CANADA IS A DEMOCRACY ..

CANADA IS A DEMOCRACY IN NAME ONLY
It is the unelected senior bureaucrats in Canada’s Department of Finance and The Canada Revenue Agency that actually dictate the conduct of Canada’s Prime Minister and Members of the House of Commons.

Victor Drummond ©
January 2010

At long last a Canadian Newspaper has published an article that should be a wake-up call to all Canadians. On Wednesday, January 27, 2010 the on-line Toronto Star contained an editorial with the title: “Time to address democratic deficit.”
Ref: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/756262--time-to-address-democratic-deficit#article

This report came as a surprise to me because, until now, it seemed to me Canadian News Media were mainly cowed into conforming to Canadian government guidelines forbidding publishing comments or articles unfavourable to the government. A kind of censorship.

The information presented came as no surprise, however, as I had already observed the transition of Canada’s government from a democracy to a dictatorship during my lifetime.

And it is not our elected members in the House of Commons, or our Prime Minister that are calling the shots these days.

When Stephen Harper suddenly did an about face and went completely silent, on the outrageous phantom tax issue, following the warning: “JDS deal dangerous precedent.” issued in December 2007, by senior “bureaucrats” in the Department of Finance and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), it became painfully obvious who is really running Canada’s government.

Prior to this directive Prime Minister Harper was a participant in getting the Gary Lunn, Tax Remission Order, (TRO), approved in order to revoke the tax on phantom income for 37 former employees of the defunct SDL Optics Inc (JDS Uniphase) plant in Gary Lunn’s riding of Saanich Gulf Islands, British Columbia.

Harper would not have approved this TRO if he had the slightest doubt the tax was totally unjustified, unfair and abusive to those honest, hard-working Canadians who were being victimized by it.

At the time this TRO was announced, with plenty political fanfare, Harper was asked by a Victoria Times Colonist Newspaper, Columnist, (Cindy E. Harnett) if his government would extend the tax treatment, provided by the TRO, to other Canadian victims of the tax on phantom income?

Harper’s reply implied he would take action to extend the fair taxation provisions of the TRO to all Canadians victimized in this way when he answered: “we’ll get it resolved – it will take a change of code.”

But following a directive issued by those unelected “senior bureaucrats” Harper did a prompt about face and began to stonewall all appeals for the equal treatment under the laws of Canada that are guaranteed under provisions of the (May 2007) updated “Taxpayers Bill of Rights”.

Having Canada governed by unelected senior bureaucrats might not be such a bad thing if those bureaucrats displayed any qualities of compassion, honesty, decency or fairness. But it is obvious from the fact they warned the Prime Minister against fulfilling his commitment to “resolve” the phantom tax issue they do not concern themselves with none monetary items. They are strictly business oriented. Integrity, honesty, dependability, compassion fairness or justice have no place in their value system.

Their primary concern appears to be to collect all the tax money they can and if possible produce a federal budget surplus which would provide the government with excess funds, some of which may find its way into their pockets in the form of bonuses and/or pay raises.

How about the Prime Minister being held accountable by those MP’s who have been elected to the House of Commons to represent and protect the best interests of all Canadians – especially their constituents? That is the way it is supposed to work – but it no longer does.

The recent Prime Ministers of Canada have created committees to address the concerns of MP’s and rule on any action to be taken to correct an issue. By appointing personal mandarins to head up the committees they have created -- the Prime Minister effectively controls Parliament.

If you doubt the validity of the foregoing statements try getting anyone in Canada’s government to give you a position statement on the phantom income tax issue. Not even the leaders of Canada’s Loyal Opposition parties will so much as reply to a request for that information.

Why? What are they afraid of?

Every Canadian has a right to this information in order to make an informed decision when it comes time to vote for a representative in Parliament.

If Canadians do not pay attention to the changes going on in our system of government, and take action to restore true democracy, they may wake up one day in the same position as the group of German students who found a time has arrived “When Truth is Treason”.

In spite of the loudly proclaimed statements by our Honourable James M. Flaherty MP, CP, Minister of Finance, telling us that taxation of phantom income is “fair”, nearly everyone who takes the time to understand this outrageous tax concludes it is not fair, or even justified in any sense of the word.

If anyone claims it is OK to apply this tax because the victims are all well heeled executives that made bundles of money during the Hi-Tech stock market boom and are now trying to avoid pay a legitimate tax – don’t believe them.

For every fat cat executive that fits that description there are hundreds of ordinary, clerks and production line workers caught in the same tax trap.

Just examine the Gary Lunn TRO victims to see the proof of that statement.

