« Home | Sask Conservative MPs Feeling Heat Over Equalizati... » | Majority of Americans Want Troops Out Of Iraq » | International Day for the Elimination of Racial Di... » | Harper Plays 'Word Dinkery' With Saskatchewan » | 'Conrad Black Should Not Have Gone Public With His... » | Shoveling $Billions$ Into Quebec » | Lady Black Calls Journalist - 'SLUT' ! » | O'Connor Apologizes For Misleading The House Of Co... » | Greenpeace Activists Chain Themselves To Gate At 2... » | The METHOD In Elizabeth May's MADNESS » 

Thursday, March 22, 2007 

Saskatchewan Party LIES About Province's Budget

The official oppositon, Saskatchewan Party is once again playing fast and loose with facts.

Saskatchewan's Finance Minister Andrew Thomson brought down a budget which implements a new Seniors Drug Program - implements a NO TAX plan for recent post secondary grads who make Saskatchewan their home and continues a freeze on university tuition.

Here is what the Bank of Montreal says about the 2007 Budget in their article, '13 Going On 14'.
"The Province of Saskatchewan is projecting its 14th consecutive balanced budget for 2007-08. The $75 million surplus in the General Revenue Fund follows an estimated $70 million balance in 2006-07."
Bank of Montreal
BMO Capital Markets
March 22, 2007

But hold the phone ... what does the opposition Saskatchewan Party have to say? "Sask. Party Says NDP Has Saddled Citizens With $700 Million Deficit."

Hmmm - who do I believe - economists from the Bank of Montreal -OR- the Saskatchewan Party???

I thought I read that the NDP had to take a bunch of cash out of the reserve to make it a "balanced" budget.

In the end, there expenditures are more than their revenues.

Where do you get that banks and economists necessarily "like that".

Wouldn't you have to admit that a rainy day fund should be for just that and not during an economic boom? It's obvious that Calvert & Co. should be adding to the fund rather than drawing from it at a time like this.

But they way they use a closely controlled fiscal stabaliztion fund allows them to draw from reserves in a predictable way where NO debt has to be incurred. Without the retained earnings to draw down, you are correct, they would have had to borrow and that is what CA's consider a true deficit - because it incurrs debt.

If you plan for expenditures next month by retaining $100 of this months money and expending it in next months expenditures, then you did not have a $100 deficit next month NOR did you incur new debt ... you planed to spend retained earnings from 'this' month, 'next' month.

Banks and economists like that. Right wing extremists like the Sask Party hate it .... because they are too bloody dumb to understand it ...

So you don't like a 20% increase in highways funding?

You don't like CAIS to be FULLY funded?

So you don't like the extra 78 million to rural municipalities?

Seniors who are now spending hundreds a month on prescription drugs get a break (total cost of program is $72 M yet the Sask Party wants to spend millions to set up a beaurcracy to hassel seniors as to whether they would 'qualify' or not).

This is a good budget. Bank of Montreal likes it - Brad Wall hates it.

Dawg, having to choose between trusting bankers and trusting politicians is really tough, but I'd be more inclined to believe the NDP than either.

Except drawing 500 million from the Election Slush Fund reduces our financial assets. You'll notice our net debt increases by 1 BILLION DOLLARS on pg 58 of the budget. You'll also notice the 700 Million Dollar Deficit on pg 57 of the budget. So leftdog I ask you the question. Why do you quote the BMO assessment of the budget while ignoring the NDP's own admission in the budget that they ran a 700 Million dollar deficit.

dean ... How do you have your hands on a budget book from yesterday already? How else would you know what is on page 58 of the 'booklet' when those booklets aren't out there - probably only for those who were in Regina at the Legislature building for the Budget speech. But let me point out where you are wrong.

Dean, if you pull $100 out of your March income, put it in an envelope until April, then take it out and spend it with your April income:
-is that a $100 deficit? NO, it is called retained earnings.
-did you increase your debt by $100? NO, because it is your own retained earnings from March, spent in April.

The way you are playing with the numbers is not working out for you too well.

You do realize that you can get the budget documents off of the Finance website don't you? If you haven't even had a chance to go through the budget thoroughly then where is your credibility Leftdog? You have none. Just using your leftwing rhetoric which is proving very ineffective.

ineffective? .... it sure got you riled up!
I watched the 6:00 CTV news tonight where they pointed out bank after bank praising the provincial budget.

Sask Party folks, however, seem to be pretty sensitive to any counter criticism of your coordinated communications strategy around the budget.

Post a Comment

Follow leftdog on Twitter

About Me


  • -Carmichael-
  • Things I Read

    • -Canadian Political Viewpoints-
    • -ZAG-
    • -Next Year Country-
    • -Huffington Post: Canada-
    • -Let Freedom Rain-
    • -Informed On Information-
    • -Wellington Post-NDP-
    • -Trapped In A Whirlpool-
    • -Larry Hubich's Blog-
    • -ROGERISM-
    • -Leftdog's Daily KOS Blog Page-
    • -Dipper Chick
    • -Ideagist -
    • -Al Barger's MORETHINGS.COM-
    • -Canadian Cynic-
    • Saskatchewan Progressive Bloggers
    • My Zimbio
      Top Stories
    • Blogarama - The Blog Directory
    • Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites
      View blog authority
    • Display Pagerank
    • Canada's NDP
Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates