The following was a letter that was published today by Charles Sampson of the NSEF. Charles is a very smart man and has been watching the actions of government for a long time. Provincial governments say the focus is on healthcare. The Federal government, through the Liberals and the PC’s, have been cutting the funding to healthcare since the 70s and this makes the provinces pay more thus leaving less money in provincial coffers. The municipalities are now carrying that financial burden because the focus for development is focused on the province’s capital region. (70 or 80 cranes in Halifax will show anyone that.) Big corporations are allowed to bank their money offshore and then bring it back into the country tax free and this starves the country of much needed tax revenue, for programs like healthcare, etc. At the NSEF we believe the problem lies with the public who do not hold our politicians accountable for the actions of government. That is our duty as Canadians, but we understand that life is distracting, and we get too busy with the day-to-day stuff. We thank Charles Sampson for keeping the pressure on and we hope you are at least a little better informed after reading his information and letters. The NSEF vows to keep the pressure on to seek fairness for the CBRM and Cape Breton but we must all do our part. When the politicians start to knock on your doors soon seeking your votes, that is the time for you to be vocal about the situation in our region. Taxation, poverty, homelessness, infrastructure, a lack of opportunity, etc. should be mentioned when those running are asking for your support or vote. It is the one time every 4 years that you hold the power. Use that power wisely. Here is the latest letter by Charles Sampson: Dear Editor: Professor Tom Urbaniak’s CB Post Opinion piece of Jan 3, 2024, (Is Nova Scotia’s Cabinet Acting Unconstitutionally?) raises an important issue of how governments in Canada are avoiding its legal obligation to be held accountable and transparent about its governing activities. Property owners in the CBRM know about the government’s and the court’s dismissive comments of the constitutional equalization commitment enshrined in section 36 of the Constitution Act, 1982. The N.S. Appeal Court’s decision even went far beyond being considered sound jurisprudence when it stated that section 36 could only be actioned by the two levels of government which were privy to what is represented by section 36. Because the 1950 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada clearly states who owns “our” constitution: “The constitution of Canada does not belong either to Parliament, or to the Legislatures; it belongs to the country, and it is there that the citizens of the country will find the protection of the rights to which they are entitled.” This confusion has not been addressed yet by the legal community. Why? Because the government’s own data of its illegal manipulation of this constitutional equalization commitment had to be prevented from the government somehow being forced to defend its illegality in a trial setting. On another important issue of funding health care and how the federal government, for decades, has been underfunding this service. According to a Doctor Susan Rosenthal in her informative article online (consortium news)15 March, 2023, Trudeau Sr. in 1977 reduced the federal percentage from the agreed commitment of 50% to 20%. And it shouldn’t now be surprising that after 47 years of such a large federal government cut in funding to health care that it is now seriously unprepared to provide this essential service. Another constitutional change government manipulated which is not well understood. In 1974, Trudeau Sr. joined the international bankers: Basel Committee in Switzerland. The Canadian Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada seeking a declaration for the government to follow its exclusive constitutional responsibility enshrined in 1867 for monetary policy. Its appeal was dismissed and not heard by the SCOC. The question about this change in banking policy was never really addressed. Does giving control of our central bank to foreign powers break the supreme law? The usual legal comment: This is a “political “ issue. However, no politicians are willing or perhaps allowed to talk about it. Lastly, journalist Joyce Nelson’s Jan. 18, 2018 article in the Watershed Sentinel, “How Canada Fights Tax Fraud by Legalizing it.” In 2015, Alain Deneault, a Canadian expert on tax havens wrote that Canada’s Harper government legalized tax havens with this provision of its own through section 5907(11) of Canada’s Income Tax Regulations. The Trudeau government has done nothing to change this tax loophole, which allows billions$ to enter Canada tax free and no record will be made of this. Yes, professor Urbaniak’s constitutional concern is serious and so are these too. Charles W Sampson Sydney Forks