The NSEF is planning protests now. Get involved and save CB.

Dr. Albert Maroun Follow Me

Posted this 2018-03-21 2:24 PM ADT (updated 2018-04-01 11:10 AM ADT)

The NSEF group in CBRM is now in the protest planning stages for our up coming protests on the equalization situation in Cape Breton. We have heard from many people who have signed up to join us in our demonstrations through our website and social media. Moving forward, we are planning out locations carefully to maximize our effect. The final meeting for the public will be on April 3rd at 7:30 pm at the Cedars Club on Mackenzie Street in Sydney. We will have presentations from the police as well as lawyers on the laws about protesting and demonstrating as well as presenters on issues pertaining to Equalization. We urge all who plan to protest to send someone from your group so they may be informed on these laws.

If you have not signed up to protest and you wish to help save our island, then visit our website at www.nsef.ca and educate yourself on this crime against the people of Nova Scotia. The Provincial Government in Halifax is keeping the funds that Ottawa is providing to us for themselves, so that they can build and better their city while the rest of the province dies. Towns are dropping like flies and we will be next unless we unite and stand together and show the government that they work for us and we, the people, make the decisions concerning our future, not them. Here in CBRM we receive $15 million in equalization and this amount should be around $240 million per year. Our island is falling apart and we are letting this happen by voting in the same MLA's year after year who will not stand up and fight for us. So this fight is going to have to fall on the people of Cape Breton and we hope that you all remember that at election time.

The date to pick up your protesting kits (signs, banners and brochures) will be Tuesday May 1st after 7:00pm at the Cedars Club on Mackenzie Street. At this time, your location will be determined and protest times will be issued. The NSEF would like to thank the public for their support over the past few months and we want to thank all the people who have signed up to protest. Together, we will take back this island and start fresh on a new and exciting road. We all need to stop complaining about our problems and actually do something to fix them. Every person on Cape Breton can and will make the difference.

Thank you.

The Nova Scotians for Equalization Fairness

Posted by Dr. Albert Maroun
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW

