It was good for the party to hear some uncomfortable truths, in particular that the party is in danger of losing its soul.

At the satellite event in London on Saturday, organized by Doug Ferguson and Glen Pearson, I argued that policy should be our priority. I know that some voters aren't interested in the details of policy, but I reject the idea that people don't care or are too stupid to understand policy. Political parties, and especially party decision-makers, hide behind these two excuses when they fail to persuade voters or their execution is poor. These same folks think it is a good idea to withhold the details of a policy platform until the writ is dropped, expecting Canadians to hear about, consider and support a wide range of policy proposals in just a few weeks. We need to break this cycle.

We have to look no further than the dramatic rise of the Green Party of Canada to see the attraction a focus on policy first has for ordinary Canadians.

Recently, I was nominated for an Action Canada fellowship. Unfortunately, I just heard that I wasn't selected for an interview. But the application process prompted me to focus on the fellowship theme -- Economic Transformations -- and put forward a few policy proposals.

Canada @ 150 was a very good event in many ways, but it is just one important part of our policy development process. We need to build on this success and flesh out a serious, practical policy platform.

I believe in the importance of productivity (of both labour and capital) to our prosperity. The folks at the Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity have produced a series of good reports on the topic. I believe education and competition are essential to productivity.

Existing policy instruments designed to increase productivity -- an accelerated capital cost allowance (CCA) for investments in machinery and equipment, for example -- operate through the income tax system and are targeted at for-profit companies. This is reasonable, as for-profit companies account for the majority of Canada's GDP. But public sector organizations, non-profits and charities aren't influenced by these policy instruments, as they don't pay income taxes.

My first idea is to provide an enhanced donation tax credit to donors who designate gifts to productivity-enhancing expenditures, such as skills upgrading and training of employees, purchases of computers, software and other technology/equipment. Specifically, I proposed a 200 per cent donation tax credit multiplier for gifts to registered charities that are designated to productivity-enhancing investments. I now believe it needs to be even higher -- say 250 per cent. For example, the tax credit for a $10,000 donation to a charity that was designated to an eligible expenditure would be 2.5 x 29% (highest existing federal tax credit) = 72.5% or $7,250. The net cost to the donor would therefore be $2,750. Such a policy instrument could allow the approximately 80,000 charities in Canada to benefit from increased productivity gains. By aligning with existing tax measures regarding eligible expenditures, the marginal cost of monitoring and enforcement would be minimized.

On the education front, I put forward two ideas for PSE:

• We need more competition in PSE. By increasing by proportion of institutional funding that comes from students (ie tuition) while increasing grants available to low-income students, more of the funds directed to PSE would follow the student without impairing access. PSE institutions would necessarily have to further differentiate themselves from each other and compete on the basis of quality.
• Remove disincentives in provincial funding formulas for universities that discourage year-round education, especially co-op education. The summer break is a throwback to an economy based on agriculture, and I doubt we would design a PSE system on that basis if we were starting with a blank slate. The status quo funding model for universities encourages inefficient use of capital (more and larger buildings to handle Fall/Winter enrolment peaks) and less labour (fewer professors and instructors) because operating funding is allocated on the basis of full-time equivalent enrolment without regard for how enrolment is distributed throughout the year or how capital stock is utilized. University of Waterloo is a good example of a university that has succeeded despite these disincentives.

We also need to increase competition, especially by reducing barriers to competition such as unduly long or restrictive protection of intellectual property. The Competition Policy Review Panel rightly identified this as an important issue, but seems to give priority to protecting rightsholders rather than users of intellectual property. Rightsholders have a strong financial incentive to erect barriers to competition for as long as possible. Canada should balance the private interests of rightsholders and the need for reasonable protection of intellectual property with the longer-term public benefits of strong competition, individual freedom and rapid adoption of new technology and ideas. We need to get this right in order to attract and retain highly skilled, creative workers.

