Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

Dan Albas: Examples that point towards increased household debt ... in order to access the benefits of the programs ... that themselves are being offered by a $19.8 billion deficit budget


The challenge with many of the programs on offer in this budget is the fine print!

In last week’s report I provided some highlights on the recent 2019 budget and asked citizens if they liked what they saw in the budget so far.  I also made a commitment to share my own thoughts on this budget as an opposition Member of Parliament.

Most critics have labelled this budget as an ‘election year goodies’ budget that targets certain voting demographics that the Liberals hope will translate to votes in the October election.

While I do not disagree with that sentiment, I would submit that most every sitting government in an election year tables a budget that it believes will be politically popular.

My concern with this budget is somewhat different.

As you may have heard, household debt levels here in Canada are at an all-time high.  Household debt as a percentage of gross income in 2016 was 166%.  In January of this year (2019) it has now increased to 176%.

Why do I mention that in the context of this budget?

The new “Canada Training Benefit” on the surface sounds like a good program encouraging job skills retraining. However when you read the fine print only $250 is available per year up to a career maximum of $5,000.

The challenge that I am already hearing is the majority of training programs cost well in excess of that amount.  Many skills training programs are literally thousands of dollars or more. For many workers to benefit from this $250 training credit it will mean borrowing thousands and increasing household debt.

Similarly, for most to access the credit of $5,000 towards the purchase of a new electric car, would mean borrowing up to the maximum for the program amount of $45,000.  This again results in more household debt for anyone borrowing for a new vehicle purchase.

A similar situation is created with the new home buyers program.

Rather than eliminate the GST on affordable new housing (as has been done with the PST provincially), this budget only offers more options that encourage borrowing. Borrowing $10,000 more from your RRSP, up to maximum of $35,000, is  an option that few new home buyers can access.

The new first time home buyers incentive on the surface sounds helpful. The program can help provide between 5-10% of the down payment towards a maximum CMHC insurable mortgage up to $480,000, not counting the total down payment.

The challenge with this program is also in the fine print.

The maximum $480,000 mortgage value is also based on the programs maximum allowable household income level of $120,000 annually.

In a community where the average household income is $70,000, the maximum value under this program is set at FOUR TIMES the income, meaning a CMHC (Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation) insurable mortgage limit of just $280,000.

A significant difference.

These are just a few examples that all point towards increased household debt ... in order to access the benefits of these programs ... that ironically are themselves being offered by a $19.8 billion deficit budget.

My question this week:
At this current rate of spending, by 2040, an additional $271 billion in new debt will have accumulated, not factoring in household debt levels.

Are you concerned about this?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Given the noted infractions of this agreement with OneBC leader Dallas Brodie, I request the Party immediate suspend the leadership campaign of Yuri Fulmer

I have personally emailed the following to the Board and Administration of the Conservative Party of BC:   TODAY (03/30) Yuri Fulmer, a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of BC, made a pact with ONEBC leader Dallas Broldie, that if he is elected will commit the Conservative Party to the following. Specifically, the pact states : This Memorandum of Understanding outlines the definitive electoral and governing alliance that will be executed upon Yuri Fulmer’s election as Leader of the Conservative Party of British Columbia OneBC Party commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in 88 of British Columbia’s 93 electoral districts. In exchange, the Conservative Party of BC, under the leadership of Yuri Fulmer, commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in five (5) specific electoral districts . OneBC will be the sole standard-bearer for the right in those five districts. The specific ridings will be determined through mutual negotiation and fin...

Delays to the replacement of the Red Bridge? Kamloops North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer says they are, “Totally Unacceptable.”

I think it’s totally unacceptable that on one hand the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) is saying they’re going to be responsible for putting together multiple replacement options with public engagement, and then in the same breath they're saying, ‘Oh, and by the way, we're going to start our geotechnical environmental and archaeological site assessments on both sides of the river, possibly beginning this summer.’ According to Stamer, that should already have been done. “Obviously, we're pretty sure it will be in the same location because there's really no other place to put it. So, if you're going to put in a bridge, you think that at least you'd be doing the archaeological assessments first off”, stated Stamer.   “If it's determined it has to be a free-span bridge, and it can't have anything or very minimal impact in the riverbed, they should already be determining that. It would help in the design, wouldn't it?” Stamer indicated...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more