Saskatchewan Finance Minister Andrew Thompson is mighty peeved that his province has been guaranteed zero dollars in federal transfer payments next year. Alberta, B.C. and Ontario — the ‘have’ provinces — are also guaranteed ‘zero’ dollars in transfer payments. Thompson was on CTV’s Question Period this morning. Here’s the exchange between Thompson and co-host Craig Oliver:
CRAIG OLIVER: Those of us who've spent a certain number of years in Saskatchewan in our lives probably never thought we'd see the day when Saskatchewan would be considered one of the rich provinces. No longer a have not province. And that is, along with Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario. However, the province there isn't at all happy about this because it has meant that the federal government has cut off their equalization. And to come up with that formula, they've included the money Saskatchewan is getting from its natural resources. We're joined now by Andrew Thompson, who is the Finance Minister of the province. So, what's the problem? I mean some people would say you should be happy that you're no longer a have-not.
ANDREW THOMPSON: We're happy. We're happy being a have province. Our concern is that the Prime Minister is breaking his word and not keeping his promise to the Saskatchewan people, which was to take the non-renewable natural resource, these resource that will deplete over a generation. He's including them in the equalization formula. Taking the money out of Saskatchewan and spending it elsewhere. All we're saying is let's spend that money that's generated in Saskatchewan in Saskatchewan so we can change our economy so we become a true have province.
OLIVER: So you're getting nothing, but Quebec is getting something like $2 billion [more]. They also have an energy sector in terms of hydro power. Do you feel that you are being discriminated against or there's favouritism being shown to Quebec for obvious political reasons?
THOMPSON: I think our fear is that this is what it will be seen as, is that they're going to use the western oil money to essentially buy votes in Quebec. We all know that this is a government very fixated on how it can get re-elected. They believe that they can take the votes in the western part of the country for granted, and they're obviously focused on how they can gain more seats in other provinces, Ontario and Quebec. The concern that we have is we have a very clear promise from the Prime Minister that he would not do this. Now he and Minister Flaherty appear to be reneging on it . . .
OLIVER: The danger being, let's be clear about this, that in the western provinces, the old anger starts against Quebec getting all kinds of breaks that the west isn't getting again.
THOMPSON: I think the bigger concern is that the old anger against Ottawa will start again. We've seen this before. Trudeau tried this with the national energy program. We tried this. This was the fight Lougheed had with them a generation ago. Chretien managed to find a way to do it with these equalization agreements, and Harper seems quite happy to be continuing on. This is not what Stephen Harper promised Canadians, and especially not what he promised western Canadians.
OLIVER: At one point the Conservatives were doing quite well in Saskatchewan. They want to do well there again. Do you believe this is going to hurt their chances in your province?
THOMPSON: I can tell you voters are mad. They're very angry about it. In the last election, when we looked at the three parties' programs, our NDP government said the best deal for Saskatchewan is the one the Conservatives were offering. We said that publicly. They made a big deal out of it. Now they're reneging on it. And I can tell you my sense is voters are mad about this, and it may well cost them seats in Saskatchewan and in the west.
Now, earlier in the show, Jane Taber had interviewed Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Here’s that’s exchange:
TABER: You have informed the provinces that you're going to boost, for instance, Quebec's share by one billion dollars and, while Saskatchewan, for instance, is now a have province, you have said, and it's not going to get any equalization money at all, which, of course, is angering Saskatchewan. Are you showing favouritism? Is your government showing favouritism to Quebec because you need the votes there?
FLAHERTY: No, not at all, and you know I was kind of surprised at the reaction of some of my colleagues, Finance Ministers in Canada, to this, because they know that all this letter was that I sent out earlier in the week before I came to China was a letter saying here's the floor for equalization. Here's legally all we can pay this year until we get the budget and so on and new authorization. They wanted to know that. They asked me for that at our meeting in Vancouver on December 15th, so they now have the floor. That's not the end of the story. That's the floor for equalization this year, as I made very clear in my letter to all of them. But I think it also should be remembered that one of the goals of equalization, one of the good things is for have not provinces to become have provinces. And when they became have provinces, that's actually something to celebrate rather than to feel poorly about.
TABER: Well I don't think your counterpart in Saskatchewan, Andrew Thompson, is actually celebrating right now, Mr. Flaherty. He's going to
be on after this interview. What do you say to [him]?FLAHERTY: Andrew and I have some vigorous discussions about this issue, as he does with his colleagues in the other provinces. There is not consensus among the provinces on the issue, and at the end of the day, in the absence of consensus, it's the constitutional responsibility of the government of Canada to make determinations about equalization and to make sure that that happens equitably across Canada. I think we all agree, fundamentally, as Canadians that we want reasonably comparable social services across Canada. And I think that's fundamental that all of us join in that commitment, and then we have to sort out how that works best on a principled long-term basis, not on an ad-hoc as to be changed basis every year.
TABER: Okay. You don't think then, you don't agree with my assessment, or some peoples' assessment that there's, there's favouritism being shown to Quebec with this one billion dollar boost?
FLAHERTY: No, absolutely not. And I think one thing that is a reality in Canada is that Quebec is in the have not, the receiving category with respect to equalization, and the population of Quebec is quite large, sowhen you multiply the number on a per capita basis in Quebec, the number, of course, is quite large because Quebec has a substantial population, the largest population among the equalization-receiving provinces.