Like 11 Dislike 0

FOLLOW 15

9,808 19

19

Depth
Cora MacNeil Follow Me 2018-03-21 7:18 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Ready to roll.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-03-22 12:04 PM ADT Reply 3 0 If over $30,000,000,000 ($30 billion) in federal Equalization will have been provided the past 20 years but all the provincial political parties in power sets its Equalization grant program to municipalities uses ONLY $640 million ($32 million x 20 years) when 26% of that $30 billion or $7,818,000,000 is federally provided due to this province’s municipal relative weakness in property tax fiscal capacity - where is $7,178,000,000 being spent? Time for government accountability on this manipulation by government at both levels that demands an audit to show how this political policy is fair to our economically struggling municipal units that are clearly under funded. Lloyd Allan MacPherson Follow Me 2018-03-25 7:14 PM ADT Reply 0 0 Charles, I personally think you are going to create this floor and ceiling within the year. For a total that size, you simply have to look at the bad rural agreements that exist to know where the money is going...the answer everyone is looking to you to find is how does one province make sense of equalisation and what parameters are needed to justify reparation. I think you have all of that before you already and with Fraser Institute recommendation in hand (ceiling), it should be quick to confirm if this is simply a healthcare issue or if we have developed unhealthy business practices with certain stakeholders. Whatever the verdict, self-sufficiency is the next step to the process and that is being addressed behind closed doors as we speak.
Dr. Albert Maroun My Post Follow Me 2018-03-22 1:52 PM ADT Reply 3 0 We know where the money was spent Charles. Just take a drive to Halifax and it will be apparent. The provincial capital is doing a grave injustice to the people of Nova Scotia and it will all be exposed very soon. We will not stop until it is. Can you imagine the development and infrastructure that this money could have been used for in Cape Breton and the rest of Nova Scotia.
Dr. Albert Maroun My Post Follow Me 2018-03-24 10:20 AM ADT Reply 5 0 It is very important for everyone reading these posts here to remember that the NSEF is not affiliated with any political party. Certain people in government are now trying to tone us and our messages down. The NSEF has been fighting this issue for so long now that we do not put trust in any politician. People call us a "watchdog" group and I guess that is somewhat true but we, the public, need to hold our politicians accountable moving forward. It is the time to take back power as citizens and remind government that they represent us and we need to have more input. Everyday now we are reading the newspaper and reading about something that the government is doing that we know nothing about as citizens. What happened to the days of politicians knocking on your door to get your vote and input on issues. If we sit back and never challenge our government then we deserve to be left in the dark about important issues that we should be involved in. The times are changing now with social media and the communication tools available to us so get on board and have an opinion and voice when it comes to important issues that pertain to your future and the future of you children. It is very easy in today's world to become informed. Thank you. Martha Ross Follow Me 2018-03-24 11:52 AM ADT Reply 4 0 Thank you Dr. Maroun for this well informed posting. We need to stand strong and let our governments know that we the people are demanding change and accountability. For far to long governments gave us lip service, and we excepted that but no more. We never deserved what governments have being allowed to get away with, as the saying goes..we teach people how to treat us... well now is the time to be treated with respect and what we so deserve is EQUALIZATION FAIRNESS..... we need to save this island of Cape Breton,and as well the rest of the municipalities of Nova Scotia. Are you ready to stand up for our RIGHTS! Joe Ward Follow Me 2018-03-24 12:36 PM ADT Reply 4 0 Any politician suggesting that an advocacy group tone it down is not respecting the democratic process. Leadership requires dealing with the public voice, not discouraging it, preventing it, chilling it, or ignoring it. Lloyd Allan MacPherson Follow Me 2018-03-25 7:34 PM ADT Reply 0 0 True enough. I think any party willing to surrender capital to the municipality's "sustainability fund" should be dealing with a level of NSEF involvement that can consult on self-sufficiency schemes that bolster municipal fiscal capacity short-falls. There are people in your midst that are already connected to those networks in both advocacy and interest - find them and you may also find the creativity to roll out interesting projects.
Edward Kelly Follow Me 2018-03-24 11:43 AM ADT Reply 0 4 Dr Maroun You say CBRM should receive $240 million from the roughly 1.8 billion received by the province in equalization. I assume these numbers are based on CBRM’s prorated share of the provincial population. These numbers in no way indicate if CBRM is getting it’s “fair share”. I think it would be more accurate to look at the total provincial expenditures in CBRM (health, education, transportation, etc. etc) and compare that to total provincial expenditures. The resulting number would reflect if we are getting “our fair share”. I live in and fully support CBRM. However, using possible erroneous data to support a cause erodes our credibility. Richard Lorway Follow Me 2018-03-24 12:15 PM ADT Reply 2 0 It's a good point, but my understanding is that health and education are funded by the federal government under completely separate funding envelopes. Whereas the equalization fund IS intended to ensure that all Canadians receive a comparable level of public services at a similar tax rate regardless of where they live in Canada. Mind you, my understanding is based upon