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

2 The Canadian Statesman, Bowmanville, Wednesday, August 3,1994 Section Two W Canadian Itattro Former Publishers • Rev. W. R. Climie, 1854 -1878 • M. A. James, 1878 -1935 • George W. James, 1935 -1957 Produced weekly by James Publishing Company Limited P.O. Box 190,62 King St. W,, Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3K9 905-623-3303 Fax 905-623-6161 For 140 Years, Our First Concern Has Been Our Community Publisher-John M. James Assoc. Publisher - Richard A. James Plant Mana ger - Donald J, Bishop Ad. Manager - Brian G . Purdy Editor - Peter Parrott Production Rick Patterson, Laurens Kaldeway, Doug Lugtenburg, Sharon McMullen, Barb Patterson, Ralph Rozema, Jim Snoek, Vance Sutherland, Jim Tuuramo Advertising Editorial Laverne Morrison Brad Kelly, Lorraine Manfredo, Laura J. Richards Office Angela Luscher, Junia Hodge, Grace McGregor, Nancy Pleasance-Sturman, Marilyn Rutherford How Much is an M.P. Worth? It looks to us as though proposals to re-structure salaries being paid to federal Members of Parliament are as dead as a doornail. A commission to review the members' pay has recommended some major changes. But, since the changes resemble a pay increase, they just aren't likely to happen. Because, in the final analysis, the job of an MP is a job like no other. And, although the commission attempted to review the members' salaries in a neutral, businesslike fashion, the remuneration of elected officials is a political hot potato at the best of times. And these are not the best of times. In other words, it's not a good opportunity for politicians to ask for a raise or even an adjustment in the way in which they are being paid. In a news release last week, the commission which studied the salary issue explained its reasoning by beginning first with some historical background. For Canada's first parliamentary sessions, elected officials and senators each were paid $600 per year. Moreover, the early senators and parliamentarians were only required to be in Ottawa those three to five weeks when Parliament met. In 1893, MPs were granted free rail transportation. Not until 1965 did both houses receive a retirement allowance. And now for the present-day situation: Members of Parliament and senators receive an annual salary of $64,400, plus a tax-free allowance of $21,300 for Members of Parliament (and $10,000 for senators) to cover expenses. They receive 64 round-trips "points" to allow them to travel between their constituency and Ottawa. After serving a minimum of six years, they are entitled to a retirement allowance. The commission has suggested much of the MPs' pay scheme is based on the horse and buggy days when representatives were meeting in Ottawa for a mere three to five weeks. The commission proposes that the tax-free allowances be abolished and that the elected officials and senators earn a salary of $86,000 (which would come into effect after the next election.) A minimum age of 55 was also suggested for those politicians wishing to draw retirement benefits. According to the commission, Members of Parliament perform the following six jobs, with the percentage in brackets representing the total time spent on each: small office manager (6.2%); policy analyst (32.4%); law-maker (27.7%); government liaison/advocate (4.7%); counsellor (6.2%) and vice-president, public relations (17.2%). Supposedly, a person performing these jobs in the private or public sectors would cam in the range of $86,000 per year. Interestingly enough, the current pay of parliamentarians, plus their expense allowance, is almost exactly equal to the proposed new salary. Does the commission's recommendation really amount to a huge pay hike? The answer could be yes or no. It's the sort of reply that is dearly loved by elected officials who enjoy the art of political fence-sitting. It seems to us that the commission isn't recommending the expense allowances be discontinued, only that the expense allowances be accountable and "fully transparent." At the moment, the expense allowance representing one-third of a MB's salary is issued with no questions asked and is really just another part of the pay package. If the recommendation of the commission were to be followed, this amount would be replaced with a single higher salary. Presumably, a politician could continue to claim expenses, although these would be documented and, we suppose, subject to review by the public. In other words, a politician who decided to make do with his or her $86,000 salary and claim no expenses would be no further ahead than he or she is now. In fact, that individual would actually be making less because none of the salary would be tax free. On the other hand, a politician could also pocket the $86,000 salary and still claim $20,000 per year in expenses (and perhaps more.) When you add in the expense claims, an elected official could be making over $100,000 per year under the new proposal. We remarked at the outset of these comments that it's difficult to get a precise handle on fair pay for elected officials because the job is like none other in the private or public sector. And the argument that the current pay scale is old-fashioned and not based on 20th century management techniques is hardly valid. Nobody would seriously suggest tearing down the Peace Tower or the Parliamentary Library because they are not "modem" enough. If the remuneration currently being paid to elected officials is working, why change it? Because politicians have a unique job, their pay cannot be based on comparisons with the private or public sectors or research by personnel experts. The MPs' pay packet will be not one penny more than the electorate can put up with. And, at the moment, there is little interest in reforming remuneration for elected officials. To make a comparison with the private sector, we might note that salaries of elected officials are based (at least in part) on merit. Given high unemployment, high interest rates, a lower Canadian dollar and threats to national unity, it doesn't seem to the average Canadian that the MPs of the past have been earning their keep. One member of the commission noted that a decade ago, most Canadians described politicians in terms such as principled, competent and more concerned with people than money. Today, those holding the job are generally described by voters as incompetent, unprincipled and more concerned with money than people. "Given the current state of public attitudes towards our representative institutions in this country, it is really not surprising to find that the majority of Canadians are sceptical about how and for what Members of Parliament are paid," one