Conservative Budget Breaks Promise to Saskatchewan

If this story is true then they broke their promise :

---

The Conservative budget proposes to exclude 50 per cent of non-renewable natural resources from the formula used to calculate equalization payments to the provinces. Premiers Lorne Calvert of Saskatchewan and Danny Williams of Newfoundland had lobbied hard for 100 per cent exclusion of non-renewable natural resources, but analysts had predicted 50 per cent inclusion was more realistic.

---

Does this break the promise? Decide for yourself:

here is the conservative plan:

The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Work with the provinces in order to achieve a long-term agreement which would address the issue of fiscal imbalance in a permanent fashion.
• Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.

"Ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula" Not "removed with a cap" not "sort or removed but not really"

Let's see what the conservatives said in the house:

---

“The matter of equalization has to do with Saskatchewan's natural resources which by right of the Constitution we should have complete access to, we should have total and complete benefit of.
- Mr. Bradley Trost (Saskatoon—Humboldt, CPC) Hansard

"It is our position that non-renewable resources such as oil and gas should not be in the formula. "
- Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC) Hansard

"Will the minister or his designate stand in the House today and do what is right, do what is fair, and simply commit to the elimination of the clawback provisions and give Saskatchewan people the same deal as afforded to Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia?"
- Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, CPC) Hansard

It was interesting to hear him say that equalization is not really about equality. It seems to me that it is…. We know that the current equalization formula is flawed…. We agree that Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia deserve to keep their offshore gas and oil revenues. However, we think that what is fair for those provinces is also fair for Saskatchewan…. . This change should be a slam dunk.
- Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC) Hansard

"Representatives of the people of Saskatchewan are obliged to speak out against an equalization system that penalizes our province with an over-emphasis on non-renewable resources and a complete failure to accurately measure fiscal capacity.
- Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Blackstrap, CPC) Hansard

---

This means the following (according to CTV again)

---

The fiscal capacity cap, another new measure in the budget, is intended to ensure that the formula doesn't unfairly bring a receiving province's overall fiscal capacity to a level higher than that of any non-receiving, or "have" provinces.

Under the measure, no province can bring in more revenue than Ontario, which doesn't receive a payment from the equalization program earns less revenue than Alberta.

That cap has a significant effect on Saskatchewan, which is currently a have-not province but has significant natural resources revenue.

---

In other words, Saskatchewan is to get about 220 million.

THAT IS NOT WHAT WAS PROMISED

---

To put it into perspective, a new equalization deal would have meant an additional $750 million for Saskatchewan, my province, this year alone.
- Mr. Dave Batters (Palliser, CPC) Hansard

"It is estimated that Saskatchewan, had it received that same deal a decade ago, would have received an additional $8 billion for the province from non-renewable resource revenues…. In regard to equalization, Saskatchewan is being treated very unfairly
- Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, CPC) Hansard

"By my understanding, if Saskatchewan were allowed to keep 100% of its non-renewable natural resources, it would mean an estimated $800 million yearly and perhaps even higher than that".
- Tom Lukiwski source: Federal Hansard, March 22, 2005

---

Remember that Saskatchewan Conservative MP's - Brad Trost, according to the CBC said that Saskatchewan would get the "best deal ever" which may be true - but he also said that it would be just as good as they were promising:

---

Brad Trost said while caucus discussions are confidential, MPs from Saskatchewan are intent on keeping their promise to get a new equalization deal for the province.

"Let me give you a 100 per cent guarantee, Prime Minister Harper will give Saskatchewan the best deal it's ever had from any prime minister ever, " he said.

---

A 100% guarantee, eh? That's a pretty strong statement. But it ge's even better, what does Trost go on to say:

---

Asked if that would be the same deal the Conservatives campaigned on, Trost said: "If it isn't, it better be better."

---

Let's see what his fellow MP Tom Lukiwiski had to say (from the same article:

---

Before the Conservatives formed the goverment, Lukiwski said the two proposed changes to the equalization formula could mean at least $2 billion a year extra for Saskatchewan government coffers.

---

So Saskatchewan gets 220 million - which is not $2 billon or $8 billion or even $800 million - which are all numbers that THE CONSERVATIVES SAID WE WOULD GET

This has been a Saskatchewan Screw Job - Harper Style

Read more here

Layton Stands up For Saskatchewan

At least one federal leader cares about Saskatchewan:

---

NDP leader Jack Layton says he can't support the upcoming federal budget if it doesn't deal with an issue near and dear to the Saskatchewan government — equalization payments.