Even the few fat cat executives that did exist are entitled to a fair tax levy.

The U.S.A. government corrected their equivalent, defective, phantom income tax legislation, last October, and Canada has no excuse for continuing this travesty of justice. Ref: www.reformamt.org

Contact your riding MP and inform them you want the tax on phantom income stopped immediately and those already victimized by it to be fairly compensated – just as the Americans have done, or “No Vote” in the coming federal election.

See you at the voting polls in the next federal election O’Grady.

Victor Drummond ©

STOP THE FINGER..

DO NOT POINT FINGERS – WHAT ARE YOU GOOD FOR
Federal Political Parties are very good at telling us the faults of their political opponents but very poor at telling why we should vote for them.

I am one Canadian voter that wants to know: "why I should vote for you?"
by Victor Drummond (c)
January 2010

The federal liberal party of Canada enjoyed one majority government after another until the financial scandals perpetrated under the Jean Chretien regime became public knowledge in the years 2004 and 2005.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien displayed arrogance and total distain for Canada’s Parliament when he was under investigation by the Gomery commission. Instead of giving straightforward answers to the questions he was asked he sat with his eyes lowered on a handful of golf balls and began to make wise cracks.

Chretien attempted to justify immoral mismanagement of taxpayers dollars, per the sponsorship scandal, on the grounds this timely action avoided splitting Canada into two nations. His rationale apparently being the end justified the means.

Perhaps the lack of ethics -- displayed by the federal liberal party at that time – was a determining factor in the Liberal government being defeated, by the federal Conservative party, in the 2006 federal election. A second important element contributing to their defeat was the fact the conservative party campaigned on a long list of promises they were going to implement if elected.

Instead of telling voters why they should vote against the Liberals – which was general knowledge anyway -- they focused on why the voters should vote for them.

Starting in 2005 the federal conservative party began a pre-election campaign that was couched in a slogan: “STAND UP FOR CANADA” with some very important “Action Plans” to entice voter support such as: a promise to enact legislation to tighten up the criminal code and keep repeat offenders in jail longer.

Another important promise was an “Action plan” to implement “Fair Taxation for all Canadians” a basic right to which every Canadian is entitled and one -- especially victims of taxation on “phantom” income -- would be sure to vote for.

Still another very important promise was to “Enact legislation to ensure that full and timely compensation will be paid to all persons who are deprived of personal or private property as a result of any federal government initiative, policy, process regulation or legislation.” This is another promise that every victim of taxation on “phantom” income would be certain to vote for.

There is no doubt the legislation -- which the Revenue Canada Agency currently uses as an excuse to extort money from honest, hard-working Canadians – has been, and still is depriving many of our citizens of considerable personal property ranging from their life’s savings to their very homes.

So although the conservative party did a bit of finger pointing -- at the scandalous conduct of the liberal government -- their main 2005 pre-election platform was a long list of things they were going to do to improve the quality of life for the average Canadian. They offered abused Canadian taxpayers something to vote for -- not something to vote against.

After the conservative party was elected, however, it turns out a few of the more important action plans they promoted were only half-way implemented and the “fair taxation for all Canadians” plan was abandoned after a token number (37) phantom income tax victims had been given the promised “fair” tax deal.
Reference: The Gary Lunn Tax Remission Order (TRO) which can be found with a Google Search.

The federal liberal party then attempted to regain public support by selecting a replacement party leader who they hoped would upgrade their credibility and public image. They thought they had found a suitable candidate in the person of Stephane Dion who had a scandal free record and was very likeable.

Stephane Dion became leader of the federal liberal party on December 2nd 2006. Not long afterward the conservative party finger pointing began. Unable to dig up any real dirt on Mr Dion the conservative party spin doctors began to issue attack ads claiming: “he lacked leadership qualities.”

By conservative party standards this claim was valid.

Stephane Dion is first and foremost a man of integrity. He is a person who values his personal and his government attributes such as: integrity, dependability, honesty, decency and fair play above a budget surplus.

I am willing to bet on Stephane Dion keeping his word if he made a commitment to correct (“resolve”) Canada’s outrageous policy of taxing honest, hard-working Canadians on money that never existed i.e. “phantom” income.

Eventually the federal Liberal Party realized Stephane Dion was indeed too much of a gentleman and no match for the perfidious conservative political machine. Mr. Dion would not stoop to the conservative party level of political-opposition and personal character assassination.

I have no doubt if Stephane Dion had become Canada’s Prime Minister he would have restored Canada’s image on the world stage as a truly democratic country where citizens are treated fairly and equally under Canadian law.

