Ontario’s plan for a single securities regulator

Premier of Ontario delivers the first opening statement in todays First Ministers Conference. In order to maintain a strong economy, Ontario believes that infrastructure building is crucial. This issue has been stressed since the first agenda meeting and it appears that other provinces, such as saskatchewan and manitoba, are also recognizing this as an important issue as well. 

Furthermore, Ontario pitches for a single securities regulator. The lack of a single securities regulator in Canada has jeopardized the degree of foreign investment coming into Canada. Thus, Ontario government is advocating for a single securities regulator that is administered across the country. Ontario places emphasis on the current passport system that would translate into a single securities regulator. When a single securities regulator is established, it would increase confidence with Canada and increase employment rate. 

 

Joyce Chan,The Seditious Times

Yes we CAN-ada

10:25 am, Ontario’s premier’s opening statements at the First Ministers meeting hit a chord among the premiers.

“Yes we Canada,” she said, speaking to a comprehensive team oriented approach to tackling the nation’s issues.  It was a play on President-elect Obama’s rallying American slogan “Yes we can.”

“It’s time to work together to change the system,” said Ontario’s premier.

She wasn’t concerned about potential trademark infringements. “It could be [an infringment],” she admitted, “but it’s all with good intentions.”

The democrat’s slogan has caused controversy south of the border. “It’s outrageous,” declared Homer “Deacon” Jones Jr., the president and grandson of the founder of the Intercourse Canning Company of Intercourse, Pennsylvania.

“….When someone takes our prideful slogan, ‘Yes, We Can!’ and usurps it for political purposes, well, that makes my blood boil. That slogan is known all over the country for just one thing: Canning.” The Intercourse Canning Company is known for canning beets, pickles and tomatoes. Mr. Jones was the President of the National Center for Home Food Preservation and Canning from 1996 to 2002.

Neither the Obama campaign nor The Intercourse Canning Company was available for comment.

Believe it… or not

As we approach the date of our First Ministers Conference, November 15th 2008, delegations have been busy strategizing their agenda and having discussion behind closed doors.

The Seditious Times has gotten their hands on a very reliable source regarding potential new agendas that would be presented in the upcoming First Ministers Conference.

According to our sources, Ontario might be advocating for Upper Canada. There is an intention to annex neighboring provinces. “We two oldest provinces must come together with English Ontario in control” stated our source. If Ontario manages to pass this agenda, Quebec and Manitoba would be in danger.

Apparently, Ontario doesn’t intend to stop there with geographical restructuring. There are talks about another priority being the moving of Canada’s capital from Ottawa to Hamilton, moving Canada’s capital closer to the United States. History has proved that Canada cannot isolate itself from the United States due to their geographical proximity. However, after witnessing our current economic crisis, should Canada strive to develop without the help of the United States instead?

 The Seditious Times is looking forward to the First Ministers Conference

 

“Digging Holes? More Like Building For a Better Today”

Ontario on infrastructure. 

In response to the article entitled “Wrong Priority”, Ontario has released the following press release. 

“Investing in infrastructure is a crucial priority for all Canadian governments in this financial crisis. The Government of Ontario is not underestimating the power of trade as we advocated for it at a recent agenda meeting. However, Ontario feels strongly that investing in infrastructure is a viable solution to contend with the current economic situation.

Ontario takes issue with the quick dismissal of infrastructure by many of its provincial counterparts at last week’s agenda meeting. Investing in infrastructure projects puts people in jobs, giving them a wage they are then able to spend in the local economy supporting retail and service firms. This puts in forward linkages that support the greater Canadian economy. Improving infrastructure will increase efficiency and the quality of government programs as well as impacting the quality of life for every Canadian.

Infrastructure is about more than just repaving roads. Canadian society relies on a strong, efficient infrastructure. Without continued improvements Canadian society will stagnate, creating continuously increasing problems for the government. Surface solutions and band-aid programs will only go so far: we need to address the structural infrastructure problems underlying such issues as hospital wait times and renewable energy resources.