---

Remember when Conservative MP Brad Trost said this:

---

Finally, it should be noted that only the Conservatives are fighting for Saskatchewan to receive the full benefits of it's natural resources. The Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois are opposed to Saskatchewan receiving those benefits and the federal NDP has studiously avoided the issue.

---

Suck it Trost.

Suck it long and suck it hard.

Equalization Round Up

Some people have been wondering if the equalization issue has "legs", that is, do people care about it?

Well I know that the blogging community isn't exactly a representative sample of the "real world" but on the other hand, I would guess that we are what pollsters and opinion experts call "opiion shapers". In other words, if we all care about a topic, then we will lead other people to care about a topic.

So lets look in at the blogging world on the latest equalization promise, shall we?

Saskboy writes:

---

Harper’s gamble that he can pander to Quebec at the expense of Westerners who he’s just screwed over, is going to be called.

---

The Jurist weighs in:

---

After the firestorm this week surrounding the Cons' apparent plan to break their promises on equalization, PMS' provincial and federal allies alike are going out of their way to say that nothing's been set in stone - while of course refusing to suggest what else might be on the way instead.

---

and at Canada's Debate:

---

Well the shit seems to have hit the fan. Harper’s plan to “fix” the fiscal imbalance has been announced, and not surprisingly people from the provinces most effected (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland) are the ones who are the most upset.

---

Cowboys for Social Responsibility:

---

The province will get $600 million less than the Cartman Tories promised - a backhanded slap costing the province $50 million per Tory MP.

---

Ken Chapman asks "What is Stephen Harper Thinking?"

---

Wasn’t it just this kind of pandering to Quebec politics that started the Reform Party in the first place? Wasn’t Stephen Harper around then?

---

Eugene Plawiuk chimes in:

---

Call me sceptical, call me a lifelong Albertan, but the True Blue Tory types in Alberta will deny, deny, deny this is a new NEP. Well it is.

---

Laddie is fairly blunt in his comments:

---

Stephen "Two-Face" Harper doesn't want to lose the 10 seats that the Conservatives have picked up in Quebec, but the 12 seats in Saskatchewan are up for grabs!

---

Nicole Martel opines:

---

No matter how the Conservatives try to position themselves, this proposal will certainly cause backlash from their Western base. Mostly because it is another broken promise to a group that is still dealing with the reversal on income trusts and appointing unelected senators to cabinet posts

---

The Northern Liberal says:

---

I can see no other logical explanation for Harper not following through on his promise to exclude resource revenues from the calculation of equalization other than to divert more money into vote-rich Quebec. If you can--please--I'd like to hear it.

---

And to come full circle, Saskboy again

---

Harper has done it. He’s given the cheeky middle finger to Saskatchewan.

---

Wow! This is obviously a pretty important issue - at least in the blogosphere.

Let's get the right-wing reaction from Small Dead Animals on equalization:

sound of crickets chirping

Well, that's even more telling, isn't it?

Response To Paul Well's Letter Writer

Paul Wells was kind enough to link to my blog yesterday and then (in the spirit of bipartisanship or something) posted an e-mail that he got from a reader criticizing me and/or my blog.

---

Maybe I’m a bit slow, or maybe it’s the over gleeful partisan nature of you and that mouse thingy you linked to, but I’m not seeing where the Tories are in trouble. We’ve got a Radio Canada leak of possible solutions, and then the Brad Trost quote looks only to guarantee the “best deal” ever, which doesn’t even seem to be violated by the RC leak.

---

The e-mail writer then went on to say:

---

Post some information rather than a smirk, or link to someone who can write for an audience that doesn’t already agree with him 1000%. Partisan blogs more than have their role, but to explain to the public outside of Sask. Such partisan abstruseness doesn’t help.

---

Mr. Wells then went on to eviscerate this person's attack on Wells' blog. Very, very effective.

This is my pale imitation of Mr. Well's - only I will be standing up for my own blog.

1) The Reader (a Graeme H) says "the over gleeful partisan nature of you and that mouse thingy you linked to"

First of all, Paul Wells is anything but partisan as he himself so eloquently points out. I on the other hand, have made no secret that I support the NDP. I am a member of the NDP as any sort of half-assed examination of my site would tell you.

