The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Durham's budget 1981 The net impact on the average property owner in "Durham Region will be 14.9 per cent more in taxes as a result of the 1981 Regional budget which was almost fully approved following two long days of debate last week. What Regional council did not do last week was approve the police department share of the budget, deciding to wait until Durham officlals could try to squeeze a few more dollars out of the provincial coffers specifically for police protection in Durham. While most of the attention last week centred on the impact on the ratepayers, the 463 page budget document is startling in several other respects. Property taxes this year will have to yield about $22.5 million, an Increase of $3.5 million over 1980. But Durham Region's total gross expenditure from all revenue sources in 1981 will be a staggering $98 million, That's right; $98 million. In 1980, the total gross expenditure was a mere $89 million. As one councillor put it last week, if the increases continue at the present rate, Durham will be spending $200 million annually before this decade Is out. To be fair, it should be pointed out that about $30.5 million of the total is financed directly by user service charges and other direct recoveries. -But-the largest single amount of revenue for Durham's $98 million gross spending this year comes from the provincial government: a total of $36.6 million. Although that does not come directly from property taxes, one way or another the tax-payer of Durham and Ontario Is paying for that amount. And let us not forget, that Durham's $98 million this year does not include spending for education, or the monies that the eight area municipalities will raise for their own local spending. The cost of public education in Durham this year will be in excess of $100 million, and the total of the eight municipalities will likely be close to $50 million. The cost of municipal government and education for Durham's 270,000 people will be in the neighbour- hood of $250 million in 1981. And that does not include schools in Newcastle which has Its own Board of Education. The question is not when does it stop, but how. How do politicians at all levels of government get a handle on spending? Aside from inflation which Is gobbling government spending at a rate of 12 per cent each year, the time must be coming in the not "too distant future when people are going to throw their hands in the air and say 'Hold it, wait a minute. Enough is enough." It is simply beyond the comprehension of most people who think In terms of a pay-cheque, the 'grocery bill or the cost of owning a home, to calculate all the layers of government spending at the municipal, provincial and federal levels In this country. LIBERAL 4 TRADE-IN ~~ /UBEDAMNED ] }e DECIDED Jo KEEP Hi$ 38 vEAR OLD GAS-6UZZLER . The question is not are we getting good levels of service for all this money, but rather are we getting too much service from governments. When one thinks in terms of the $98 million gross expenditure for Durham Region this year, it seems almost folly that the 30-member council could balk at the police budget and decide to run off to Queens Park, hat in hand to squeeze maybe another $100,000 (if they are lucky) out of the provincial government. If Durham does manage to get $100,000 more, the net impact on property taxes for Region purposes this year will be a reduction of one half of one per cent. The three levels of government in this country have reached the point where they are the single biggest employer and spend more money than any other single "industry" by a long shot. Durham Region, with its $250 million for munici- pal and education purposes this year is not an exception. Infact, it is probably right in line with the spending by any municipality of similar size and population. The point is that no matter how long and hard municipal politicians ponder their budgets and slash spending here and there, the net effect will be minimal on the total picture. As long as inflation rates continue at 10 per cent or higher and natural assessment growth lurches-along at three per cent (which is Durham's growth rate this year) the only way to curtail overall spending will be a reduction in the levels of service. : Ronald Reagan just got himself elected to the most powerful political position In the Western World, partly on the promise to reduce spending by reducing levels of service. He will find it is easler - said than done, and his critics point to his time as governor of California where he had no such luck reducing spending despite promises to the contrary. Nevertheless, most would have to agree that government spending Is reaching a crisis point. itis just not possible for the situation to go on much longer. At the present rate, Durham's spending will double by the end of this decade. Can we afford it? Where will the dollars come from? CANADIAN FOOFAWRAW Hello, out dere! Are you a sick as I am