Flaherty to tell Washington how to cut spending - Macleans.ca

Flaherty to tell Washington how to cut spending

Finance minister to tout Canadian banks, fiscal policy


Jim Flaherty is slated to give a speech on Wed. Jan. 12 at the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Canada Institute here in Washington, entitled:  How the West Can Win: Controlling Spending as We Grow”

From the press release:

“Canada’s Minister of Finance James Flaherty will discuss how Canada’s fiscal strength entering the recession and its stable banking system allowed for such a large stimulus package and avoided bank failures and nationalizations. His speech will also touch upon Canada ’s international leadership at the G20 summit in Toronto and the need for advanced economies to fiscally consolidate, while resisting protectionism. A question and answer session will follow the Minister’s presentation.”

Filed under:

Flaherty to tell Washington how to cut spending

  1. Mmmm…is he going to kick the tires on our new F-35's while he's there?

    Or would that look too stupid?

    • Those are built in Washington ?

      Hah Cats!

  2. "A question and answer session will follow the Minister's presentation."

    Q1: Minister Flaherty, at the time of the downturn, Canada's banks were leveraged, on average, 33 to 1. How was this a "stable banking system"?

    Q2: In 2008, your government instructed the state-controlled mortgage insurer to take up to $75 billion in mortgages (which they already insured) off of the books of Canada's big banks and extended to them $45 billion in liquidity guarantees. Indeed, Canada nationalized $69 billion in bank-held mortgages via CMHC and CPP. How was this not a bailout?

    Q3: Since 2006, Canada's Federal annual spending has increased nearly $60 billion and you have swung from a $14 billion dollar annual surplus to a $56 billion annual deficit. How is this " Controlling Spending as We Grow"?

    • Q2a: Canada's largest banks received $110 million from the US government's bailout package for the banking sector. How was this not a bailout too?

    • 'Controlling Spending as We Grow"?'

      Perhaps this could become known as Flaherty's razor, or Flaherty's law.

    • Thanks for posting that Amateur Hour. It's amazing how few in the Cdn MSM report this. And there are only a few in the US and other western media realize how the Cons have screwed we taxpayers who will be on the hook for all those 0-40, and then 5-35 mtgs, via CMHC, when the interest rates increase 1-3%'s and those over-leveraged homeowners go bankrupt. Apparently Cdns are 2 or 3 pay cheques from bankruptcy. Yes it was the con artists who brought this in. They were the ones who wanted to deregulate banks when in opposition. How did that work out in the US. And now they have the gaul to tell us today " “Canada's Minister of Finance James Flaherty will discuss how Canada's fiscal strength entering the recession and its stable banking system allowed for such a large stimulus package and avoided bank failures and nationalizations. His speech will also touch upon Canada 's international leadership at the G20 summit in Toronto and the need for advanced economies to fiscally consolidate, while resisting protectionism. A question and answer session will follow the Minister's presentation.”

      Resisting 'protectionism' – what a laugh! How about the UAB and the Potash debacle – LOL

  3. Perhaps "Lucky" Jim can instruct his audience how to lie about whether a defcit exists, what the size of that (non-existant) deficit is and how to make false projections as to how soon said (non-existant) deficit will be eliminated.

  4. I'm definitely going to want to see a word cloud from the text of his speech. Will we see the words Liberal and Coalition?

    • How about Pirates?

      • If he's talking about the Pirate Party of Canada… we've already won.

  5. So, I presume this will be followed up by "Aglukkaq to tell Washington to abandon public health care", "MacKay to tell Washington the F-35 is not a good defense purchase" and "Clement to tell Washington that anything more than $10,000 for a gazebo no one will ever use is extortion"?

    • Clement to tell Washington that all statisticians wrong regarding statistical methodology.

      • Actually, the equivalent here would be Clement telling Washington that they should always listen to statisticians.

        The irony about Flaherty telling Washington about cutting spending is that he's increased spending here.

  6. Jumbo's old thyme recipe for surviving a financial meltdown:

    First ya takes a liberal govt that consistently posted billion $ surpluses

    [ i know the libs were probably headed toward deficit too – but that would spoil the cake..er story, so bear with me]

    Then ya cleans out all the cupboards and throws away all the surpluses[ i find cutting consumer taxes works a treat] – anything left over?Quebec's always a good dumping place.

    Next ya craft a multi-billion $ pork barrel stimulus plan to a recession you say we would have already had if it was coming,[ here's the clever part] and then you claim the resulting deficit would have been waaay worse if the opposition had been the cook.

    And voila, you have saved Canada from a fate as bad as you guys, and established your credentials worldwide as a fiscally prudent finance minister.

