Join the new world

Ultimately it is all about choices. Do we want a visionary, an autocrat, a reactionary, a status quo candidate... all of the above, none.

The purpose of the Presidency is first and foremost to provide leadership. It is through the CP candidate's agenda that the debate will be framed. Part of it comes from the team assembled, the skills and knowledge they bring to the table. Part of it comes from the focus, if any, whether it be domestic or international.

Finally, due the recent (and not so recent) history for Canada, it comes to trust. Not just trust that your candidates will not rob you blind but the trust that they will do exactly what they promised to do. The trust that if something is wrong, that they will show the willingness to adapt and make it better. Admit, if need be, that they were wrong so that disaster will not strike.

As your CP candidate I have only one goal, to leave the country better on my last day in office than it was on my first. During my first term I achieved exactly that. It's called progress. Could I have done more? Absolutely. Did my first term last year have areas that needed work? Again, undeniably so.

I have to tell you and be honest, I still have many of those same flaws. I still have those same strengths though and something much more important, experience.

Economy.

There is a big debate right now on which is better. Income tax vs. VAT tax. Here is the hard truth, there is no right answer to this one.

Income tax is an easy tax that is predictable and reliable. VAT tax fluctuates with consumption. If the earning and spending power of Canadians is high, the VAT rises. When they save or refuse to buy on local markets, VAT sinks and the treasury is not earning as much.

Here is a second truth. High levels of either tax will cause citizens to go abroad. Each side will try to convince you otherwise but if you are losing a large part of your salary to income tax, you may choose to work international since there is no longer any restriction on that. If VAT is too high, you may decide the savings are too tempting and buy your goods in another country.

Finally, every country in the New World suffers from a plague called overproduction. Canadians earn on average $35,587 a day in wages (this is an estimate based on the average offers for jobs as well as observation of the changes in treasury). Those same Canadians produce on average $81,238 worth of goods. That means that even if we were to spend every penny, every day, we would still only consume 44% of what we create.

To have a truly healthy economy, we need to find a way to export that remaining 56% production. How do we do that? Through all three taxes, income, VAT and import.

The first step is already well on the way and that is lowering the income tax bracket. We could lower it all the way to 1% and leave the choice entirely to Canadians. However I believe that things like military spending, although sometimes controversial, is something that is supported by a majority of citizens. So I proposed a continued lowering to around 3% income tax. Every dollar saved in income tax is a dollar earned in spending power.

Second I advocate a gradual rise of the VAT to 8%. Yes, all things being the same, the price tag on items would go up. Remember though that income tax will be lowered too and therefore your ability to pay for that good will increase. For food the proportion of your salary to pay for one unit will be better by 1.5%. For weapons 6.9%. For houses, you will be able to afford them a quarter of the time sooner.

The net result will be a lowering of the ability of the treasury to generate revenue short term, remember that overproduction issue. The way we fix that is by making our industries more efficient and our competitive edge as an exporter higher. We are no longer a resource powerhouse but we have an older and very skilled workforce. Therefore we should direct more effort towards making our manufacturing sector strong.

The way to do that is tailoring the tax system (through income and import) to direct workforce away from raw producing sectors that are not competitive (without killing) towards those that are. It is encouraging foreign investment in sectors we are weaker while protecting those that are of most national value and building where we can outperform.

This process will take time and some parts of it will be a little painful but long term, it will lead to a more efficient and profitable economy. One which will generate more income, take in more foreign money to our benefit and ensure Canadians always have a competitive edge when it comes to earning power.

Population health and growth.

I believe that the role of Government is to return as much as possible to the people. Right now that is mostly true with the military and not much else. The occasional charity effort which is usually the work of individuals and groups not affiliated with the administration.

That is why I plan to re-introduce a Canada Health program. In conjunction with Congress, the goal would be to make short term contracts with grain and food company for the express and narrow goal of generating health for new citizens or those that find themselves in need.

The way it would work is that 15 day contracts would be agreed to between owners and Government where the business is subsidized to generate x amount of food. Part of the agreement would be for the owners to pay above market wages to their workers during this time while they take on the roles of "doctors" (health care workers).

How much would this plan cost? On average $7,200 per health contract. How much health (food) would it generate? On average almost 18,900 health.

Companies would only be eligible to bid once per month on these contracts. During my term, I would run a pilot project for this.