I mean, my god, if the trolls over on Small Dead Animals can figure it out, we are not talking rocket science here, and they attack me for being an NDP shill and a lefty crazy all the time.

Secondly, "mouse thingy"? - I'm hurt. :-)


2) link to someone who can write for an audience that doesn’t already agree with him 1000%. Partisan blogs more than have their role, but to explain to the public outside of Sask. Such partisan abstruseness doesn’t help.

The link that Mr Wells was kind enough to provide simply listed the quotes, from Hansard, of the 12 conservative MP's. If these words now seemed bias and partisan - it is because the CONSERVATIVES LIED. Nothing I say or do can change that fact and if the reader doesn't like it, perhaps he should take it up with the CONSERVATIVES who LIED and not me and my blog for pointing it out.

Sheesh!


3) I’m not seeing where the Tories are in trouble. We’ve got a Radio Canada leak of possible solutions, and then the Brad Trost quote looks only to guarantee the “best deal” ever,

Right here, right now, I am going to predict the future. The Conservatives will take out resource revenues from the equalization formula and claim, as a result, that they lived up to their election promise. Then they will apply a cap (the O'brian formula) and say that this is nothing new and that they have still lived up to their promise.

Here is the problem. Applying the cap would mean that Saskatchewan would get a few million a year from the Federal Government. Brad Trost will claim that this is still the "best deal that Saskatchewan has ever had" because yes, 99 kicks to the head from the Torys is better than the 100 kicks to the head from the Liberals.

Heres the problem. The conservatives will still be breaking their promise.

Here is what the (now) Prime Minister Harper had to say when he was in opposition:

---

The Prime Minister is also failing Saskatchewan on equalization. The government promised to reform the equalization program in 2004 for Saskatchewan. The government now says it will not get to that until at least 2006, costing Saskatchewan over $750 million in lost revenue. When will the Prime Minister overrule his finance minister and make the changes necessary, so Saskatchewan does not lose this money?

---

Here is what Saskatchewan Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski said

---

"By my understanding, if Saskatchewan were allowed to keep 100% of its non-renewable natural resources, it would mean an estimated $800 million yearly and perhaps even higher than that".

"In fact, if Saskatchewan had a proper, fair and just equalization formula right now, at today's oil prices Saskatchewan would be receiving, by my calculations, anywhere between $800 million and $1.5 billion in additional revenue each and every year. Of course we do not have that agreement"

---

And here is what Saskatchewan Conservative MP Brad Trost had to say:

---

Brad Trost said while caucus discussions are confidential, MPs from Saskatchewan are intent on keeping their promise to get a new equalization deal for the province. "Let me give you a 100 per cent guarantee, Prime Minister Harper will give Saskatchewan the best deal it's ever had from any prime minister ever, " he said. Asked if that would be the same deal the Conservatives campaigned on, Trost said: "If it isn't, it better be better."

---

For the record they did not campaign on putting a "cap" on payments after taking resource revenues out of the system.

So the numbers that the Conservatives talked about (inlcuding Mr. Harper) were in the $750 million to $1.5 billion range.

If Saskatchewan gets $100 million a year is that living up to what they said?

I think not.

Harper to "Fix" fiscal imbalance - or you know, not

According to the CBC Prime Minister Harper is all set to keep one of his major election promises and be an all-around good guy:

---

Radio Canada reported Monday that Ottawa will increase transfer payments to the provinces in the area of education, post-secondary education and infrastructure.
Continue Article

As well, Quebec would get an extra $1.5 billion in equalization payments.

---

Oh wait.

I don't live in Quebec.

Make that, Harper is about to deliver a screw job to Saskatchewan

From the story:

---

It suggested that half of the revenues of the provinces drawn from natural resources be included in the calculation of equalization payments.

---

What was that promise again? The one the Conservatives made in their platform?

You know, in writing?

Oh yeah:

---

Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.

---

Lies.

All lies.

Vote for this Story

click on the button

---

Update:

As Greg over at political staples points out:

---

So Alberta and Saskatchewan (otherwise known as the core base) will be opposed. Danny Williams will be hoping mad and Dalton "election year" McGuinty will pile on. Out of the frying pan into....another frying pan Ms. Ambrose - this will be very interesting.