The Liberal party began looking for someone to become their leader who could match, and surpass, attacks of the federal conservative spin doctors. Again the Liberal Caucus found a person they hope can lead them back to forming the government of Canada – a man by the name of Michael Ignatieff.

Michael became leader of the federal liberal party on December 10 2008.

Shortly afterward the finger pointing by the federal conservative party spin doctors began with statements such as: “Michael Ignatieff is not a suitable candidate for the office of Prime Minister of Canada as he is only visiting.” the attack ads went on to say Micheal is a person devoted to world travel and has no real interest in the affairs of Canada.

What else could the conservative party do? They couldn’t regurgitate their “STAND UP FOR CANADA” action plans – especially the promise of “fair” taxation for all Canadians” as they had already defaulted on that promise. And the commitment to: “Enact legislati on to ensure that full and timely compensation will be paid to all persons who are deprived of personal or private property as a result of any federal government initiative, policy, process regulation or legislation.” never got off the drawing board.

Michael has made a few false starts since becoming leader of the federal liberal party. He quickly realized Canadians did not want Canada governed by a coalition of opposition parties and wisely backed out of that arrangement.

He has done a bit of finger pointing since but hopefully he will soon realize Canadians do not need, or want, regurgitation of the conservative government’s misdeeds – the news media does a fair job of keeping everyone informed about those items.

When Michael Ignatieff realizes Canadians are looking for an honest government that allows parliament to do the job they were elected to do AND commits to rectifying government abuses of honest, hard-working Canadian taxpayers THEN he can count on my support and the support of the many thousands of Canadians (from coast to coast to coast) victimized by the unjust, and outrageous tax on so called “Earned Income” that was neither “Earned” nor real “Income” of any kind – it was “phantom Income” for which only "phantom taxes" could be justified.

Give us something real to vote for Michael and minimize the finger pointing.

See you at the voting polls for the next Federal election – O’Grady.

Victor Drummond (c)

BTW:- Comments are now moderated before they are posted.

FROM TWO-O-ONE TO..

FROM TWO-O-ONE TO THREE HUNDRED

Canadians who have been legally robbed and financially devastated due to “Income” Taxes levied on nonexistent, (phantom), income,have been submitting comments to the “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation”,
(CFET), Petition for the Canadian Government.

The Third one hundred submissions are presented here with comments
By Victor Drummond ©
January 2010

Below are the opening lines of the CFET petition.

To the Prime Minister, Minister of Finance, Minister of Revenue, Members of parliament of all parties We, the undersigned, are shocked to learn that the government is taxing people on paper income they never in reality made, a.k.a. phantom income.

(Note: Victor Drummond, definition of “phantom income”.
Phantom income is income that “might” have happened but did not happen but has been taxed as though it did happen. Unfairness personified.)

Visit: www.cfet.ca to read the full text.
=============================================

The third 100 entries on the Petition Sign-on page -- with space for comment -- are as follows:

Of the 100 individual entries only 28 posted a comment.
Not one comment, however, said anything good about the taxing of phantom income.

Of the 100 individual entries 29 preferred to sign in as “Anonymous”
Why?

The best explanation for some people to remain anonymous, when signing the CFET petition, was contained in an e-mail that arrived at the CFET via the web page -- inquiry@ link -- last March.

The authors of the letter explained why they supported CFET but are reluctant to actually join the group, as follows: “I wished to remain anonymous. I suspect cra folk read these and remember.”

That is our Canada – a place where many honest, hard-working, victimized taxpayers, and their supporters, are afraid to be identified with their honest opinion for fear of being persecuted.

Do you suppose there is any justification for this concern? It has never happened to me, yet.

Ask someone who lost their home, and/or life savings, to the taxman, what they think about possible reprisals for telling it the way they see it.

What a sad state of affairs for honest, hard-working, Canadians to find themselves living with.

Especially when the Canadian Government has produced a document titled:
“Serving Canadians – Canada’s System of Justice”
Ref: www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/pub/just/img/courten.pdf

Telling Canadians how Canadian laws are designed to assure equality and fairness.


The Third one hundred CFET Petition Entries
============================================
(201) Anonymous No comment
(202) S. H. No comment
(203) S. H. No comment
(204) Anonymous “This needs to be changed”
(205) M. N. No comment
(206) L. L. H No comment
(207) D. C. No comment

(208) O. L. “Concur wholeheartedly. Tax should be paid on cash, or realized gains not on paper gains which may never be realized, or materialize.”

(209) Anonymous No comment

(210) W. T. M. “When employed at JDS in Ottawa this affected many of the staff but particularly the lower salaried and less financially savvy technical support workers. These people are also the ones who are least able to cope with paying off the large tax bills.”

