DATE: 2003.10.14
EDITION: Final
SECTION: OPINION
PAGE: A7
SOURCE: Ottawa Citizen
EDITORIAL
VOICES FROM ACROSS
CANADA: Clearing up user fees
In the People's Republic of China, after they execute
you, they charge your family for
the bullet. Here in Canada, government user fees are not that extreme. But Liberal
MP
Roy Cullen is still right to try to control the federal government's habit of
forcing people
to do things, then making them pay for the privilege.
Mr. Cullen's private member's bill would force government
departments to publish lists
of the fees they charge, explain what services are given in return and how long
it will
take to deliver them and, if they miss their target by 10 per cent or more,
force them to
give a refund. Unlike most private member's bills, Bill C-212 was passed by
the House
of Commons despite government opposition. The Senate should also approve it.
Government's main job is to provide only those benefits
for which it is impossible to
charge; for instance, you can't provide national defence only to those who have
bought
invasion insurance. It should also provide some services, such as garbage collection,
that could be done privately but where the "transaction cost" of everyone
arranging it
privately would be excessive relative to the benefits.
The current situation is unfair because if, say,
drug testing is a true public service we all
benefit from, then there is no cause to charge the firms. Likewise, airport
security (or
passports) exists to protect the nation, not the individual traveller. And it's
counterproductive to overcharge "companies" to spare citizens because
any money
extracted from them actually comes from their customers through higher prices,
their
employees through lower wages and their shareholders through lower dividends.
Requiring departments to publish their user fees
is an elementary piece of government
transparency. So is requiring departments to say what services people will get
for
paying those fees. And requiring them to provide the promised service on time
is a way
of insisting that fees are justifiable.
Bill C-212 won't solve all the problems associated
with government user fees. But it
would make government more honest at virtually no cost. Canadians should not
allow
the government to let it pass unmolested through the House, then shoot it using
the
Senate as a silencer. After all, they'll be paying for the bullet. ====
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2003.10.04
EDITION: National
SECTION: Editorials
PAGE: A15
SOURCE: National Post
Cullen's coup
It is rare thing in Ottawa when a private member's
bill becomes law. Even when one
does, the subject is almost always something minor, like designating the beaver
a
national symbol. A little-noticed piece of legislation passed in the House of
Commons
last week by Liberal MP Roy Cullen stands as a notable -- and welcome -- exception.
Mr. Cullen's bill, C-212, would bring accountability
to the $4-billion the federal
government collects annually through user fees. We have no problem with user
fee
programs per se -- especially the so-called "cost recovery programs"
that charge for
services resulting in private benefit, such as the approval of new drugs for
pharmaceutical companies. The problem is that there isn't always a connection
between
the fee Ottawa charges and the purported benefit received. In the case of drug
approvals, for instance, many companies wonder what they're paying for: The
Canadian
approval process can be painfully slow, often twice as long as in the United
Sates and
the European Union.
Mr. Cullen's bill would address that problem by creating
an independent dispute
resolution process for umbraged fee-payers; giving Parliamentary committees
rather
than government departments control over introducing or changing fee schedules;
and,
most importantly, forcing departments to give back some of the fees they collect
if they
miss previously-set time targets by 10% or more. These are all great ideas:
They will
help introduce market-style accountability -- and, hopefully, market-style value
-- to
government-mandated fees.
Predictably, the Liberal brass in Ottawa opposed
Bill C-212 and are apparently still
trying to put the kibosh on it. The fact that Mr. Cullen's bill has progressed
at least this
far helps us retain some faith in our parliamentary system. ====
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2003.09.30
EDITION: National
SECTION: Financial Post: News
PAGE: FP04
BYLINE: Ian Jack
SOURCE: Financial Post
DATELINE: OTTAWA
NOTE: ijack@nationalpost.com
Bill on $4B paid to Ottawa almost law
OTTAWA - A private member's bill that would force
the government to justify the
$4-billion in fees it charges for services -- and to refund part of the money
if it doesn't
meet its own performance standards -- is just one step from becoming law.
The bill championed by Roy Cullen, a Liberal MP from
Toronto, passed through the
House of Commons yesterday, a rare accomplishment since the government not only
did not support the bill but until recently actively campaigned against it.
Bills introduced
by backbench MPs rarely get passed, especially those that deal with the way
the
government operates as opposed to ones naming a national horse or other no-cost
initiatives.
Mr. Cullen's bill, which must be approved by the
Senate, requires government
departments to publish lists of their user fees and how long they will take
to perform
functions such as evaluating drugs for market or supplying icebreakers for the
Great
Lakes.