---

Well, at least one of the top Conservative Cabinet Ministers is on it. I mean, Ms. Ambrose did such a good job in Environment that she got this.... promotion.

right?

right?

Uperdate:

Buckdog has a nasty-looking picture of Harper up and also seems to have a copy of the conservative platform. I smell the NDP campaign in Saskatchewan being formed right here on the web!

And here is what one of the blogging tories has to say:

---

This will probably cause some trouble with Sasketchewan ,Alberta and Newfoundland. I think it is worth that risk.

---

Typical. If it helps Quebec, screw the west!


Upper-UpperDate:

Paul Wells is in on the act!

---

As another election promise breathes its last gasps

Hey, someone in Lorne Calvert's office: remind me the names of those Saskatchewan Conservative MPs who used to bug the Liberals about resource revenues and equalization? Let's make their lives hell, shan't we...

---

Mr. Wells, if the Premier's office doesn't get back to you you just have to look here

Conservative MP tells outright Lie in Letter to the Editor

According to the Saskatchewan NDP caucus website: Brad Trost, one of the Conservative MP's from Saskatchewan, said the following in a letter to the editor:

---

"Finally, it should be noted that only the Conservatives are fighting for Saskatchewan to receive the full benefits of it's natural resources. The Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois are opposed to Saskatchewan receiving those benefits and the federal NDP has studiously avoided the issue. Calvert should be lobbying federal Leader Jack Layton to support the Conservatives"

---

The site then goes on to list the three-year record of Jack Layton and the Federal NDP fighting for Saskatchewan on this issue.

Woops!

Like the site says, "why the big lie, Mr. Trost?"

---

Conservatives Break Promise to Saskatchewan

Remember when the conservatives made the promise to Saskatchewan in the last election campaign about the equalization deal?

Here is their platform:

The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Work with the provinces in order to achieve a long-term agreement which would address the issue of fiscal imbalance in a permanent fashion.
• Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.

---

"Ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula" sounds like a pretty specific campaign promise to me.

And remember what Conservative MP Brad Trost said:

Asked if that would be the same deal the Conservatives campaigned on, Trost said: "If it isn't, it better be better."

So therefore, unless Trost is the biggest liar in what will be a caucus full of liars if this deal does not happen then the Conservatives will HAVE to live up to this commitment

But that was then and this is now. NOW what is Trost saying?

---

Trost is backing away from the $800 million that's long been talked about as what it would mean to Saskatchewan. Trost says it will all depend on what goes into the formula. He says his government is consulting with all of the provinces, to ensure there's a fair deal for all.

---

And what does MP Gerry Ritz have to say?

---

But just how much money Saskatchewan would get under a new equalization formula has not been determined.

"We're well on our way to doing that. Any kind of dollar figure is up to different interpretations, of course," Ritz said in an interview from Ottawa.

---

I've been calling it all along:

Saskatchewan Launches New Equalization Campaign

Because of the whole "Harper and the CPC screwing Saskatchwan" deal, the Province of Saskatchewan will be launching a new campaign.

I'm not sure how well the "Imagine" theme will play, but I haven't seen the ads or cards yet so maybe it will work.

Hopefully this will put the pressure on the federal conservatives to keep thier promises.

Harper Screws Saskatchewan and BREAKS HIS COMMITTMENT

I called it here , the Harper Conservatives in this province are going to screw us royally.

In the election the 12 Conservative MP's and Harper made promises to the people of Saskatchewan

Now it turns out that the new plan is as follows:

---

"The plan would mean more money for every province -- with the exception of Newfoundland and Labrador. Quebec would be the biggest winner, likely receiving an extra $1.1-billion a year. Ontario would also benefit, gaining about $900-million through increased transfers for social programs."

---

hmmm. Looks like Eastern Canada gets a pretty good deal there eh? I'm sure Saskatchewan does just as well. Right?

---

"Saskatchewan would receive an extra $156-million, less than the nearly $1-billion it would get if resource revenues were excluded from the calculation."

---

Woops. I guess not.

Some more from the article:

---

Resource-rich provinces such as Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan and Alberta had hotly opposed including their oil and gas wealth in the calculation. They insisted non-renewable resources be excluded -- a position also taken by the Conservatives in their 2006 election platform.