(211) Anonymous No comment
(212) G. N. No comment
(213) Anonymous No comment
(214) Anonymous No comment
(215) K. T. No comment
(216) H. W. No comment
(217) L. M. No comment
(218) Anonymous No comment
(219) Anonymous No comment
(220) Anonymous No comment

(221) Anonymous “I agree”

(222) G. B. No comment
(223) M. V. No comment
(224) K. N. No comment
(225) J. D. Z. No comment
(226) Anonymous No comment

(227) Anonymous “Absolutely unfair – paid taxes on stock purchase program for Nortel that are 700% under water.”

(228) N. S. No comment

(229) B. H. “This is an easy fix. The employees at SDL Optics have set the example.”

(230) J. R. M. No comment

(231) C. C. “I fully support this petition. The last I, as a Canadian taxpayer want to see is to tax people unfairly. Please fix the law.”

(232) L. B. No comment

(233) Anonymous “I was in the U.S. at the time, already retired from Nortel after 25 years of work and exercised some stock options with advice to retain them.” “On that basis I found out later that I had to pay about $165,000 in taxes on paper shares that I still have at a value less than $2,800.00.” “This is highly unfair and unequitable as I had to lose all my savings and some of my RRSP in order to cover the tax on fictitious gains.” “Only real gains (on actual sale of shares) should be taxable, not immaterial variations in price.”

(234) M. M. No comment
(235) L. No comment
(236) A. B. No comment
(237) T. C. No comment


(238) G. D. “This law is irrational and typical of the bully pulpit enjoyed by REVCAN.” “Please fix it.”

(239) Anonymous “I fought my income tax bill for two years and then gave up in despair.” “Had to declare bankruptcy.” “I never defaulted on a payment in my life but now my credit rating is mud.” “Even more infuriating considering the relief the CRA provided the JDS Uniphase employees:
http://www.gowlings.com/resources/enewsletters/taxationlaw/Htmfiles/V1N97_20070208.en.html

(240) Anonymous “It is time to address this.”

(241) M. J. K. No comment
(242) Anonymous No comment
(243) D. T. No comment
(244) C. J. No comment
(245) D. F. No comment
(246) D. G. No comment
(247) R. K. No comment

(248) M. Y. “It makes no sense to charge tax until a gain is realized.” “This is why we have capital gains taxes.” “Unrealized employee benefits should not be taxed or assessed until realized.” “If we treated capital gains this way it would kill investment in Canada due to burden of servicing the tax burden.”

(249) C. M. No comment
(250) D. C. No comment
(251) M. S. No comment
(252) C. G. No comment
(253) T. F. No comment

(254) R. M. “I have been taxed on a huge $ amount of employment benefit that was never realized.” “How can some people have this flaw corrected for them yet not all Canadians in the same situation can say this.”

(255) J. M. No comment
(256) W. T. No comment

(257) Anonymous “Best situation would be to allow capital loss on the shares to offset the paper employment benefit.” “Tax us on the money we actually receive.”

(258) C. M. “Faced with having to fill out the exact same ESO-tax deferral as part of my income tax return for the rest of my life I am happy to support any effort to get this loop-hole closed.”

(259) M. C. No comment
(260) S. H. No comment

(261) C. M. “My taxable stock option benefit is zero because the stock price went deep South.” “So mathematically 0 taxable benefit earned X 17% tax rate = 0 tax.”

(262) J. S. No comment
(263) Anonymous No comment

(264) D. M. “I wish us all luck on this one, but doubt that the government would ever rescind such an easy cash grab.” “Still if anyone was going to do it I suppose it is this current administration.”

(265) C. C. No comment
(266) A. L. No comment
(267) R. H. No comment

(268) Anonymous “I actually left my company 8 years ago to pursue other opportunities, and was a bit shocked this year when my accountant informed me that the shares I thought were an asset are actually a large liability due to the deferred stock option liability.” “ So, the shares sit there, without the possibility of ever being sold by me.” “ Why sell and trigger a tax liability when I can just put them under my bed and not ever trigger the liability.”

(269) D. R. No comment
(270) D. M. No comment
(271) Anonymous No comment

(272) B. M. “This not only requires action but the right kind of action. It requires thoughtful deliberation by people who are deliberately being fair, to end this mean and needless taxation.”