The Government of Ontario would like to point out the overall interest in increased infrastructure funding advocated at today’s agenda meeting in terms of health care and environmental initiatives. We wonder why our provincial and territorial government counterparts are now claiming their support for such initiatives when at last week’s agenda meeting, infrastructure was deemed as an expensive and wasteful investment. A member of the Alberta delegation even likened such investment to digging holes and filling them back in again. While not all provinces are equally blessed with wealth such as Alberta’s, that province could surely also benefit from enhanced infrastructure.

In essence, the Government of Ontario would like to assure its citizens and all Canadians of its commitment to investing in infrastructure to build a better today, together.”

Wrong priority…?

Monday October 26th 2008, the 2nd Agenda Meeting in regards to the fiscal crisis became a rather heated debate. Both Manitoba and Ontario advocated for the need to develop better infrastructure within their provinces. This in turn requires a substantial amount of money from the federal government. The positive impact from having a better-developed infrastructure is undeniable, however is this really the priority we should advocate during a financial crisis?

Consumers are panicking and loosing trust in banks. Under a situation like the financial crisis, resolutions need to be immediate. Most gains from infrastructures are long-term gains, thus we may benefit from it in the future, but something needs to be done in the meantime. A popular topic during the discussion on Monday afternoon was internal trade. Many delegations have brought up the Alberta-BC trade as a good model and example for internal trading. Taken directly from Government of BC homepage,

“The purpose of the Agreement will be to:

ESTABLISH an open, efficient and stable domestic market in Alberta and British Columbia

ENHANCE competitiveness, economic growth and stability

INCREASE opportunities and choice for workers, consumers and business;

REDUCE costs of consumers, business and governments;

PROMOTE sustainable and environmentally sound development, high levels of consumer protection, and health and labor standards; and

SUPPORT ongoing trade and investment liberalization both nationally and internationally”

Most of the goals that a better-developed infrastructure intended to achieve are similar to the ones in the agreement. Therefore it shows that trade is an important component for Canada in terms of lessening hte impact of the financial crisis.

In a recent interview with the Ontario delegation, they have clearly indicated that trading with EU and internal trading would greatly influence Canada’s economy. Ontario representatives argue that since trading with EU is a national matter, the federal government should deal with most of the matters, however it should not fail to consult the provinces when making decisions.

While both the Manitoba and Ontario delegations have acknowledged the importance of trade, it was not the crucial topic they were advocating for. Are we underestimating the impact of trade?

Joyce Chan, The Seditious Times

Reference:

http://www.gov.bc.ca/ecdev/down/framework_agreement.pdf

Improvement in Ontario’s Health Care

As part of restoring the fiscal balance, Department of Finance Canada, in its 2007 Budget, has announced a move to equal per capita cash support for the Canada Health Transfer. However this will not take effect until 2014-15. In a recent press release, Ontario has directed one of their priorities to health care, pointing out that “[h]ealth care is an important issue across Canada and requires equal funding to deal with the demands on the system. [Thus, it] requires immediate action from the federal government in terms of the Canada Health Transfer”. While a six-year wait may be unfair, could an immediate move to equal per capita support improve Ontario’s health care problems instantly?

October 10, 2008. The Globe and Mail posted an article suggesting that Ontario should expand and strengthen the role of patient advocates. Physical restraints to control mental health patients and lack of medical monitoring had caused the death of Jeffrey James, a 34-year-old schizophrenic in 2005. After this incident, Gail Czukar, an executive vice-president and general counsel of Canada’s largest mental hospital released the following statement, “We’ve reduced our use of restraints from the last three years by 67%, so we’re not restraint-free yet, but we’ve certainly made significant progress towards that”. It is evident that Ontario’s health care can be improved and in the case of Mr. Jeffery James, improvement was achieved without additional funding.

Joyce Chan, The Seditious Times

Reference

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081010.winquest1010/BNStory/National