---

That's right, Harper made a commitment in the platform, something he emphasised last time he was here in the province, here is what Harper said about equalization:

---

"I'm certainly aware we made some commitments in that regard. As you know, this government prides itself on fulfilling these commitments."

---

Which was quickly pounced on by reporters here in the province:

---

And then there was my personal favourite: "I've told the province that during these discussions that I'm going to try and not say things that will prejudice the final outcome because we are listening to a range of provincial concerns on these issues."
You don't want to prejudice the final outcome? Of course, you do, sir. You're the prime minister of Canada. It's actually your job to prejudice the outcome, because you're the one that made the blunt, unequivocal promise in a Jan. 12 letter to "exclude non-renewable resources" from the equalization formula and move to a 10-province standard.

---

The media have also been critical of the lapdogs, I mean, MP's of Prime Minister Steve. (PMS)

---

"Saskatchewan Conservative MPs and candidates were crystal clear during the 2006 election campaign when they promised that a Conservative government would exempt Saskatchewan's non-renewable resources from equalization....Seeing that, one can't help but wonder if the federal Conservatives only recently decided to flip-flop on their promise to Saskatchewan? Is that because they believe we can be taken for granted? Or did the Conservatives always plan to break their promise to a province with just 14 seats so they could keep their promise to a province with 75 seats?"

---

And now, with this latest outrage, the media is quick to point out the obvious.

---

Saskatchewan is about to become the country's biggest equalization loser.In its most simplified form, the report states the Harper government is considering implementing an equalization plan that penalizes Saskatchewan more than any other province.

---

When Prime Minister Harper goes on and on about how he and his government keep their commitments, call them on the bullshit. They are breaking a commitment they made so that they can screw the 14 seats in Saskatchewan to pick up seats in Ontario/Quebec.

So much for the "West Want's In" eh, PMS?

---

Calvert Ponders Ad Campaign for Equalization pt 2

Part 1

While we are at it, here is an interesting quote from the article from my first post.

---

Elhard [the Conservative Party Critic] is now urging Calvert to slow down.

"If we can be a little more patient, take the prime minister at his word," he said. "If he says there's going to be change, we'll wait to see that happen."

People in Saskatchewan don't need to be convinced that a new equalization deal is a good idea, Elhard said.

---

That's very interesting. Here is what Elhard's Boss- Brad Wall, the Conservative Leader of the Opposition had to say on this file a few months ago:

---

Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure if you’ve heard, but the federal Liberal government
seems to be having their share of political challenges at the moment, and the likelihood of a spring election is increasing across the country. What better time to press for a better equalization deal for our province than right now?

---

First the Conservative Saskatchewan Party is all for pushing for equalization and now they are against pushing for it?

What happened?

Oh, right, the Conservatives formed the government federaly.

Brad Wall is selling out the people of Saskatchewan to play lapdog for his master PMS

Calvert Ponders Ad Campaign for Equalization

The CBC reports that Premier Calvert may take on PMS and the Conservative MP's from Saskatchewan on the whole equalization deal.

Might I suggest an ad?

12 Conservative MP's from Saskatchewan in Trouble

Welcome to Paul Wells' Readers: (And there are a lot of you!) this post is from last year
Read my latest post on this topic here

The conservative MPs from Saskatchewan told the people of this province to vote for them in the last election campaign because they would deliver on an equalization deal for the province. Now they are cutting and running from that promise:

---

"Let me give you a 100 per cent guarantee, Prime Minister Harper will give Saskatchewan the best deal it's ever had from any prime minister ever, "

- Saskatchewan MP Brad Trost

---

So the Prime Minister was in Saskatchewan yesterday and his office was running the show with typical arrogance. They told one reporter from Regina that, “What you see on (the Prime Minister's itinerary) advisory is what we want you to know. If we're not telling you, we don't want you to know.”

Can you believe these guys?

Of course, PMSH made no comment on the biggest federal-provincial file in the province, the only one that all the newspapers have been writing about and the one that his own MP’s sent him a letter saying it could cost them thier seats in the next election. The one that one of his MP’s went out on a limb to say that PMSH would give us the “best deal it’s ever had from a Prime Minister”

Well, just to keep the MP’s on their toes – here is what the Saskatchewan MP’s have had to say about the equalization deal – before they formed government of course. It would be weird if ALL 12 SASKATCHEWAN CONSERVATIVE MP’s spoke out against the current equalization deal and called for an immediate change.