member of the Commission observed. Exactly. And, until elected officials reduce the deficit, lower taxes and put more people back to work, we are going to remain sceptical. A few weeks back, I attended the public meeting in; Bowmanville, when the Durham Region Acute Care Study was presented for public discussion discussion in regard to the future role of Bowmanville Memorial Hospital. The same process applied to Port Perry Hospital and Whitby, which I couldn't attend. To say the least, the meeting in Bowmanville was lively. I understand it was the same at the other other two meetings. My job in the coming coming weeks, will be to report to the Minister of Health about how the residents residents living in the riding feel about the changes, and to ensure the health care you and your family count on is there when needed.. Hospitals are Ontario's largest single expense. They accounted for 14* ofpayments in '91-'92 Hospital's are Ontario largest single single expense. They accounted for 13.8 per cent of all government transfer payments in 1991/92. And more' money is being spent on them every year. That's the reason behind our government's hospital restructuring program. Aimed primarily at hospitals hospitals that are clustered together in cities cities or towns, our reform means an end to duplication of service and wasted resources that are far too common among groups of nearby hospitals. By giving area District Health Councils a say in hospital management management and planning, our government is making sure the needs of you and your community come first. Our government's government's hospital reform isn't just about making your health care dollars count, it's about getting the province's province's hospitals working together for you. We are also committed to"A Strategy Strategy of Hope" for those with cancer. The strategy involves creating a Can- ■ ccr Network to co-ordinate services; setting up a task force on primary prevention; providing a "seamless" system, from prevention, early detection detection and treatment, to support services services and palliation. This 1 know is welcome welcome news to everyone living in Durham East. The Cancer society volunteers provide support and encouragement encouragement to both patients and their families, their work is beyond pnee, and will still be needed as our government works to improve prevention, prevention, detection and treatment. We already spend over $ 1-billion a year on cancer care, and since our government took office, more than $300-million has been spent on new machines and facilities for radiation treatment. We have extended the hours for treatment in Toronto, London London and Hamilton. We have committed committed morè than $ 185-million for the relocation and rebuilding of the Princess Princess Margaret Hospital. This new hospital is expected to start treating patients by the fall of 1995. I am writing with "bated breath" for full radiation therapy to come to Oshawa General Hospital. I have had several meetings with the Minister of Health and others involved with the cancer strategy, where I pursued an agenda, on behalf of everyone in Durham East and those living more to the north, that will allow this to happen. Heaven only knows how much we need it here, and that's been the thrust of my talks with the ministry. I » think the new health card will be a trump to beat the cheats. To get one, everybody will have to register in person. That means, an end to duplicate duplicate cards, and ineligible cardholders. The Ministry of Health will start to issue the new cards in 1995. Despite the gloom and doom folks, including Mike Harris et al, business seems to have a great deal of confidence locally, as well as province wide. I'm speaking of the new mall extension in Bowmanville, and the millions being spent to upgrade upgrade the Oshawa Centre. Both of these considerable investments in the future of Ontario, have provided good jobs, and work for hundreds of others who produce the materials needed to do the work. I can't imagine imagine such investment coming forward locally if Bill 40 and Bill 79, and a decent minimum wage, is such a serious serious threat to business, as we are told it is, by the Conservatives at Queen's Park. Will those gloom and doom preachers please spare us their Orwellian Orwellian spectres? Each week it seems, I receive a letter from someone who tells me that welfare should be abolished. This despite the facts that over 70 per cent of all welfare goes to those who can't work through disability, the elderly elderly and children. The same time as I received that letter, 1 also received the results of a study by the Ontario Federation of Labour. According to this study, there are 381 corporations owing $5-million or more to the federal federal government in deferred taxes. Alcan is the leader of the pack, they owe $955 million U.S. Northern Telecom Telecom is in second place owing $347,9 million, and Dupont is a poor third they owe only $91.8 million. I find it strange that the spokespeople of these businesses, including the Toronto Toronto Sun Publishing, who incidentally incidentally owe $6.5 million, loudly proclaim that government should be run like a business, and not have deficits! As I said last week in a letter, there is a giant gulf between principle and practice when one's own ox is being gored. While on the subject of taxes, the Ministry of Finance has sent me a copy of their Tax Enforcement Bulletin. Bulletin. This document highlights 35 individual individual cases of tax evasion, failure to remit taxes collected and tax fraud. Fines amounting to $3.5 million have been imposed on the offenders. Missing Missing from the bulletin are the names of those involved, but the type of business business is identified.. As a result ot this, There is a giant gulf between principle ami practice when one's own ox is being gored business people in two local areas named in the bulletin, Durham Region Region and the County of Peterborough, now collectively share the shadow cast over their type of business by the three convicted companies, because nobody knows who they arc. When I was growing up in pre-war England, business wasn't so jcind towards the consumer. In those days, where I lived, if you owed money to a local business, your name, address and amount owed, was posted front and centre in the shop window for all to sec, never mind having a valid excuse, excuse, like being sick or out of work! Prince Charles recently addressed the Newspaper Society in London. I haven't the full text of his speech but I was interested to read how he neatly put his finger on the "progressive media" media" for the creation of an image that Continued on Page 3