a Public Finance course taken at Dalhouse University a gazillion years ago, and the operating principles could have changed since then. But if accurate, then health and education funding is NOT related to equalization, and should not be taken into account in this issue. Interestingly, I also believe that the federal health and education transfers used to be earmarked so that the provinces could only spend that money in the intended areas. But the provinces long ago lobbied to have the earmarks removed, so that the federal dollars all go into General Revenues. And once that happened, we seemed to lose any semblance of public accountability. If my understanding is out of date, I'd be interested to know this. Perhaps someone has links to the government policies/legislation that could clarify the matter? Joe Ward Follow Me 2018-03-24 12:25 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Hi Edward, would you support the Province providing that information in a timeframe of, let's say, the next 6 months? An analysis of all provincial monies transferred to/from the CBRM and other municipalities would appropriately demonstrate many potential disparities. A basic per capita analysis would be helpful, although there are certainly more factors to consider. While provincial revenues based on taxation and service delivery should be expected to be concentrated in the most populated/urban region (the HRM), the Federal Equalization program makes its allocation province-wide, and should not have any bias towards the areas developing most actively. In fact, it appears that the intent is to distribute them with a bias towards underperforming regions (with a quantitative economic basis). What seems abundantly clear is that despite having the municipality with the second largest population in the province, after the HRM, there is a massive disparity in economic indicators. The HRM has a 4:1 population ratio compared with the CBRM, but a tax base ratio of 9:1. It has shown some population growth, while other areas of the province decline. The CBRM celebrates the 2nd highest residential tax rates in the province and the highest commercial tax rates. Clearly, we cannot incentivize growth in our tax base with this disparity. The result is that homeowners get "less home" and less services than homeowners with much more valuable properties in the HRM, while having lower median incomes, and paying the same. However, more importantly, this disparity creates a strong economic incentive for career-age Cape Bretoners to make a transition away from our region, further eroding our economy and tax base that is a downward spiral, and not at all in an exaggerative sense. All else being held equal, if we were given enough equalization funds to create parity on tax rates across the province (rate per $100 of home or business valuation), what would be possible? Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-03-24 1:01 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Edward Kelly: Tthe approximately $240 million is arrived at from the federally provided 26% of the total $1.838 billion of Equalization Payments that is due to the provinces’s relative weakness in property tax fiscal capacity. When the government replies that CBRM gets 50% of the inadequate and capped provincial Equalization grant program of $32 million, we applied that same 50% amount to the total of the 26% on the total federally provided $1.838 billion Equalization Payments. Edward Kelly Follow Me 2018-03-24 8:00 PM ADT Reply 1 3 Richard, Joe & Charles, The provincial revenues for 2018/2019 are approx 10.5 billion dollars. Approx 7 billion of these revenues comes from personal income tax, corporate income tax, harmonized sales tax, and a large number of small items. 1.7 billion comes from Equalization Payments. 1 billion comes from the Canada Health Transfer and .4 Billion comes from the Canada Social Transfer. Let's keep this simple and try not to loose sight of the issue; "Is CBRM getting it's fair share of provincial expenditures". You cannot just pick one piece of the puzzle, namely Equalization Payments, and demand we get our prorated share based on CBRM population or whatever metric you choose to use. How much of this 10.5 billion is being spent in CBRM on things like health, education, social systems, etc. Based on population, CBRM has roughly 10% of the provinces 1 million people. So, 10.5 billion minus 1 billion for debt interest leaves us with 9.5 billion. So, is the provincial government spending 950 million on health, education, social programs, infrastructure maintenance, etc. etc. in CBRM? Joe Ward Follow Me 2018-03-24 8:15 PM ADT Reply 3 0 Per your question/statement: "So, is the provincial government spending 950 million on health, education, social programs, infrastructure maintenance, etc. etc. in CBRM?" I would ask you, if you are aware, how much are they spending? In other words, your premise is valid, does the data support it, or are you speculating? What we do know is that Cape Breton has failing economic indicators that are not matching the HRM's performance, and are creating disincentives to living or doing business here. Though I'm interested in seeing the data based on overall spending, I do keep in mind that some programs are earmarked for specific usage that often includes a distribution based on a needs assessment such as reasonably comparable levels of service at reasonably comparable levels of taxation. For example, the very premise of the Federal Equalization program is bringing struggling regions on par with the rest of the country. It's not simply a transfer back to all provinces based on headcount. The CBRMs issue is much less so about headcount, and vastly more so about economic conditions and indicators. Edward Kelly Follow Me 2018-03-24 9:19 PM ADT Reply 1 2 Joe, I have no idea what the province is spending in CBRM but I think that is the figure that determines if we are getting our fair share. Trying to capture money from the equalization program is never going to happen because the province puts these