Mary Poppins sang a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.
Dressed in his governess' best, Stephen Harper is hoping bags of sweetness will help Canadians choke down his buckets of snake oil.
Last Thursday, the Tory prime minister made good on his government's long-awaited promise on income splitting, a social-conservative tax cut so widely reviled for its unabashed pandering to the wealthy even Harper's former longtime finance minister Jim Flaherty said, "I'm not sure that, overall, it benefits our society."
The plan is inspired by the hardest of right-wing thinking that sees Canadian tax law as a gaping injustice to privileged families. According to Jason Heath, a two-income family in Ontario where both parents earn $50,000 pays around $17,388 in income tax; the same family, where one parent earns $100,000, pays around $26,440. To make sure the six-figure earner pays less, the Tories would allow the second family to split or share up to $50,000 for tax purposes, thus taking them to a lower bracket and allowing them to pay less tax if they had kids under the age of 18.
There is an issue of fairness here, just one the Tories, except for Flaherty, didn't want to talk about: according to various pundits, only the richest 15 per of Canadian families, who typically fit the Tories preferred reality of well-to-do husband and stay-at-home mom, would receive $1,100-$5,000 in tax breaks; the remaining 85 per cent of families - single parents, those struggling on two incomes - get zero.
It is actually a bit of an albatross for the Conservatives - Harper was stuck between disappointing his hard-C, Mayberry base by reneging on income splitting and attempting to convince Canadians he wasn't shoveling their money into the already stuffed pockets of his well-heeled supporters. So, on Thursday, he did a bit more income splitting - he put a cap on the income splitting benefit of $2,000, then boosted the Tories' Universal Child Care Benefit to $160 a month from $100 for each child under six and added another monthly cheque of $60 for each child between six and 17.
In effect, Harper somewhat eased his enormous tax cut for rich families, then gave all families - including the rich families - more money for their kids to distract from the cashout he'd given the privileged. It's like Christmas and Boxing Day, except it's only Christmas for the 15 per cent and the servants and their betters share the presents on Boxing Day.
According to the National Post's John Ivison, income splitting will eventually cost $2 billion a year and the childcare extension will consume $4.5 billion annually. Estimated total cost of this season of giving: a combined $26.7 billion, over six years, through 2019-20.
From a purely fiscal point, for a government that so prides itself on caring for the public purse, the timing of the cut is reckless: according to the Canadian Press, last week the Bank of Canada warned persistent low oil prices could significantly hurt the country's GDP in 2015 - between oil weakness and Harper's tax cuts, next year's $5 billion surplus could be wiped out.
But one of the ugliest parts of this profligacy is that every dollar spent on the tax cut is a dollar taken from elsewhere: wounded veterans, improving the lot of aboriginals, environmental protection, a national daycare system, health care. The list of better uses is endless.
The current municipal election provides ready examples. Want the feds to help out building a performing arts centre? Sorry, that money is going to pay the electricity bill on someone's walk-in humidor. Think crumbling infrastructure is a problem? Unfortunately the purchase of a back-up polo pony is a more pressing concern.
The worst aspect of Harper's goodies is he no doubt knows all of this criticism, all of these risks and has discounted all of them. He knows income splitting partly caters to the most anachronistic, most reactionary parts of his party, factions overjoyed to see women discouraged from entering into the workforce; who, like Conservative pundit Lawrence Solomon, think it would result in "fewer women... would be abandoned singles, fewer... men would be footloose and irresponsible." He knows it is policy that gives the most to the most comfortable - traditional, nuclear families at the cost of depriving those who need relief the most.
It is a dividing approach to this country, one predicated on creating a split between the Canadians who enjoy Harper's favour and everyone else. The prime minister is banking his favourites will reward him with not just votes but political contributions and volunteer time, the lifeblood of a campaign ground game. He'll then take enough of those families happy with their child care cash and leave the rest for the Liberals and NDP to squabble over.
As Ivison writes: "Few governments have been booted from office for overestimating the self-interest of the electorate." Last week's income splitting announcement wasn't a kneejerk, desperate spasm from Stephen Harper - it's the culmination of a political strategy he's cultivated since the 2011 election. It is the embodiment of what he thinks Canada is - and he's prime minister because he knows this is what his people want.
