The Hair, in his role as benevolent prime minister, was in Vaughan, Ontario the other day. The Hair and a large group of affluent looking Conservative families were there to tell the news media of the benefits voters can get by being married, having a big income, voting Conservative and having children. The Hair has this ‘June Cleaver’ image of marriage where the little woman stays home raising children and her man goes out in the world to earn to earn a living for both of them. Nobody has the heart to tell The Hair that times have changed.
The Conservatives have been promising for quite a few years now that when they got Canada’s budget deficit wrestled down to nothing, they would let rich couples with children share up to $50,000 of their income when one spouse does not earn as much as the other. That way, the couple can save up to $2000 in taxes each year.
On top of this largess from The Hair, he is increasing the child care expense deduction for wealthy Canadians with children next year. And if you cannot afford to buy your kids expensive hockey gear never fear, The Hair has a bribe for you too.
The Universal Child Care Benefit (the successor to our famous Canadian Baby Bonus) will be increased by $60 per month next year for children aged five or under. In addition, children from 6 to 17 will be eligible for a $60 per month handout from our taxes. This increase does not keep up with inflation but the Conservatives want to trumpet it anyway.
It does not seem to be a coincidence that these new Baby Bonus payments will start in July next year just a couple months before The Hair is supposed to be calling the October General Election.
If you are confused by all of these figures, you can just ask your accountant what it all means. If you do not have an accountant, you probably do not earn enough money for the income splitting or tax credits to matter.
Of course, in Vaughan, The Hair only showed off the Conservative view of the nuclear family. There were no same sex partners raising a child in this group. The Hair knows better than to rub Conservative noses in that.
And he was certainly not announcing these benefits in the House of Commons. Those other parties might have asked embarrassing questions. They might have also pointed out how discriminatory and unfair these benefits are as they mainly benefit people who do not need the money.
-30-
Copyright 2014 © Peter Lowry
Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]