I have been looking at this thread develop and must say that I have seldom seen so much ignorant, bigoted and yes, some times asinine commentary in such a short thread. And it all started with an article attacking the Quebec situation without any factual basis. My understanding was that these forums require us to deal with verifiable facts. I have noted that many times when Quebec issues come up, the responses are full of bile and must say that I do not know where this comes from in people that have worked in the field with Quebeckers.
Let me try to just input some facts in here.
First, lets deal with the crazy, unaffordable retirement at 62 scheme: First of all, it is not universal, it is optional. And if you elect to take this early retirement scheme, your monthly payments are REDUCED BY 12% for the rest of your life, so that basically, it has exactly the same actuarial cost to the scheme as if you took your full pension at the standard age (which is still 65 for everyone else - the plan being copied exactly on the CPP). Now, how much of this is paid for by the "Have" provinces? Nothing, zilch, zero, the big nada. The pension plan is ENTIRELY paid from the money collected as premium on every single quebecker's salary - just like your CPP contribution- and nowhere else. There is not a cent that comes from the general revenues of the province - thus none from outside the province. These contributions are managed by the CDP (Caisse de dépot et placement) and currently, even though it took a hit when the market crashed a couple of years ago, it has no actuarial deficit nor is any such deficit forecasted. BTW, the measure was not adopted out of excess of largesse. It was adopted because about 20 years ago, three of Quebec's largest industrial sectors started to melt from the delocalisation connected with globalization and the soft wood lumber conflict. Quebec was canada's home to the textile and clothing industry. When that went to Asia and the forestry sector suffered at the same time, massive layoffs put elderly workers in the street. After unemployment stopped, the optional retirement at 62 (with lower payments) was meant to bridge the gap - at no extra cost (otherwise, these workers would have had to sell their home and possessions until left with no choice but to go on welfare).
Lets get to the "have" / "have not" provinces now. Haletown got them wrong. For the last few years, Ontario has been a have not, while Newfoundland has been a have province. Basically, there are now (and for the next few years for sure) four "have" provinces: BC, AB, SK and NL. But is Quebec really a province in such bad economic order on the scale of Greece whilst the other "have not" are OK? The following table is taken from the Federal Government site on the latest round of equalization payments - made under the new Conservative government formula allegedly "fairer":
Province : Equalization : Per capita :
PEI 337 M$ $ 2,390.07
Nova Scotia 1,268 M$ $ 1,351.52
New Brunswick 1,495 M$ $ 1994.66
Québec 7,391 M$ $ 944.07
Ontario 3,261 M$ $ 249.52
Manitoba 1,671 M$ $ 1,367.43
So if Quebeckers are living in luxury at the expenses of the "have provinces", what does that tell you about Manitobans and the residents of the "have not" Atlantic provinces?
And is Quebec a "greek" economy in canada?
Lets look at some current facts. They come from the following sources: Pop. figures: Federal government numbers for 2009; current provincial deficits, debt to GDP ratio, Federal transfers as % of province revenues: come from each province's latest budgets, as compiled by CBC, finally, net debts of provinces: TD Canada economic forecast figures.
Ontario Québec Manitoba Nova Scotia
Pop. (2009) (x 1000) 13,029 7,829 1,222 938
Budget Deficit 15.3 B$ 1.5 B$ 460 M$ 211 M$
Net Debt 260.4 B$ 178.5 B$ 15.4 B$ 13.7 B$
Debt to GDP ratio 37.2 % 35.2 % 27.4 % 34.8 %
Federal transfers as % of provincial revenue 19.4 % 22.8 % 28.1 % 32.1 %
The federal transfer payments include ALL transfers to the province's revenue. It is interesting to add here that on that basis, Alberta gets 12% of its provincial general revenue from Federal transfers.
If Quebec is like Greece, with a small deficit of $1.5 B$ this year (and a forecasted return (Yes! return) to balanced budget next year), what does that say of Manitoba at double the deficit in proportion, and Ontario at five times! And how could the Manitoba and Nova Scotia government fare - extravagant as they are - without the huge Federal transfer that buoy them up?
So, Loachman, which provincial governments are exercising fiscal responsibility in this country now?
Finally, here are a couple of little facts about the "$7-a-day daycare program in Quebec: 1) All economic studies so far (and there have been a few) have concluded that the program generates for the province's government approximately $1,5 B$ in revenue a year ABOVE the cost of the program. 2) the very existence of this program is cited in the annual UN Human Development Index as having helped Canada up two positions in the index, with a complaint that it had not been adopted by all provinces. Go figure, Alberta!
/RANT OFF
