Japan and the U. S. have also announced they will take on entrenched agricultural interests at home in the interests of achieving a TPP deal. Canada cannot win the day on dairy protections because every other TPP partner has made concessions and expects us to do the same. It is hard to overstate how much is at stake. Three- quarters of our meat exports go to TPP countries, yet Canada has trade agreements with only four of them. Canada can ill afford to be on the outside when our main competitors for meat exports, Australia and the U. S., gain new access to the TPP through the agreement. The same applies to lentils, wheat and numerous other commodities. These agreements matter. When the U. S. signed a trade agreement with Korea before Canada did, beef exports fell by roughly one- third. Conversely, when Canada ratified its trade agreement with Colombia before the U. S. did, wheat farmers there predicted losses of at least $ 100 million ( U. S.) a year. There are long- term implications, too. Consumption of food and other commodities in most TPP countries is growing faster than in the U. S. In Malaysia, Vietnam and even Peru, where millions upon millions of people are just leaving poverty and entering the middle class, the upside is huge. Getting in early is critical to gaining and holding market share. These are not markets where you want to try to dislodge entrenched U. S. and Australian producers. Beef producers have already seen the price of allowing U. S. and Australia better access to growing markets in Korea. The lesson needs to be shared, and passionately so, with the rest of the Canada's commodity producers. News reports this week suggest Canada is finally ready to bend on protectionist measures for dairy and poultry. International Trade Minister Ed Fast is mum while talks continue, but if the reports are accurate, this is a welcome signal of sanity and compromise at the last minute. One reason the government has been slow to move is the perception Canadian dairy farmers are the only group in Canada concerned about the TPP negotiations. The producers' presence in Hawaii this week makes that point. All of the myriad agricultural and commodity interests - from beef to pork to wheat to lentils to timber have been comparatively quiet - as has the service sector. That relative silence compared to the noise from the dairy industry continues to the peril of us all. Carlo Dade is the director of trade and investment policy at the Canada West Foundation. A deal we can't or must refuse TPP could seriously hurt Canadian interests Don't let dairy lobby freeze us out of pact DEVERYN ROSS CARLO DADE TNS FILES A_ 09_ Jul- 31- 15_ FP_ 01. indd A9 7/ 30/ 15 5: 42: 36 PM ;