Another important role of Government is the shepherd its population. That means, amongst other things, growing it. I will not promise you a baby boom. If one happens, it will be to all our benefit but I do not have the resources to manufacture one.

What I propose is that under the leadership of a Minister of Immigration, that we will go and actively recruit citizens. Those that choose to come will then be given grants to make their lives easier on the day they receive citizenship. After one week. After one month. Provided of course that they remain active, that they remain employed at a Canadian company and that they live in Canada.

Each person would be subjected to immigration audits (non-invasive, easy check) to ensure compliance. All candidates would still have to undergo usual CSIS examination as it would be nonsensical to pay to have our country infiltrated.

Further to this we hope that our active and directed economy would attract and retain new citizens and we will have staff dedicated to integrating these new arrivals.

International.

We live in interesting times when it comes to alliances. Once more we seem to have attained the end of a cycle in the beginning of a new one. Canada under my leadership and that of my chosen Minister of Foreign affairs, will be an active participant. We will maintain the close contact we have developed over time with friendly nations while at the same time actively search for new opportunities.

Traditionally we have been pretty good about observing our alliance dues and being a good friend. Equally so, we have taken a more passive approach to neutral and opposed regimes (with notable changes recently which is a move in the right direction).

Part of the mandate you would be giving me by voting me into office would be to negotiate new partnerships, both military and economical. Although it won't always be possible, it should be our goal to diversify our resources as much as possible. It should also be our goal to always punch higher than our weight class and that means strong alliances.

Cabinet.

So who would be coming with me along for the ride? What is the team you would be voting for?

There are still some position to be confirmed but I am ready to announce a cabinet and it would look like this:

Vice President and Minister of Finance: Etemenanki.

Why? Etemenanki is the person I leaned on the most in my first term. I trust him implicitly and I need his expertise when it comes to planning the budget and keeping an eye out on the shifting results of our tax reforms. Why the two roles? Each of the members of my team will be encouraged to participate in all facets of Government but for things not to devolve into chaos, you need strong leads. Etemenanki will be that lead on the economy.

Minister of Defense: Kronos Q.

Why? Kronos is already a high profile Canadian that has months of hard work for the benefit of all of us under his belt. Some of the changes I'm proposing will pose challenges to organizations like the CAF and TCO. I believe Kronos can earn their trust (already has it) and more importantly he has my full confidence that we can make the adjustments necessary to have all this work.

Alliance representative and director of strategic operations: Chucky Norris.

Why? Fancy title but all that it implies is that Chucky showed to me just how invaluable he was the first time I worked with him. He is an ex-CP, long-time CAF leader and has the trust of many important people internationally. He understand the current of New World politics and most importantly, has a firm grasp of strategy and the role the military must play. I will be looking for him to continue providing leadership so that Canada does not steer wrong in our dealings with our allies.

Ministers of Health and Immigration: Nathan Slater & Kilgor Trout 89.

Why? Or why two ministers to share these duties? For one thing, they will be the two offices with the most potential red tape. It is always easier to deal with this type of challenge as a team. Kilgore is a Canadian thinker that I highly respect. I've worked with him in the past in the TCO and I know he can successfully lead any group he is put in charge of. Most importantly, he will not hesitate to improvise and improve if he feels the need to. Nathan Slater shows equal enthusiasm and initiative. For these two departments to work, I need to have people that want to be there. Nathan is most assuredly one of the readiest Canadians to help.

Director of CSIS: Marcchelala.

Why? Experience and continuity. I would not ask for a different Director and when I decided to campaign in earnest, I asked Marc if he would continue on. He responded with an unequivocal yes. Canada is lucky to have such a long serving public servant.

My cabinet is not complete yet. There are two important roles to fill, one for Canada, one for me. The first is the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The second is my Chief of Staff/Intergovernmental Minister. I have some definitive candidates for these two positions which I will share with the public ASAP.

Conclusion.

This is not a campaign without risk and it is not a platform without change. It is a platform that offers choice however. That choice is twofold... one, it puts more money back into the pockets of every single Canadian so that they may choose how they will spend it and where it will go. It offers a choice as well as a nation how we want to go forward. The status quo is a known quantity with all the risks we have seen over the months (i.e. theft). Progress has its own risks but if implemented successfully would lead to new and exciting possibilities.

Thank you Canada.