ul

HE federal-provincial: sum-
mit conference on educa-
tion, held behind- closed

doors in Ottawa, has pointed up
____ the deepening crisis in the rela-
fion between Quebec, the other
nine provinces and the federal
government. The failure to re-
Cognize the national status of
Quebec within Canadian Con:
federation makes any demo-
Cratic long term fiscal arrange-
ments between the various
levels of government impossible.

~The outworn constitutional
' ‘Set-up plays into the hands of
monopoly interests who make

full use of the regional dispari-’

ties to enhance their own pri-
vileged position.

The tug of war between Ot-
tawa and the provinces over the
tax dollar gets in the way of
and tends to obscure the real
Issue of the urgent need for
democratic tax reform and a tax
Policy based upon ability to pay.
With the wealthy interests in
the driver’s seat there is not
€ven any discussion about tax-
ing capital gains. On the con-
trary, as shown by the Canada-

|S. auto free trade pact, the

_ Dlg business and U.S. monopoly
tycoons are being subsidized by
the Canadian taxpayers, while a
Substantial tax increase now
looms ahead to add to the bur-

ig Mayo Commission report, which

WL 1 :

dens of the rising costs of liv-
ing for the working people.

Ottawa is now in the process
of reversing fiscal policy by
getting out of cost-sharing pro-
grams such as the health, hos-
pital insurance and the project-
ed Canada Assistance Plan. In
return Finance Minister Michael
Sharp will transfer to the pro-
vinces an additional 17 percent
of the personal income tax. To
pay for one-half of operating
costs of post-secondary educa-
tional institutions, Ottawa will
transfer another four percent of
personal income taxes and one
percent of corporation. profits
tax. For a province like Ontario,
this means an increase in its
share of personal income tax
from 24 to 45 percent and of the
52 percent corporation tax On-
tario will get 12 percent instead
of 11 percent.

Even if the complicated sys-
tem of equalization, adjustment
and matching grants is taken
into cona#ieration, the provinces
will have to find additional funds
by new and added taxation. This
will mean judging by past ex-
perience, increases in indirect

-upon working people.

ommunist Party .

taxation bearing most heavily

The formidable financial prob-

‘lems of the municipalities have
_been ignored at the senior levels

of government. This will mean

‘heavier municipal taxation on
‘home and property owners, a
‘rise in rents and a squeeze on.
social services of all kinds.

At the same time Ottawa
plans an increase in taxes
which could conceivably be as

high as ten or more percent over’

present levels.

From an economic standpoint,
therefore, the federal-provincial
meeting of. government ministers
failed to solve any basic prob-
lems. But it tied the federal as
well as provincial governments
closer to monopoly policies, took

_Steps that will increase taxes

the cost of living, gave Ottawa
a freer hand in pursuing its
policy of undermining our Cana-
dian sovereignty and slowing
the economy down to a crawl,
creating unemployment and tak-

ing the pressure for more wages.
‘and fringe benefits off the big

employers.

The federal-provincial. meet-
ing in Ottawa also revealed the
process of erosion- of demo-
cratic processes in this country.
Not only has this type of meet-
ing usurped the ‘powers of

‘Parliament and the legislatures

in determing monetary and fiscal
policies; but the whole demo-
cratic process is being by-passed.

Federal - provincial summit
meétings have become more and
more secret during recent years.
Their recommendations in fact

constitute a priori decision on
monetary and fiscal policy which’

invariably become legal follow-
ing formal approval by parlia-
mentary and legislative major-
ities loyal to big business and
U.S: monopoly interests. Invari-
ably these decisions ignore prob-
lems of local governments and
the needs of the people. Invari-
ably they bring about further
shifts in the distribution of our
national income in favor of the
monopolies and to the growing
detriment of the working people
of Canada. ;

It is precisely by such un-
democratic methods that Onta-
rio’s Premier Robarts now pro-
poses that guidelines for the
future of Canadian Confedera-
tion should be discussed and
adopted. For this purpose he
wants to put the financial aspect

No cure for Niagara

Federal-provincial tug-of-war
obscures need for tax reform

By BRUCE MAGNUSON

Ontario: leader, C

to sleep for a couple of years by
means of a short-term fiscal
agreement.

Canadians must insist on 2
return to the democratic pro-
cess; first, in solving: problems
of fiscal policy and democratic

‘taxation by waiting’ until ‘both
. governments and the public have

had time to study the result of

.public inquiries after their re-
_commendations have been made

public; second, that the crisis of

_ Confederation be tackled by the
‘initiation of public discussion

and a democratic approach tow-
ards the proposition of drafting

a new Canadian constitution. . ~

The $50 million bonanza given
to the giant United States auto
monopolies in the form of can-
celled duties on imports of cars
and parts, the transfer of pro-
fits in the form of taxfree inter-
est and dividends, and similar
generosity towards the multi-
billion dollar corporations, is

‘done at the expense of the Can-
. adian taxpayer, of low and

medium income. An end to
such robbery, a cut in the arms
budget, and a tax on capital
gains, would go a long way to-
wards cutting taxes instead of
raising them and still provide
more funds to meet cost of need-
ed social services.