Yes, that would be weird. (the links are to the actual quotes in Hansard)

---

“The matter of equalization has to do with Saskatchewan's natural resources which by right of the Constitution we should have complete access to, we should have total and complete benefit of. It is a right which is being taken away from us through the equalization process…. We want nothing more than the basic principles of fairness applied.”
- Mr. Bradley Trost (Saskatoon—Humboldt, CPC) Hansard

---

“Saskatchewan has been ripped off by the federal government when it comes to equalization …Because of equalization, revenues from the very resources that are keeping the province afloat are being handed to the federal government which in turn distributes the money among the have not provinces”
- Mr. Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville, CPC) Hansard

---

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the equalization question…. We can find inequities that exist between provinces particularly as they relate to Saskatchewan. In that regard, there have been many studies commissioned showing that Saskatchewan has had the bad end of the deal on this one… All Saskatchewan wants is to be treated fairly and equitably… It is our position that non-renewable resources such as oil and gas should not be in the formula. The Minister of Finance, a native of Saskatchewan, has an obligation to the citizens of Saskatchewan and those in particular in Souris—Moose Mountain to ensure that the past injustices done to Saskatchewan are not repeated again.
- Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC) Hansard

---

Saskatchewan is simply not getting its fair share out of equalization…. Just last week the Prime Minister visited Saskatoon, but refused to substantially negotiate or discuss the equalization matter with our premier…. Saskatchewan faces challenges. Its population has increased 14% since the Great Depression, while other provincial populations have flourished. With major industries in crisis, a static population and mounting fiscal pressures, we cannot afford to wait forever for this federal government to attend to this problem…. We need our NDP government in Saskatchewan to be supportive of our efforts to get a better deal for Saskatchewan. We need a provincial government that wants our province to prosper on the backs of its own industries. At the very least we need a provincial government that will hold the federal government to its constitutional obligations…. I plead with the government and the minister across the way to negotiate a fair deal with the province of Saskatchewan and to do it without delay.
- Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, CPC) Hansard

---

“The equalization formula that we have has totally shafted the province of Saskatchewan from every standpoint…. A good deal of the problem I have identified is the gross unfairness in the equalization formula. I want to point out a couple of those discrepancies. I also want to point out that the Conservative Party has clearcut policies on this matter as opposed to the government across the way…. I want to make it clear that this formula is grossly unfair to a province that has non-renewable natural resources…. This is bad policy. It is terrible policy…. This formula is unfair. It is shocking. I do not know what terminology I could use to describe the matter….. As a resident of Saskatchewan, I am looking at a formula that does not serve our province very well at all. As I stated at the onset, in many respects it shafts the people of Saskatchewan to the umpteenth degree. What is the government's response to this very serious problem? The finance minister says that it is too complicated to discuss.
- Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert, CPC) Hansard

---

"The truth of the matter is that in Saskatchewan the only elected official who is not demanding the same deal as was afforded Premiers Hamm and Williams is the Minister of Finance. That is shameful. Will the minister or his designate stand in the House today and do what is right, do what is fair, and simply commit to the elimination of the clawback provisions and give Saskatchewan people the same deal as afforded to Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia?"
Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, CPC) Hansard

---

"Representatives of the people of Saskatchewan are obliged to speak out against an equalization system that penalizes our province with an over-emphasis on non-renewable resources and a complete failure to accurately measure fiscal capacity. The detrimental effects of the present equalization formula should not be under-estimated. It has and continues to have a real effect on the prosperity of the residents of Saskatchewan, robbing them of economic benefits resulting from energy revenues…. The concept of equalization is to assist have not provinces. However, under this formula, we could conceivably cement the economic stagnation of some provinces, such as my own, for decades to come. The treatment of Saskatchewan's non-renewable resources under the equalization formula is, to quote Courchene, “not only inequitable, it is fiscally and economically immiserating”`. We cannot allow this situation to persist."
- Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Blackstrap, CPC) Hansard

---

“A tremendous number of our graduates and our kids are working in Alberta in that oil patch that Alberta started before this equalization formula became a hindrance. I take exception to that…. The whole equalization process, and the fundamental word in there is equal, has become a political process, not a practical process. One can argue that formula is as flawed as the equalization one and I would agree. It needs to be changed…"
- Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC) Hansard

