Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Nah, I don't think that's accurate. He campaigned on policies that ate around the edge of the issue that would justify service cuts. Things like increasing fees for campsites etc, when the 'structural revenue problem' couldn't be addressed without a significant cut to services or a significant raise in royalties, income and corporate taxes. The 'structural revenue problem' is a roughly 20% shortfall in revenue. That's ####ing massive.
I agree though that it is politically untenable in Alberta to raise revenue from taxes, but his policy proposals were still an extension of the fiscal policies that run counter to mainstream economics.
Any party looking to credibly claim to be conservative fiscally would need to directly address this shortfall in spectacular fashion. In my opinion the NDP have displayed a more fundamentally sound understanding of economics than any PC government since Lougheed, but no one would confuse them with being the most desirable stewards of the economy.
|
https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...-and-tax-hikes
Quote:
On Tuesday, Mr. Prentice gave Albertans a sense of what’s to come: by 2018-19, only 75% of resource revenue would be used to fund program spending. The year after that, the cap would be reduced to 50%. The remaining money would be put into savings or used to pay down debt.
Mr. Prentice also acknowledged that program spending had risen faster than government revenues, absent resource royalties. The high price of oil allowed previous PC governments to avoid “difficult decisions.”
“Why did this happen in Alberta? Fundamentally, we’ve not always had realistic expectations and our leaders must bear a considerable part of the responsibility for that.”
|
This isn't "around the edges" type stuff. Raising taxes, health care premiums, and weaning the funding of the operating budget off of royalty revenues.
The political miscalculation was his refusal to raise corporate taxes. Notley was able to point to that and play to the electorate's favorite idea that someone else should pay for everything.