(273) K. M. No comment
(274) Anonymous No comment
(275) Anonymous No comment

(276) Anonymous “It is unfortunate that the Government of Canada continues to insist on benefiting from the Technology Boom when investors and employees have all lost or erased their gains.” “Many of the signatories on this petition continue to
provide significant tax revenues from income to Federal and Provincial governments, it is unjust to tax on income never realized and never realizable.” “Allowing offset of income gain with stock option losses would be fair and just.”

(277) Anonymous “Allowing those affected to offset the unrealized deferred income gain with the corresponding capital loss would seem to be a reasonable solution.”

(278) Y-T. L. No comment
(279) B. S. No comment
(280) K. T. No comment
(281) Anonymous No comment
(282) P. H. No comment
(283) Anonymous No comment

(284) P. J. “This cost me a significant amount of money that I never even saw.”

(285) C. C. No comment
(286) K. H. No comment
(287) J. M. No comment
(288) J. D. P. No comment
(289) A. No comment

(290) M. L. “I was impacted with an $80,000 tax bill which to pay I sold my house (at a loss) and cashed in much of my RRSP. I could have not sold stock and held off paying taxes - but that would have left the burden to my family in event of my death – so the decision was to bite it.... Tax was on options that cost me $0.20 for startup company which I exercises when over $60.00 USD. I exercised instead of losing stock as I had resigned my position at said company and would lose stock if not exercised. Problem is...I was in a lockout period - I could not sell stock for another almost 2 months. The first day I could sell stock, the telecommunications sector crashed and the stock was trading at sub $8.00 USD.”

(291) M. J. “In the name of justice!!!”

(292) Anonymous “How can they tax you on money you never even had They can and they do.... I petition for this to change as well.”

(293) Anonymous No comment

(294) R. T. G. “I was employed at Creo products from 1995-1999 and was effected by the tax system for employee stock options.”

(295) R. T. G. “The whole affair, involving people being taxed based on money that they never in fact received, is utterly stupid. Quite apart from the unfairness towards the people affected - involving, in some cases, people's lives being ruined - the tax laws involved clearly did not anticipate situations of the kind that have arisen.“

“Refusal by the authorities to change what is obviously defective/dysfunctional
legislation is just plain un-professional, quite apart from anything else.”

“To pretend that the law cannot be changed is simply a case of pretending that the AXIOM represented by the law is a REASON for not correcting the problem.

"It's like saying "...there's so much of it going on that you can't possibly do
anything about it...", or some such - a common form of muddled and incompetent "reasoning" frequently used for the purpose of obfuscation and fobbing people off.

In a May 2002 speech, Prime Minister Stephen Harper (as Leader of the Official Opposition, at that time) said that Canada was a "...nation of defeatists..." I have this documented. This should be brought to the attention of the Prime Minister. This problem is being caused by lawyers and bureaucrats trying to "look tough" in front of their peers or superiors, by being dictatorial and peremptory, over things they maintain "...can't be done..." , far beyond the point of merely being absurd.

Unsatisfactory; the people responsible should all be removed from their jobs without delay. It is not acceptable that a bunch of stupid lawyers and bureaucrats should be allowed to propagate the type of defeatism and defeatist attitudes that the Prime Minister himself disapproves of.

(296) D. W. No comment
(297) K. J. No comment
(298) F. No comment
(299) M. J. No comment

(300) Anonymous “You should not be taxed on any equity until there is a formal transaction of selling the equity. Then if you end up selling at a loss you should be able to claim a capitol loss as well.

===========================================
In the above listing only the initials of the CFET petition signers have been given.

If you found the above posted comments interesting you should visit the “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation” web pages and follow the “Sign our Petition” and “Signatures” links to get an advanced reading of a planned future Victor Drummond blog titled: “FROM THREE-O-ONE TO FOUR HUNDRED”.

While catching up on this topic sign the CFET petition, and post a comment, to add incentive for the Canadian Government to take corrective action.

Also planned for future Victor Drummond postings, to this blog, are a series of letters, e-mails and snail mails to various Ministers and MP’s in Canada’s Governments, past and present, and the really intelligent replies those appellants, lucky enough to get a reply, received in response.

Names and dates of the letters to be posted may be altered, or omitted, to protect the identity of the VICTIMS.

If you would like to support the CFET mission to achieve the “fair taxation for all Canadians” promised by our conservative government in their pre-election brochure: “STAND UP FOR CANADA then contact you’re Member of Parliament and say so.

The contact information for members of Canada’s 40th Parliament may be found by following the web links posted at the end of this article.

Our current government has no excuse, or justification for continuing to extort after-tax money from Canadian Taxpayers on the basis of defective taxable benefit legislation and an unjustified taxable benefit rationale.