    Now remember: you must follow after a fiscally responsible govt, or it doesn't work – i know, i tried it in Ontario.

  7. As much as I am still PO'd at him over the income trust LIE he has done a relatively admiral job, particulary as it rrelates to corporate taxes. The old adage keeps ringing true; lower taxes and you get more dinero in the coffers. Something the parasites of society will never understand. He is right on the issue at hand as well. It takes a strong economy as well as a strong military to remain a power in the world and if our friends to the south don't figure this out, and damn quick, their time as top banana will be short lived.

    • If lowering taxes worked….the US would be awash in surplus by now.

      It seems that it's you who doesn't understand.

        • Mmmhmmm it's magic. You can cut taxes, and spend like crazy…and voila, tons of money roll in.

          Why if everybody discovered this…we wouldn't have a global financial crisis!


          About what I'd expect to be written by a former leader of the Libertarian party….they're big on magic.

          • Lol i love how you don't understand the difference between revenue and spending.

            Spending = almost zero effect on revenue.

            And how we're talking about a sub-component of revenue, specifically corporate tax receipts.

            Wow, you are sooooo soooo soooo far in over your head.

            Economics Cats.

          • Cats, it's obvious you can't read and you can't count so don't be trying to discuss economics. Personally, I think you need a trip to the vet for some shots.

          • Come on Emily, you should be glad they are on the right track and it appears to be working. Recession always hits corporate (private) first creating unemployment. Tax cuts encourages them to re-hire, stimulus greases the wheels, then the cut-backs in government (public) starts to pay back the cost of the stimulus. The financial crisis was caused by Clinton repealing the law regulating the U.S. banks and the securitizing of mortgages. Greed did the rest.

            Public service sees biggest staffing squeeze since 1990s

          • LOL no, they're not on the right track…it wasn't a recession, and it's still ongoing…and had nothing to do with Clinton. The words 'jobless recovery' is now the most hopeful scenario being discussed….but the jobs aren't coming back.

          • Not sure if you are lumping Canada and the U.S, together – we have agreed the U.S. is in much deeper do-do re unemployment. Canada is ahead of the game, tax cuts are only part of the equation, but there are some good news stories too. It will be a battle for jobs out there.
            “It's got too expensive in China,” says Mr. Metcalf, general manager and part-owner of Global Sticks Inc., which he estimates holds 35 to 40 per cent of the North American market for ice cream sticks and spoons, and related small, wooden objects. Global Sticks, based in Vancouver, is an amalgamation of several U.S. and Canadian companies.

          • All countries have the same problems..and in spite of the hype, so do we..so I'm not sure where we 'agreed' on unemployment.

            Ice cream sticks shouldn't need any employees at all.

          • Hmph…my comment seems to have disappeared.

      • Cutting corporate tax rates INCREASED revenue.


        Emily has more egg on her face Cats!

    • he has done a relatively admiral job

      If by that you mean he's spent money like a highly paid drunken sailor, you speak the truth.

  8. If Flaherty does that, Canada will surely become the sanctimonious capital of the world. Kindly just do your jobs guys without beating your breasts, especially in the US. Long term wise, getting US attention is very unwise, they will take it as a lincense to have another stage and economy to wreck. Working below the radar is more preferable. Lead by examples, not by blabbers.

  9. So is it just me, or doesn't anyone else wonder how lower corp income tax rates applied to a lower profit base somehow magically result in a higher net result? Perhaps the report by the CTV "news" (meaning editorial) team bundles tax receipts from sources other than the corporate income tax into the total receipts figure… and then hopes none of us notice the mathematical inconsistency…

    • As I said earlier on here….it's MAGIC.

      Ya just gotta BELIEVE!


  10. Are Canadians not concerned that we have a media monopoly in play.. With the Globe buying Canadian Press and being part of CTV and the National Post owning the Vancouver Sun and Province we are getting a bombardment of right-wing propoganda. Tax cuts for corporations you betcha. Journalistic integrity is non-existant here in Canada and this promotion of the abilities of Flaharty is more than an embarrassment it is a mistruth. Aren't there rules against media ownership being held by a couple of corporations? Getting talking points from the pmo's office straight off the newspaper editiorial page is absolutely disgusting.

  11. I see nothing in the speech title about *cutting* spending, merely controlling it. This is a critical difference, for it allows government to actually increase spending as long as it's relatively "controlled," which is precisely what the Harper government has been doing ever since taking office.

    • I'm not sure I'd call the surge in spending controlled under Harper. It's focused and targeted yes, but controled?