---

"I have a lot of people in my riding who would like to know why, when those parties were making this deal, there was not a single penny for agriculture and not a single penny for a fair deal for Saskatchewan in terms of equalization, an agenda that this party has been driving for months as the only ally of the Saskatchewan people in moving this issue forward."
- Mr. Andrew Scheer (Regina Qu’appelle, CPC) Hansard

---

There is no equalization deal for Saskatchewan, which is what the Conservative Party has been consistently demanding from the government. To put it into perspective, a new equalization deal would have meant an additional $750 million for Saskatchewan, my province, this year alone.
- Mr. Dave Batters (Palliser, CPC) Hansard

---

It was interesting to hear him say that equalization is not really about equality. It seems to me that it is…. We know that the current equalization formula is flawed…. We agree that Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia deserve to keep their offshore gas and oil revenues. However, we think that what is fair for those provinces is also fair for Saskatchewan…. . This change should be a slam dunk.
- Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC) Hansard

---

"This is not something just unique to the Conservative Party, but we believe there is a tremendous flaw in the current equalization formula… It is estimated that Saskatchewan, had it received that same deal a decade ago, would have received an additional $8 billion for the province from non-renewable resource revenues…. In regard to equalization, Saskatchewan is being treated very unfairly…. By not providing a fair deal for Saskatchewan, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have turned their backs on our province"
Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, CPC) Hansard

---

That's all 12 Saskatchewan MPs!

Sask MP draws line in the sand over Equalization

It seems that one of the Saskatchewan Conservative MP's - Brad Trost - has really drawn a line in the sand on the equalization deal, according to the CBC

Brad Trost said while caucus discussions are confidential, MPs from Saskatchewan are intent on keeping their promise to get a new equalization deal for the province.

"Let me give you a 100 per cent guarantee, Prime Minister Harper will give Saskatchewan the best deal it's ever had from any prime minister ever, " he said.

A 100% guarantee, eh? That's a pretty strong statement. For those of you that missed my earlier post on equalization, here is the conservative plan:

The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Work with the provinces in order to achieve a long-term agreement which would address the issue of fiscal imbalance in a permanent fashion.
• Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.

"Ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula" sounds like a pretty specific campaign promise to me.

What does Trost have to say:

Asked if that would be the same deal the Conservatives campaigned on, Trost said: "If it isn't, it better be better."

So therefore, unless Trost is the biggest liar in what will be a caucus full of liars if this deal does not happen then the Conservatives will HAVE to live up to this commitement

Right?

Right?

Let's see what his fellow MP Tom Lukiwiski had to say:

Before the Conservatives formed the goverment, Lukiwski said the two proposed changes to the equalization formula could mean at least $2 billion a year extra for Saskatchewan government coffers.

Now, Lukiwski will only guarantee that the deal will be a good one.

In fact, Lukiwski went as far to say, "we're going to be happy with whatever announcement is made."

Get ready for a Saskatchewan Screw Job - Harper Style

Perhaps Equalization is "too political"

Hey! It looks like the Saskatchewan Tories have disappeared.

One can also see why our supposedly accountable Conservative MPs have run like scared rabbits since the Harper letter was pulled from the proverbial hat.

The best explanation came from Lukiwski's secretary who said Wednesday that he was in the riding and not in cell phone range.

Lukiwski is a Regina MP. He has been in his riding out of cell phone range since Wednesday.

There again, this is the same Tom Lukiwski who failed to mention equalization in his spring MP report entitled Keeping our Commitments! (Hey, didn't you move that motion in March 2005 calling for the Liberals to immediately sign an equalization deal with Saskatchewan, Tom? Tommy, Tommy, can you hear me?)

I have the answer!

They have all taken their lessons from their boss, Steve-o. This whole equalization file has become "too political" and so they are avoiding making any comment about it. (see below post if you don't know what I am talking about)


Of course, it wasn't too political to put in thier platform:

Fiscal imbalance

In the last eight years, the federal government has amassed enormous surpluses. Meanwhile, many provinces have seen reduced revenues and have had to run deficits in order to pay for education, health, and other social programs. While some sectoral and ad hoc agreements with provinces have temporarily reduced the financial pressure, it is time for a comprehensive agreement.

The plan

A Conservative government will:
• Work with the provinces in order to achieve a long-term agreement which would address the issue of fiscal imbalance in a permanent fashion.
• Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.