519
OTTAWA — Federal Tories who threatened to force an election over the Senate's protracted study of a crime bill now want the upper chamber to play ball with them in killing an opposition bill that would provide tax relief for parents saving for their children's education.
The turn-about was suggested yesterday as a way for the Conservative government to block a bill that it says will cost the treasury upward of $1-billion a year.
“There's some reasonably minded senators that will look at this and say ‘this is not good news for taxpayers,' ” said MP Ted Menzies, the parliamentary secretary to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
“I'm hoping to talk to the senators and that they will use common sense, as they're quite capable of doing.”
Liberal Member of Parliament Dan McTeague is seen on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday March 6, 2008. (Sean Kilpatrick/Globe and Mail)
Related Articles
The three opposition parties used their superior numbers in the House of Commons on Wednesday to pass a measure that would allow parents who contribute up to $5,000 a year to an education fund to deduct the payment from their income tax. The government is opposed to the idea, saying it would be too expensive to implement.
The bill now goes to the Liberal-dominated Senate.
“I'm going to suggest to the senators that this is an uncosted $900-million proposal that the Liberals have put forward,” Mr. Menzies said.
The paradox of the Tories approaching the Senate wasn't lost on the bill's sponsor, Liberal MP Dan McTeague, who said he was “disappointed but not surprised” that the Conservatives were thinking of stalling the bill in the upper house.
“This really lays bare for all to see what kind of government we're dealing with,” he said. “Can you imagine if they had a majority?”
Mr. McTeague said that if the Conservatives want to turn against an issue of vital importance to middle-class Canadians, they do so at their own peril. “I believe they really ought to rethink this,” Mr. McTeague said. “It's a direct slap in the face to the middle class.”
Only weeks ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave the Senate an ultimatum of March 1 for the passage of a crime bill that he said had been undemocratically held up. The government forced a vote of confidence in the House of Commons on the matter, which, if it lost, would have meant an election. The government won the vote and the Senate passed the bill in time.
Mr. Menzies said the bill was an abuse of Mr. McTeague's parliamentary privilege in putting forward private members' bills. Mr. McTeague's bill would treat registered education savings plans the same as registered retirement savings plans.
“That could push us into a deficit position,” he said.
The government could, if it wanted, try to void the bill by adding an amendment to technical legislation to implement last week's budget. As a money bill, that would put the Liberals in the position of having to kill the government to support Mr. McTeague's bill.
Asked whether the Liberal Party would risk going to an election over the bill after backing off a possible election in recent weeks, Mr. McTeague said that's still a hypothetical issue.
The Liberals believe the measure is as popular as anything included in Mr. Flaherty's budget last week, including a move to shelter earned interest from being taxed.
Others believe the idea is far too expensive.
Don Drummond, chief economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank, said the McTeague plan would be far more dear than original Finance Department estimates suggest.
Mr. Drummond said tax deductible RESP contributions would eventually cost the treasury $2-billion a year because Canadians would flock to the program to get the tax break. With a report from Kevin Carmichael