Departments that miss their own target by 10% or
more will have to give back a portion
of the fee they collected for the service. Parliamentary committees will also
have the
right to review charges, which will have to be benchmarked against similar fees
charged
by Canada's trading partners.
"It's not that complicated. These are services
that should be paid for, but at the same
time people have the right to know what they're paying for and to get the service
they
need," Mr. Cullen said.
The last time the bill came up for debate, the government
lined up loyal Liberal MPs to
argue against it, but yesterday did nothing. Mr. Cullen said about 20 Liberal
MPs had
told him privately they would support the bill regardless of how they were told
to vote,
and he suspects the government did not want the embarrassment of losing a recorded
vote on the bill that had been scheduled for tomorrow.
Liberal MPs are showing increasing signs of independence
as the power of the Chretien
government wanes in its dying days.
"It was an amazingly courageous act from our
side," he said. "I think members stood up
to the government and said, 'this policy is wrong and it has to get fixed.'
"
A coalition of business groups has been lobbying
for years for changes, saying they are
willing to pay but want a service guarantee in return. Otherwise, the fee is
simply a tax, a
point the coalition has been making to government for years without success.
The government has struggled to provide good service,
because when it introduced cost
recovery to help combat the deficit in the mid-1990s it also laid off workers.
The Commons finance committee heard testimony about
Singulair, an asthma drug
developed by Merck Frosst Canada Ltd. in Montreal. It was submitted for approval
to
both Canadian and U.S. authorities in 1997, but it took Canadian authorities
over 100
working days more to approve it. The brand-name drug companies say they have
paid
$100-million over the past decade for drug evaluations.
The government collects about $4-billion in
fees from Canadians annually, but some of
that is for passports, park entrances and other personal services. Mr. Cullen
said he has
been unable to get a clear answer from his own government as to how much money
comes from businesses, but the coalition has estimated at least half. ====
| PUBLICATION: | Windsor Star |
| DATE: | 2003.08.20 |
| EDITION: | Final |
| SECTION: | NEWS |
| PAGE: | A6 |
| BYLINE: | Mark Kennedy CanWest News Service |
| SOURCE: | CanWest News Service |
| DATELINE: | North Bay, Ont.RACE; COMMENTS |
| ILLUSTRATION: | Paul Martin; Jean Chretien |
The man expected to be Canada's next prime minister has delivered a backhanded swipe at Jean Chretien's handling of the federal response to the Ontario blackout last week.
Paul Martin, speaking to reporters on Tuesday, was notably lukewarm saying only: "I think that the prime minister handled this exactly the way that he saw fit. That's his judgment call."
The comment by Martin capped days of questions about Chretien's whereabouts and role when the lights went out last Thursday.
The prime minister stayed off the nation's television screens at his cottage near Shawinigan where he directed Ottawa's response and talked to U.S. President George Bush. He praised Canadians for their patience during the blackout to reporters in Shawinigan during a brief public appearance Saturday.
That left Defence Minister John McCallum, Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham and Natural Resources Minister Herb Dhaliwal speaking for the government.
McCallum added to public confusion on Thursday night by speculating that the possible cause of the blackout was a fire at a nuclear reactor in Pennsylvania.
Dhaliwal, famous for calling Bush a failed statesman on Iraq, was named to a joint Canada-U.S. task force that is seeking answers and solutions to North America's worst-ever power outage.
The federal response has been slammed by opposition politicians and some members of the prime minister's Liberal caucus, but on Tuesday MPs were more muted.
"He does work behind the scenes looking for results. I was a little disappointed that we got the facts wrong when we first came out. And that caused a lot of anxiety that wasn't necessary. In fairness, it's always a balance. If you come out too late, then someone will say 'Where is the government?' said Toronto area MP Roy Cullen.
| PUBLICATION: | Toronto Star |
| DATE: | 2003.08.13 |
| SECTION: | NEWS |
| PAGE: | B01 |
| SOURCE: | Toronto Star |
| BYLINE: | Neco Cockburn and Cal Millar Staff Reporters |
| ILLUSTRATION: | Andrew Stawicki/toronto star Baydan Farah, 13, catches hersister Aisha, 7, as she falls off her rollerblades at the housing development on Jamestown Cres. where four men were shot Saturday night. Mark Robbins, below, watches yesterday's police news conference, while Dahir Asia and her baby Adam, bottom, look on. |
Some residents doubt police
Even before television cameras started rolling at a Jamestown Cres. news conference yesterday, it was clear residents were divided about how the event would stem violence in the community.