The U.S.A. government has already acknowledged such a tax policy is unfair and have amended their equivalent tax legislation to put an end to taxing U.S. citizens on “phantom income.”
Ref: www.fair-iso.org and www.reformAMT.org

Canadian Government document: “Serving Canadians – Canada’s System of Justice” misinforms Canadians that Canada’s Laws and Justice System are intended to provide “fair” and “equitable treatment” for all Canadians. (Yah Right). The intent of this document is being violated by the CRA regularly with impunity.

Canadians have been taxed on “money never seen” for about a decade now and assumed guilty of some undefined crime – punishable by horrendous tax levies -- when they failed to sell their ESPP/ESO equities at the time of exercise. And some 37 such victims have been granted tax relief via an exclusive Tax Remission Order (TRO) while the remaining thousands of similar victims are still excluded.

Our Right Honourable Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has been quoted in the Victoria Times Colonist Newspaper as committing to “resolve” the phantom tax issue – two years ago – and the victims are still waiting.

Do not tell me Canada’s laws are designed to provide equality and fairness while imposing real taxes on imaginary income – show me.

Correct the unfair taxable benefit legislation and fairly compensate those victimized by it. The U.S. government has made this correction and Canada has no excuse for denying our tax victims the same “fair” treatment.

Canadian voters are the last resort to achieving the “fair taxation for all Canadians” promised by this government but not yet delivered.

Contact every MP in your riding – opposition MP’s included – and inform them that in exchange for your vote you want their support to correct Canada’s defective taxable benefit legislation -- to put an end to taxing Canadians on “phantom income” and those already victimized by this outrageous tax practice to be fairly compensated in a way similar to the action already taken by the United States Government.

M.P. contact information is listed on the web page at:
http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

See you at the next federal election polls O’Grady.

Victor Drummond ©

SETTING A DANGEROUS...

SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT
When a Canadian Federal Political Party Leader is trusted
by Canadian voters to represent them and to set the standards of
conduct for the entire nation what action(s) might the leader engage
in that would constitute setting a “Dangerous Precedent”?

By Victor Drummond ©
January 2010

Marie Antoinette lost her head (literally) over a trivial off-hand remark such as “then let them eat cake” when she was informed there were a significant number of French citizens who did not have so much as a loaf of bread to eat.

Marie’s reply revealed an arrogant and couldn’t care less attitude concerning the distress of her subjects.

Showing a lack of concern for the well being of those who have the power to make or break a political organization is definitely playing with fire and anything a political leader might do, or say, that can generate a negative impression regarding the politicians personal attributes – within the general population – may well turn out to be setting a dangerous precedent.

The average person does not want any representative they can not trust.
This rule also applies to voters who will not support leaders that ignore and/or fail to support them when they are abused.

Canadians have had a decade, or more, of governments that have fallen far short of acceptable performance.

Canadian Liberal governments -- under the leadership of the Right Honourable Jean Chretien followed by the Right Honourable Paul Martin -- left a trail of scandalous political conduct that made Canada the laughing stock among civilized nations and thousands of Canadian taxpayers financially ruined by taxes levied on money that never existed i.e. phantom income.

By the year 2005 Canadian citizens had taken enough abuse, and scandal, and began to listen to promises being made by the Federal Conservative Party who were offering wide ranging political reform -- in their pre-election: “STAND UP FOR CANADA” promotions – including a commitment to introduce a “PLAN OF FAIR TAXATION FOR ALL CANADIANS”.

Enough Canadian voters supported the Federal Conservatives in the 2006 election to give them sufficient House of Commons seats to form at least a minority government for Canada. The newly elected Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, got right to work on some of the more important “Action Plan” commitments made during the pre-election campaign.

Harper’s government introduced bills to tighten up the criminal code and keep repeat offenders in jail longer.
The gun registry was debated and changes recommended.

On January 30th 2007 the Honourable James M. Flaherty, Minister of Finance addressed the House of Commons (HOC) standing committee on finance (FINA)
and among other things addressed the governments plan to bring: “tax fairness” to all Canadians.

Flaherty began his address with the following statements:
“I insist on being the first witness to remind this committee directly of the critical importance of moving forward with our income trust policy AND OUR TAX FAIRNESS PLAN.”
“Make no mistake, the decision that was taken on October 31st is all about “FAIRNESS”.

“FAIRNESS FOR CANADIAN TAXPAYERS AND THEIR FAMILIES who would be asked to pay more and more.”

And in his concluding remarks the Honourable Mr. Flaherty stated as follows:

“We made our decision based not on political calculations, as did the previous government, but on principles of TAX FAIRNESS, balancing the needs of individual investors with the interests of TAXPAYERS AND THEIR FAMILIES.”
“And we acted responsibly and decisively.”