of the whole foofawraw corcerning our unpatriated constitutio Are you fed up with the daily battle in Parliament: the finger-pointing, the jowls- shaking, the threats of coercion by the so much as a by-you-leave, to prop up near-defunct manufacturers? Sure, some would go bankrupt. Some jobs would be lost. But.couldn't more jobs be created by using those hundreds of millions positively, than ~handing crutches to foreign-owned corporations? What in the world was accomplished by Liberals, the howls of defiance of the Tories, the yelps of frustration of the NDP? And all over a piece of paper that has been residing quietly in Westminister, London, England, for more years than most of us are old. Are you becoming a mite nauseated by having your tax dollars used to bolster infirm corporations like Chrysler and Massey-Ferguson, that could not hack it in the market place? Or the same tax dollars (yours), used to buy up oil companies, paying about thirty per cent more than the shares are worth on the stock exchange? Are you tired to the teeth with the constant bickering among the provinces, and the constant squabbling between them and Ottawa? Are you totally ticked off with the constant threats of separation from thé Wealthy West, the Querulous Quebecois, and recently, of all things, the New-0'l Newfies? ------Are'you thoroughly disgusted with unions who serve the public - postal, hospital, transit - thumbing their collective noses at the law? en eset There you are. A lot of rhetorical questions. It's exactly like the questions for alcoholics. If you answer "No" to one of bill smiley them, you are an alcoholic, trying to hide in the closet. If you answer yes to all of them, you are also an alcoholic. If all my readers are as angry as I am, or even half as angry, with all this raucous shouting, all these cries of "Gimme," or "Me, too," there must be a long, slow burn, like a dynamite fuse, creeping across this country. My kid brother, who spent thirty-five years in the uniform of his country, and not at any desk job, retired recently, with the Distinguished Flying Cross, among many other decorations. He was a full colonel in our armed forces. He has a pretty good pension, and is young enough to undertake a second career. One would think he'd settle down to write his memoirs, or perhaps run for parliament, or at least resign himself to writing caustic letters-to-the-editor, signed '"Col., Ret'd.," from his comfortable home somewhere in Canada. One would be wrong. He picked up stakes, turned his back on his own country, and retired to Florida. He had 'had' Canada-up ears. And I don't blame him. Let's go back to the constitution. What a lot of poppycock! If the government had quietly asked the opposition parties to agree to requesting the British government to send the silly thing to Canada, there would have been no problem. The Brits are used to it. Nobody is against motherhood or a constitution coming home. But now that we don't build statues of public figures, Pierre Trudeau wants one built of paper, that will find its place in the history books. : As a result, he and his centurions are bull-dozing their way through Parliament alienating the provinces, and radiating an arrogance that hasn't been seen since the days of C. D. Howe, and his demand for closure, because Parliament was getting in his way, back in the Fifties. And the Tories, stung bitterly by being turfed out of office after only a few months wandering the corridors of power, are equally intransigent in their opposition. They won't give an inch, even should the Liberals offer one. On the sidelines, the NDP runs around in circles, trying to attract some attention. They supported the Liberals on the Constitution only because they hate them less than they do the Tories. How about those tax dollars used, without using money out of back pocket to buy Petro-Fina at a ridiculous price? True, we have more Canadian-owned gas stations. But this company will not put one more litre of gas into our energy programme. And if the new acquisition is as well-run as the Post Office, Lord help us all. And, as I have always said, if anybody wants to separate, let them go to it. I, for one, would not fight to hold Canada together, to force an erring son or daughter to stay home against his-her will. If Newfoundland wants to go, let her (it?) go. With all that oil, and all that fish, along with some spuds from P.E.I, the natives could live like kings on fish 'n chips forever. The country would be bigger than Iceland, and a lot better off financially. But if she goes, let the government stop reaching into my wallet for welfare and baby bonuses and coast-guard protection, and new air-strips for Newfie. I've run out of space, and haven't even begun. If you are as sore as I am about the way this country is falling apart, under an --onslaught of sheer, unadulterated "crap, sound off. Let's hear you. Shout it from the housetops. If you are as sore as I am, welcome Sorehead. Let's be Soreheads together.