The very first Private Members’ Bill up on the docket to be debated is one that give me a real headache, and it’s one that should be disallowed from being voteable, all because of a wee little loophole in the rules. The bill, from Conservative MP Ted Falk, aims to increase the tax rebate which charities receive to match the same level that one gets for political donations. The problem? That this is really an expenditure, and private members’ bills are forbidden to spend money without a royal recommendation (though MPs have gone to increasingly ridiculous lengths in recent years to try and contort logic to pretend that those bills don’t spend money when in fact they do). The even bigger problem? That a loophole currently exists in the rules that makes it technically possible for these bills asking for a tax credit to bypass the spending rules because technically (and under the way that procedure is interpreted) the bill seeks to reduce tax paid, not increase or expend taxes. That’s not actually true, mind you – ask the Auditor General or any decent economist and they’ll tell you in no uncertain terms that tax credits are actually expenditures, and unfortunately there is precedent on Falk’s side, particularly with a certain PMB from Dan McTeague several parliaments ago where he got a tax deduction in under that technicality and it was deemed to be in order. The government repealed the measure in their next budget, but the bill got though when really it shouldn’t have. Unfortunately it opened the door to these kinds of bills that are looking to create new boutique tax credits, and that’s a problem. Our tax code is already thousands of pages, and far too complex. Boutique tax credits are actually terrible policy, but governments have decided that they’re good politics because they feel like they’re rewarding certain groups for certain behaviours, and damn the consequences. The Auditor General has sounded the alarm that these measures aren’t being properly tracked because they’re not deemed expenditures (even though they are), which means that they’re not being given proper parliamentary oversight to ensure that it’s money that’s being well spent – and he found many cases where it’s not. But as Falk is demonstrating, the floodgates are opening, and it won’t be long before the Order Paper is replete with these PMBs demanding new boutique tax credits for everything under the sun, to encourage all manner of behaviour that they deem a social good, under the rubric that they’re not spending any money and thus within the rules. It’s a loophole that Parliament needs to set upon itself to close for the sake of the tax code and parliament’s ability to hold these kinds of spending measures to account. Sadly, one suspects that in their self-interest, MPs won’t make the needed rule change and we can expect this situation to get worse with every passing parliamentary session.

https://twitter.com/avelshi/status/704465684797915136

Good reads:

• A minor amendment to the dispute resolution mechanism in the Canada-EU Trade deal was made during the legal scrub, moving the agreement back on track.
• Thousands of seniors are getting GIS payments that were withheld because of a glitch in the system – but not being paid interest.
• Former NDP MP Craig Scott thinks the party should use the Leap Manifesto as a jumping off point for policy discussions. Go declinism!
• One Montreal NDP riding president is making his call for Thomas Mulcair’s ouster public.
• Conservative MP Mark Strahl is not convinced by the need to cancel Friday sittings.
• There may be more administrative hurdles for the plans to clear the records of those convicted of the crime of gay sex pre-1969.
• John McCallum’s musing about toning down references to the War of 1812 in the citizenship guide prompts a look at how Canada and the US treat the subject.
• What’s that? Private Members’ Bills referring to the “pre-born” are backdoors for pro-lifers to restart the abortion debate? You don’t say!
• Kady O’Malley notes that said bill, plus the doctor-assisted dying legislation, could spark a revival of social conservatism on the Hill.
• From the Manning Centre, Chris Selley writes about the need for a new message from the party, and the need for future leaders to be more comfortable in their skin.
• Stephen Gordon questions the deficit figures for this year, and the logic behind the current push for stimulus.

Odds and ends:

Australian trainers in Iraq won’t be allowed to engage in combat, unlike Canadian trainers. (But we’re not doing our part, remember).

Here’s a look at government advertising since the Liberals came to power.

https://twitter.com/randall_bartlet/status/704398750710685698