funds into it's general revenues to pay for it total expenditures (10.5 billion 2018/2019) a portion of which is spent in CBRM. Not sure what your reference to "speculating" is about. Nothing in my post was based on speculation. I merely reported some facts and gave an opinion based on those facts. My knowledge of the equalization payments system is based on the following quotes; "Equalization payments are based on a formula that calculates the difference between the per capita revenue yield that a particular province would obtain using average tax rates and the national average per capita revenue yield at average tax rates. The objective of the program is to ensure that all provinces have access to per capita revenues equal to the potential average of all ten provinces. The formula is based solely on revenues and does not consider the cost of providing services or the expenditure need of the provinces." The tax rates in the above is not municipal property tax rates, it is provincial tax rates ie: personal income tax, HST, etc. "The money the provinces receive through equalization can be spent in any way the provincial government desires. The payments help guarantee "reasonably comparable levels" of health care, education, and welfare in all the provinces." So, back to my position. Are we getting our fair share based on provincial spending as opposed to what the province gets in transfer payments from the feds. Joe Ward Follow Me 2018-03-24 10:41 PM ADT Reply 1 0 (1 of 2) Ok, I’ll try to be specific since we’ve both shared quite a bit of info. Maybe a good start is noting what we agree on: It is a fact that the Province invests in our Municipalities and all regions. It is a fact that neither of us can state how much the total investment made by the Province in our region (or the CBRM) actually is, in total.   If you were to discover that the total Provincial spending per capita in our region is less than what they spend in, let’s say, the HRM as a baseline, regardless of which pot of money we look at, you would be more open to the idea that there is a shortchange in investment happening? Your opening post seems to start there, so we’re likely in agreement once again. The Province may put Equalization into general revenue, but it can just as easily increase the amount of Equalization (directly) or (indirectly) from general revenue into the Provincial transfer. The path it takes to get there is important for tracing the flow of the funding, but it doesn’t impact the end result of providing more funds to municipalities to use for autonomous decision making. So the “speculation” reference I made is due to our inability, at present time, to know one way or the other if the total Provincial investment is sufficient (on par) or not. Joe Ward Follow Me 2018-03-24 10:46 PM ADT Reply 2 0 "Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation." (Subsection 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982) Municipalities are entities that act as an extension of the Province, and are regulated under the Municipal Government Act. They are semi-autonomous operating units that work collaboratively with the Provincial and Federal governments to provide services and maintain infrastructure. If we live within a Municipality that has substandard delivery of services, weaker infrastructure, under-performing economic conditions, and yet still pay a higher residential commercial and residential tax rate, there is quantitative data that suggests whatever it is the Province is doing, the investments is is making with the help of Equalization is not achieving the effect that was intended with the introduction of the Federal funding mechanism. However, I’m certainly with you that we should be assessing the total investment made in each region and municipal unit, and it should be provided on an annual basis. That’s the type of actionable data we need. If the Province actually is making a total investment that is on par in this region, it would be in their best interest to demonstrate it with Financial data. Keep in mind: They’ve suggested that we’re not pulling our weight with municipal taxation.
Charles Sampson Follow Me 2018-03-24 10:29 PM ADT Reply 2 0 Edward: You raise a number of valid questions and we all would like to see them answered. So far none of those occupying the provincial power have been ready to answer them. The Liberal Party called for an audit of the federal transfer in its 2011 AGM but is not willing to even discuss it. The NDP went after the Conservative government in 2005 using a report “A Question of Balance” done by two professors from Memorial Univ. but then forgot about the manipulating allegations of these federal funds Dexter and Corbett levied against then premier Hamm. Deficiencies in fiscal capacity related to property tax and miscellaneous revenues form a significient part of the total Equalization program - 26.8% in 2011-12 when the Equalization was $1.417 billion. That significant portion of the total transfer was confirmed in correspondence with the federal Dept. of Finance. That significant portion of the total transfer is related to property tax capacity to raise sufficient revenue to provide for reasonably comparable level of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation. Property taxes are a municipal tax resource and the specific percent of the total transfer is related to the financial capacity of the municipal units that are unable to meet that reasonably comparable level of services at reasonably comparable municipal tax levels. Otherwise, why specifically calculate that municipal weakness related to property tax capacity? There are lots of questions that would be answered by government doing an audit that the present government thought was necessary when it was NOT in power. With 5 towns already having gone through dissolution and at least another 5 seeking the same, and many other municipalities struggling to stay afloat, this issue will not go away.
Constance Brodie Follow Me 2018-09-21 1:42 PM ADT Reply 0 0 It's time for Cape Brexit!!