Some of them believed the conference, held by police and area politicians in the wake of a drive-by shooting during a 4-year-old's birthday party on Saturday, was a publicity stunt. Others hoped it was a sign that officials were genuinely interested in cleaning up the area.
In the end, police announced they have adopted a "zero tolerance" policy against violence and crime plaguing the northern Etobicoke neighbourhood, and have started beefing up uniform and undercover officers to target criminals in the area.
The news conference was prompted by a shooting last Saturday night that Superintendent Ron Taverner, commanding officer of the Toronto police division in the area, described as a gun battle virtually out of the Wild West.
"It's the rogues and thugs that are coming into these areas that are causing the problem," he said yesterday, adding they will be "weeded out" as part of the new zero tolerance.
During the birthday party, four men were wounded by gunfire. Police found more than 30 spent cartridges on the ground.
The incident was the culmination of a wave of violence that has rocked the housing complex in the Kipling Ave. and Albion Rd. area for the past 18 months.
Over that period there have been a number of slayings, but most remain unsolved, because, police say, residents have not come forward with information to help investigators make arrests.
About the latest shootings, Taverner said detectives have few leads. "We've received very little in the way of information," he said during the news conference. "In fact, even our victims are uncooperative. It speaks volumes as to the problem." Standing on the sidewalk a short distance from the courtyard where the latest shootings occurred, Taverner urged residents to start working with police to make the neighbourhood safe.
At times, Taverner and others were met with loud criticism and questions from the crowd. Many voiced frustration and anger, some of it directed at the sudden media attention the area is getting.
One resident asked if the police will remain in the complex after the news cameras have gone.
Taverner promised the initiative will continue indefinitely.
"We're committed to make a difference," Taverner said. "We are committed to redeploying people and bringing them in to make a significant difference."
Taverner said police patrols were beefed up as of Monday night to improve safety in the Jamestown Cres. area that runs off John Garland Blvd., just west of Kipling Ave. He said additional personnel are being brought in to target criminals.
The crackdown in the Jamestown area is one of the first initiatives launched since a call last week by police Chief Julian Fantino for a new crackdown on street violence.
The chief held a news conference shortly after an emergency meeting with his senior officers to announce more police officers will be added to the guns and gangs task force to track down violent criminals.
Fantino demanded the crackdown after three young people died in separate slayings across the city and police were pelted with bottles and insulted by angry crowds while giving aid to four people wounded in shooting incidents on Yonge St. between Gerrard St. and College St. two weekends ago.
The officers who responded to the shooting at Saturday's birthday party were also met by a hostile crowd, according to Fantino, although residents have said their anger wasn't directed at police, but at the response time of emergency crews.
Taverner said police will start going door to door encouraging people to give information about last Saturday's shooting and any other crime, as well as encouraging people to call Crime Stoppers if they don't want to get directly involved with the police.
"It's important we come together as a community, the police, the clergy, the politicians and the community groups ... and try to solve these issues," he said.
Etobicoke North Liberal MP Roy Cullen said he was outraged by the Saturday night incident and voiced support for the actions being taken by police to end the violence.
"In a civilized society that we have in Canada this simply can't be tolerated," he said.
The Toronto councillor for the area, Suzan Hall (Ward1, Etobicoke North), agreed additional police patrols are needed, but said the city must make improvements in the community to provide young people with a range of activities, including sports and playground equipment.
"If youth are involved in positive activities they are not getting in trouble," she said.
Hall urged people to take ownership of the community and cooperate with police to help solve crime.
She also advocated the use of surveillance cameras in the area.
The issue of security cameras sparked bickering between residents concerned about privacy, and those who viewed it as a major step in catching criminals in the area.
Wayne Lewis, a Hopes Are High community leader, described the Jamestown complex as a tough neighbourhood.
But he said residents as a whole have respect for police.
"We care about them," he said.
"When we are in need those are the ones we call."
Margaret Spiteri said she was optimistic.
"I believe that things will resolve," she said, adding she thinks community groups are beginning to have an influence on decision-makers.
Others were saddened that it's taken so long for police and public officials to pay attention to the neighbourhood's difficulties.
"This should have happened years ago," one woman said.
One resident was just happy that his neighbours were out talking about the community's problems publicly.
"It's good to see people out there voicing themselves," said Mark Robbins, who added it was a relief to see yesterday's police presence.
Down the street, a group of women sat in the courtyard, close to where the shooting occurred.
"We'll see," one of them said.
"We're gonna give them a week, and see what happens."'We are committed to redeploying people and bringing them in to make a significant difference.'