There are many news events going on in Ottawa on a weekly basis, meaning that some events may be overlooked when the revelations of a Facebook data breach consume most media headlines. 
 
One of the overlooked events this past week may have been the release of the “Perspectives on Climate Change Action in Canada” report. 
 
This report basically audits and summarizes how well Canada is doing at meeting our goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. (GHG) 
 
Before I go further, here's some background information on this topic summarized from my September 22nd, 2016 MP Report. 

• Shortly after the 2015 Federal election our Prime Minister Trudeau sent the largest Canadian delegation in history to attend the Paris Climate Change Conference, at a cost in excess of $1 million dollars.
• While at the Paris conference, the Liberal Government made several comments in support of increasing GHG reduction targets while criticizing the record of the former Conservative Government.
• Despite this criticism, the Liberal Government announced it would adopt the very same GHG reduction targets that were set by the previous Government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper. 
 
For added context: 

• In 1993, former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien promised to reduce our GHG emissions to 20 per cent below 1988 levels by 2005. This promise was broken.
• In 1997, Chretien signed the Kyoto accord to reduce our emissions by a smaller amount of six per cent below 1990 levels that would be achieved by 2012.
• In 2006, when the Liberals were voted out of office, Canada was 30 per cent over that target and as a result, Mr. Harper eventually withdrew Canada from the Kyoto agreement that had set binding targets. 
• In 2009, at the Copenhagen climate conference, Mr. Harper matched the U.S. target to cut GHG emissions by 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 30 per cent by 2013 in what is a non-binding agreement. 

​These remain the exact targets being used the Trudeau Liberal Government.
 
This leads to the question how are we doing today?

A question that was looked at by the “Perspectives on Climate Change Action in Canada” audit report. 
 
The answer?

From my perspective, not well.
 
To quote the report directly “Canada is not expected to meet its 2020 target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.” 
 
CBC also reported “As of 2015, the most recent year for which full statistics are available, Canada was nearly 200 million tonnes short of that goal, which is the equivalent of the emissions produced by about 44 million cars each year. That is twice the number of vehicles registered in Canada.”
 
The audit found that only five Provinces and one Territory even have a 2020 emission reduction target and of those, only Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were on track to meet those targets.
 
 It should also be pointed out that these same two Provinces also had the lowest targets. 
 
The report indicates that as much as this Liberal Government uses the talking point that “the environment and the economy go hand in hand”, in reality there are still trade-offs and Canada remains far from achieving our GHG emissions reduction targets. 
 
My question this week:

What do you think it means to say “The Economy and the Environment go hand in hand”?
 
I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free at 1-800-665-8711. 

The week, the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) released an analysis of the most recent Liberal Government budget. 

While sharp and measured non-partisan budget analysis is common from the PBO, one particular fact from the report has generated considerable attention on Parliament Hill.

The conclusion from the PBO was, and I quote it directly: 

“Budget 2018 provides an incomplete account of the changes to the Government’s $186.7 billion infrastructure spending plan. PBO requested the new plan but it does not exist. Roughly one-quarter of the funding allocated for infrastructure from 2016-17 to 2018-19 will lapse. Both legacy and new infrastructure programs are prone to large lapses.”

As I have mentioned in previous MP reports, it is not necessarily uncommon for some budgeted funds to lapse or to remain unspent for a variety of reasons. 

What is unique in this situation, is the finding from the PBO that an appropriate infrastructure plan does not exist at all. 

The Liberal Government has been subsequently asked about this in Question Period and to date has not provided any formal documented Infrastructure Plan.

This raises serious concerns on how $186 Billion is proposed to be borrowed and spent without a proper plan or how those funds are best invested for maximum return over the next twelve years.

After promising an Infrastructure Plan during the 2015 election, how can there be no plan in place?

This is a question only the Liberal Government can answer. 

A February 2018 analysis by the Globe & Mail newspaper indicated that Liberals may be playing old fashioned “pork barrel” type politics as 64% of infrastructure spending to date has been in areas of Canada where the Liberals are typically elected.

It would be interesting to submit an Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the Prime Minister’s office for more analysis on the political involvement in the decision making process.  However, despite the Prime Minister’s election promise that his own office and any Minister’s office would be fully subject to FOI/ATIP legislation, this has not occurred. 

For the record, I am not suggesting the Liberals are playing favoritism with how and where they fund infrastructure projects. Although the data from the Globe & Mail reporting raises some serious questions, there may well be legitimate answers. 

Where I do fault the Liberal Government is, without a proper and coherent Infrastructure Plan along with the ability to FOI supporting documents, Canadians are largely being left in the dark about this process and how it works.

Considering that it will be Canadians shouldering this $186 billion of debt, in my view, more information is required. 

My question this week is about transparency:

Do you believe this Liberal Government is living up to the transparency commitments they made during the election and does this concern you? 

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

This week’s report is a reminder that in a little over a month, April 30th, the majority of Canadians need to complete and file their 2017 Canada Income Tax returns to avoid potential late penalties.
 