“IT IS NOT TAX FAIRNESS IF IT IS ONLY FOR A FEW.”

Although the above statements have been selected out of a much longer address text they are not “taken out of context”?

Could the above statements have any other meaning than the one they convey on their own? If the above statements do not mean exactly what they say then we are dealing with a “senior bureaucrat” that speaks with a forked tongue and that would be setting a dangerous precedent.

As soon as the Federal Conservative party was elected -- to form Canada’s government -- in 2006 the Honourable Gary Lunn, CP, MP, for the riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands British Columbia, began supporting a group of his constituents who had hired a lawyer to fight for the “fair Taxation” the Conservative Party had promised.

Gary succeeded in having the Honourable Carol Skelton, CP, MP, Minister of National Revenue request a “Tax Remission Order” (TRO) be prepared that would cancel the taxes and penalties levied on the victimized constituents against income money that never actually existed, i.e. “phantom income”.

True to his word, when the TRO was ready for signing the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, signed the TRO which was then passed into law when Canada’s Governor General, Her Excellency Micheal Jean also signed the document.

When the approved TRO was made public, with a grand ceremony in Victoria British Columbia, the Honourable Gary Lunn was quoted in the Victoria Times Colonist, newspaper as declaring:

“It took a change of government to get someone to listen, but the Prime Minister has come through and delivered tax relief on this issue.” “It is not in the interest of government to tax people on money they never saw.”

Around the same time the Right Honourable Stephen Harper was quoted, in the same newspaper, as replying to the question: -- “Will the same “fair tax treatment” be extended to other Canadian taxpayers who were also taxed on phantom income?” – Harper said: “We’ll get it resolved.” “It will take a change of code.”

What meaning would the average Canadian assign to the statement: “We’ll get it resolved.”?

That answer sounds like a “YES” the same “fair tax” treatment would be extended to all other Canadian taxpayers who have been, and are still being, taxed on phantom income.

Not long after that the Honourable James M. Flaherty in the company of the Honourable Carol Skelton, CP, MP, and Minister of National Revenue, made an historic announcement concerning the creation of a “Taxpayers Ombudsman” AND an updated “Bill of Taxpayers Rights”.

As it turned out, however, the “Taxpayers Ombudsman” has no power to enforce any of the “Taxpayers Bills Of Rights” beyond admonishing any member of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) that doesn’t enforce CRA rulings in a polite manner.

You may still have your wages garnisheed, and/or your bank account seized but the wording used by the CRA agent(s) must now be polite.

Apparently the Honourable James M. Flaherty considers that is all the consideration that TRO excluded Canadian victims of phantom income taxation deserve or are entitled to.

Some Canadian journalists later remarked the creation of the “Taxpayers Ombudsman” together with a token “Taxpayers Bill of Rights” was nothing more, or less, than a huge public relations scam perpetrated on the Canadian taxpayers to create the false impression these changes would ensure the “fair” taxation promised in the Conservative Action Plan.

Nothing could be further from the truth and when Canadian voters eventually realize the insult to their intelligence our government has been, and still is, heaping upon them with such scams then the perpetrators should be voted out of office.

Government scam artists may just find out the Canadian population is not entirely made up of gullible individuals who can be so easily duped.

That scam may be one of the dangerous precedents that eventually bring down our current self-serving arrogant government leaders.

Another article (below) might explain why the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, decided to renege on his commitment to “resolve” the phantom income tax inequality created by the Gary Lunn TRO.

The December 7, 2007 issue of the Victoria Times Colonist Newspaper contained an article with the title: “JDS Deal Dangerous Precedent – Ottawa told.”

Some “Key statements” in that article are as follows:
(a)“The federal government has offered tax relief to several dozen former employees of high-tech company JDS Uniphase who made and lost millions on paper, in a special deal that could open the door for other taxpayers to demand the same treatment.”
(b) “The decision recently published as a “remission order” in the Canada Gazette, was approved by cabinet despite objections from officials at Finance and Canada Revenue Agency.”

and

(c) “Senior bureaucrats warned such a decision was UNFAIR to other taxpayers and set a dangerous precedent for employees of other high-tech companies who watched their fortunes rise and fall during the dot-com boom and subsequent crash.”

The above warning issued by “senior bureaucrats” in Canada’s Revenue Agency and Department of Finance makes it perfectly clear that “tax fairness” and observance of the terms of the updated “Taxpayers Bill of Rights”, are the very least of their concerns.