Committee — all at the expense of the

iT

deals with municipal reorganiza-
tion and proposes a metro type of
buffer administration between the prov-
incial government and local councils in
the Niagara Peninsula, suffers from the

Same shortcoming as other reports and

Studies on the same subject elsewhere.
It attacks local governments for failure
to solve problems which, in this day
and age, are not local problems in the
first place, but ought to be solved by
Provincial and federal authorities.

_ This is so because at the present
time the senior governments alone pos-
Sess sufficient power to tax large in-
Comes and revenues derived from gen-
€ral industrial and commercial activ-
ity. And the main problem facing Jocal
8overnments today is the lack of suf-

Client funds to do what they know is
Necessary for them to do.

If the municipalities had the funds

they would do the job required of local

B0vernments. It is not for lack of
ability to recognize problems or to find
Solutions. Our cities and towns have
Plenty of plans, and good plans. The
Problem is a lack of funds to carry out

_ Such plans,

If senior governments do not wish to
assume responsibility for financing
Services other than those of land and
real state, the solution is to give the
Municipalities new sources of taxation
and new powers to tax corporate
Wealth and large incomes. rues

Dr. Mayo does not sugest ways of
Peabing new sources of revenue for
cal government. In fact, another tier

in Dr. Mayo's report

By JOHN TRUFAL

Councillor in Welland. Ontario.

of government such as is being pro-
posed will add to the cost of local gov-
ernment without providing any solu-

‘tion other than still heavier taxation

on real estate. This means heavier as-
sessment and rising mill rates on home
owners and small businesses at the
local level. It means heavier taxes on
those least able to pay.

Another, and perhaps equally or

- even more serious problem, is the ero-
sion of democracy at the local govern- -

ment level. Annexations and amalga-
mations, where practical and neces-
sary, are one thing when carried out in
a democratic manner. But when prov-
incial authorities proceed to create
“super-councils,” or “buffer” adminis-
trations that simply brush democracy
aside, that is another matter entirely.
Metro Toronto is a good example of
such a bureaucratic procedure. This is
the exact opposite to democratic tax
reforms and strengthened local govern-
ments. based on councils elected by

-direct and universal franchise.

Dr. Mayo’s proposals suffer from
similar shortcomings. For instance, ap-
pointment of top officials means a dis-

trust of the electorate arid a. partial
disenfranchisement, even when _§indi-
rect elections take place.

Under such a regional governmental
setup, local councils tend to become
mere’ administrative arms of that re-
gional government. They become for-

-ums for public complaint Sut without

the authority to offer and bring about
solutions. —

The addition of. regional superstruc-

tures will tend to make government:

more expensive and less efficient. Such
superstructures are more distant from
the electorate and make it more dif-
ficult for voters to influence policy.

The role of citizen electors is dimin-
ished, local government becomes erod-
ed and replaced by provincial govern-
mental dictation. Regional governments

become a form of provincial govern-

ment sub-department.

A regional government of the type
suggested in Dr. Mayo’s report will pro-

_ voke further conflict between compet-
ing municipalities of St. Catharines, —

Welland and Niagara Falls for control
of the Metro Council and Executive

smaller municipalities. -_

Last, but not least, such an approach
will weaken further the public’s already
shaken confidence in political institu-
tions and its relationship to those in-
stitutions. Political institutions will be-
come. more remote from the average
citizen, rather than being drawn into
administrative work in one form or
other, as has been the case with local
government. This is the greatest dis-
service to popular democracy, which
ought to be extended rather than
diminished. |

Responsible local self-government is
essential and must be strengthened in
our day and age. Amalgamations,
where needed and possible on a demo-
cratic basis, ought to be considered
where larger units of government will
conform more closely to growth of in-
dustry, commerce and population. But
provincial governments résponsible*for
administration at higher levels ought
to discharge those responsibilities di-
rectly without erecting obstacles in the
form of “buffer” governments which
by their very nature can do nothing

else but obstruct the ordinary demo-

cratic processes.

The people of the Niagara Peninsula
ought to discuss this matter carefully

and express their views to the Robarts.

administration without fear or favor.
This ought to be done now before it is
too late and beforye we embark on the
path of destruction of local govern-
ments — a path which may be more
painful to reverse at a later time. |

November 11, 1966—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5