There are a few changes this year that may be of interest to you and your family.
 
For those who file paper returns, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will be mailing you a 2017 income tax return package. In the event you do not receive one or would like to obtain a paper copy you can call 1-855-330-3305 to request one be mailed to you. 
 
Also, for those who need help preparing their Income Tax Return, CRA offers Income Tax Clinics for those with modest income and simple tax situations.
 
Please visit our website, www.danalbas.com, and click on '2018 Income Tax Clinics'  for more information. 
 
Some things to bear in mind as you begin the process; there are several former tax credits available in recent years that have been eliminated by the Liberal Government 
 
 Here is a list of the tax credit programs that no longer exist: 
  
• Federal Education and Textbook 
• Children’s Fitness 
• Children’s Arts 
• Public Transit 

​Although most of what has often been referred to as “boutique” tax credits were eliminated, the Government did introduce a new specialized tax credit that is available for this taxation year.

Called the “Teacher and Early Childhood Educator School Supply” tax credit. it is primarily for teachers when purchasing classroom materials. 
 
There have also been what I believe, largely positive changes to existing credits.

For example, the Canada Caregiver tax credit now streamlines the former Family Caregiver tax credit, and some changes have also been implemented to the Disability Tax Credit (DTC) and the Medical Expense Tax Credit programs. 
 
Actual income tax rates for the current year remain unchanged from last year.

As some will know, there have been studies to suggest Canadians are paying more in taxes as a result of the elimination of many family focused tax credits.

However, critics of those studies point out that Canada Child Benefit (CCB) program may potentially offset any taxation increases as a result of the elimination of the credits.
 
Who is correct?

In my view, it depends entirely on the situation.

As an example, someone who takes public transit with no children will be adversely impacted with the loss of the Public Transit tax credit. However, depending on their income, a family with three young children, who are not active in sports or arts programs, could come out significantly ahead as a result of the enhanced CCB program

My question this week:

Do you feel further ahead this year because of these changes or behind?  

Drop me a line and let me know.
 
I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free at 1-800-665-8711. 

​Last week, I wrote at length about Prime Minister Trudeau’s recent trip to India and addressed some of the criticisms that had been levied.

For example, there were allegations that the Prime Minister, and members of his cabinet, are sympathetic to radicalized operatives who support the Khalistan separatist movement in India.

At the time I wrote the report, I defended the Prime Minister and stated that I believed that Mr. Trudeau had attempted to refute these allegations and stated Canada’s long support for a united India. 

The day after, it was revealed that the Prime Minister had a guest invited to an official event who was convicted of an “an act of terrorism” after a failed attempt to assassinate an Indian cabinet Minister visiting Vancouver Island back in 1986.

The presence of this individual created an international uproar that led to the Prime Minister’s office engaging in damage control.

At one point Mr. Trudeau’s own, handpicked, National Security Advisor was put forward in a confidential news conference. Quoting from a reporter at the news conference, this high ranking National Security Official was “peddling what must be one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories ever advanced by a Canadian government” suggesting “That the terrorist invited by the Liberals to Mumbai, may have been planted there by the Indian government or maybe by Indian security agencies or perhaps by factions in the Indian government.”

Soon after this news conference, the Prime Minister and his office realized that the media were not buying into this unusual conspiracy so it was suggested that a lone Liberal MP from British Columbia was responsible for the invite. The Prime Minister solemnly assured Canadians that this MP would receive a stern talking to once back in Canada. 

Subsequently, this MP apologized, took responsibility and resigned his chairmanship of the BC Pacific Liberal Caucus.

This appeared to be the end of this sad and embarrassing situation until the Prime Minister was asked about the validity of the conspiracy theory in Question Period. 

To the surprise of many, Mr. Trudeau stated, while standing in the House of Commons, that when a National Security Official says something to Canadians, it's because they know it to be true.

In other words Mr.Trudeau doubled down and backed the conspiracy theory. 

To date, the Liberal Government has provided no evidence to substantiate this serious international accusation.

In an almost unprecedented event, the Indian Government issued an official response denying the allegations in their entirety and by extension questioned the credibility of  Prime MinisterTrudeau.

Since that time, numerous pictures of the convicted terrorist have been circulating that show the individual and Mr. Trudeau together at various points in time.

Serious concerns remain, yet to be answered by Mr.Trudeau or his Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale.

As a result, the Opposition tabled a motion at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (known as SECU) to meet with Mr.Trudeau’s National Security Adviser and learn more about this alleged conspiracy theory. 

Unfortunately, the Liberal members of this committee used their majority to block this motion. 

Given that the former head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service has also cast doubt on Mr.Trudeau’s conspiracy theory, many are deeply concerned over this lack of transparency that directly question the credibility of Prime Minister Trudeau.

My question this week:

How do you view the outcome of Mr. Trudeau’s trip to India given these recent developments?

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