The “senior bureaucrats” who issued that warning have no more concern for the well-being of abused Canadians than Marie Antoinette displayed for her loyal subjects.

At that point Harper had two options:-

(1) Keep his word and “resolve” the issue of extending the “fair” tax treatment provided by the Gary Lunn TRO to all other victimized Canadian Taxpayers – facing the risk that retaining his credibility may incur.

or

(2) Turn tail and stonewall all appeals for the “fair taxation for all Canadians” and his commitment to “resolve” the phantom tax fiasco.

Harper chose option (2) thereby destroying what credibility he did have.

There are, however, two very relevant points established in the above warning.

The first, and most important point, being the Senior Bureaucrats stated very clearly that the exclusion of other victimized taxpayers from the treatment granted to Gary Lunn’s constituents per the TRO is “UNFAIR to other taxpayers”. (Reference (c) above.)

In light of this statement what is the Honourable James M. Flaherty doing when he publicly claims: “the tax treatment of taxpayers who hold their ESPP/ESO equities beyond the date of exercise is fair because they are treated the same as all other Canadian stock market investors/speculators.”

He is selling out his credibility, integrity, and constituents – that is what he is doing.

That alone could be setting a “dangerous situation” -- (can’t use the word “precedent” here as this isn’t his first time.) -- and that should cost him his seat in parliament.

The second important point contained in the above warning is: “a special deal that could open the door for other taxpayers to DEMAND the same treatment.” (Reference (a) above.)

In view of the fact that numerous Canadian taxpayers, victimized by the same phantom income tax trap, have tried: (1) the courts of justice, (2) have tried appeals to the CRA Chief of Tax Appeals, (3) have tried appeals to their riding MP, and (4) to all House of Commons Members from the Prime Minister all the way down to the furthest back back-bencher and (5) appeals to members of Canada’s Senate – all to little or no avail – just what can these “other victimized taxpayers do to DEMAND the same fair tax treatment?

The Canadian government would like the general population to believe tax victims will obtain justice and “fair treatment” by appealing to the Canada Revenue “Chief of Appeals” officers located in most Revenue Canada tax centers across Canada.

Rulings by these CRA Officers have been a crap shoot and at best merely compound the UNFAIRNESS of the phantom tax fiasco even more. The primary basis for granting relief to phantom tax victims, by a CRA Chief of Appeals Officer, has been on the basis of “hardship”.

This practice merely punishes victims who have been thrifty, but who do not deserve to lose their life’s savings, while rewarding spendthrifts who never saved a dime.

In addition the federal auditor reported in 2008 that obtaining a favourable decision, from a CRA Chief of Appeals Officer, depended as much, or more, upon the location where the appeal was submitted as it did upon the merits of the appellant’s case. A crap shoot to be sure.

Our esteemed Prime Minister has chosen to renege on his commitment(s) to provide “fair taxation” for all Canadians and especially reneged on his remark “we’ll get it resolved” in regard to extending the fair tax treatment provided by the Gary Lunn TRO to all Canadian Taxpayers caught in the same tax trap.

Adding to Harpers deficiencies, concerning his personal integrity, he has revealed he has no concern for Canadians financially devastated by a flawed tax policy or for the responsibility Canada has for people detained by the Canadian Military.

In his opinion Canadians have little or no concern what happens to Afghanistan detainees after the Canadian Military apprehends them.

Harper is not speaking for me on this issue and I believe he underestimates the decency level of most Canadians.

He may not have any concern, or recognize any responsibility, for the possible abuse of Afghan citizens detained and delivered to the Afghan prison authorities by the Canadian Military but that is not necessarily the attitude of the average Canadian.

No matter how one slices the issue -- Afghans detained by the Canadian Military become a Canadian responsibility the very moment they become our prisoners. That responsibility is not diminished by delivering our Afghan prisoners to the Afghanistan prison system.

If there was the slightest possibility our Afghan detainees would be at risk of interrogation practices not acceptable to our system of justice then Canadians are just as guilty as the Afghan authorities for the torture and abuse that occurs and that we do not find acceptable.

Harper has already displayed a total lack of concern for the distress imposed on his own citizens by way of taxing thousands of them on income that never existed.

So it is right in character for Harper to show the same indifference to Afghan prisoners taken by Canadian forces that are very likely to be tortured by their own prison authorities.

To add insult to injury our Prime Minister has chosen – for the second time in a year – to shut down parliament rather than deal with the truth.

That “run and hide” performance alone is setting a dangerous precedent – one that should give every Canadian cause to look for a more competent and more dependable replacement government.

See you at the voting polls in the next federal election O’Grady.

Victor Drummond ©