Fiscal situation: Don't worry, be happy! No major cuts to spending or increases in revenue. Commitment to "protecting growth in transfers that directly benefit Canadians, such as pensions, health care and education." So what is left over? The 2008-2009 public accounts provide a bit of a guide, although the 2009-2010 accounts will show where the stimulus spending has been allocated. The 2008-2009 public accounts breakdown expenditures as follows:

• Major transfers to persons (25.8%), major transfers to other governments (19.5%), other transfer payments (12.6%) and public debt charges (13.0%).
• This leaves operating/ministries (25.7%) and crown corporations (3.7%) as areas for potential spending freezes/reductions.
• National defence by itself accounts for $18.6 of $69.1 billion (or 27%) of the total operating category (excluding its small portion of other transfer payments).
• Spending in all remaining ministries, excluding transfer payments, therefore accounts for only $50.5 billion (18.7%) of total government expenditures (25.7% less 6.9% for national defence).
• As a percentage of this $50.4 billion, deficits over the next few years are projected to be 86%, 56%, 46% and 38%. Freezing spending growth on the $50.4 billion will not make a meaningful difference.
• The government refers to eliminating "unnecessary appointments" to various boards, agencies and Crown Corporations. This is a token gesture, but perhaps indicative of the government's future plans for Crown Corporations, which account for $8 billion in spending.

The government's view on balancing the budget:

• Step one: wind down stimulus spending within a year.
• Step two: restrain spending (ie. salary freezes, overall departmental spending caps, etc)
• Step three: hope the economy rebounds and more tax revenue is available.

What is the plan for national defence?

• The combat mission in Afghanistan is scheduled to end in 2011.
• Since the mission in Afghanistan began, national defence spending has increased by 82% from $10.4 billion to $19 billion. Roughly half of this increase occurred under Liberal governments; the other half occurred under the Conservative government.
• The strength of the regular force has increased by 10.3% from 61,340 to 67,756 since 2003-2004 (still well below a recent historical peak of 75,000 in 1994).
• The Canada First defence strategy, announced in 2008, committed the government to steady increases in defence spending, on the order of 2% annually, with a goal of $30 billion by 2027-2028.
• Will national defence spending be reduced? Although this may seem unlikely, given the government's enthusiasm for the military, the Mulroney government talked a big game about the military as well. It ultimately cut spending. It remains to be seen whether the departmental freeze will apply to DND, which is the largest employer in the federal government and one of the largest in Canada.

Copyright & IP law to be "strengthened." This is likely code for greater regulatory/legal barriers to competition in creative industries. Rightsholders seek legal protections but who stands up for users and citizens? Conservatives need to be reminded of the virtues of creative destruction and individual freedom, apparently. I'm still somewhat optimistic that Tony Clement and especially James Moore will see the light.

Taxes: nary a mention of the increasing EI premiums, airport security tax increase or HST harmonization.

Environment: The government proposes very little in such an important policy area.

Trade: Government commits to pursuing bilateral FTAs, essentially giving up on the multilateral process through the WTO. This is bad news for Canada. Is it a surprise that there have been four ministers of international trade since Feb 2006?

The federal government is expected to run a $54.2 billion deficit in 2009-2010. The Parliamentary Budget Office projects near-term future deficits to be $43.1 (10-11), $27.9 (11-12), $23.2 (12-13), $19.0 (13-14), for a total accumulated deficit over the period of $167.2 billion. This represents a 36% increase on the $463.7 billion net federal debt outstanding at the end of 2008-2009.

Consider the demographic challenge facing Canada over the same period. At the end of the period (2014), the leading edge of the boomer cohort will be in its mid-to-late-sixties. Over the following two decades from 2014-2033, our increasingly aged population will provide the cruel combination of both a smaller income tax base and a higher demand for government services, especially health care.

Statistics Canada, 2007, Canadian Demographics at a Glance, Catalogue number 91-003-XWE.

I suppose it is good news that the PBO's projections take demographics into account. However, its projections only extend to 2014, and the picture doesn't get any brighter thereafter. Once we've cranked up the net debt to $631 billion in 2014, we will not only have to balance the budget but also run significant operating surpluses to pay back the debt to a reasonable level. We will have to do so with a smaller income tax base (see demographics, above), higher demand for many government services, and higher interest payments on the debt.

In light of this rosy scenario, we must consider what to do now to mitigate these looming budgetary problems. Clearly, some combination of revenue increases and expenditure reductions will be necessary to balance the budget and run operating surpluses to offset the debt incurred over the next few years.

The simplest and most effective change we can make immediately would be to restore the GST to its previous level of seven per cent. The Conservative government slashed this tax by 28.5% over two years. The PBO estimates that each percentage point decrease in the GST costs the government $5.4 billion in revenue. Restoring the GST to 7% would provide $10.8 billion in revenue annually, or $52.4 billion over five years. We would still have to deal with a projected $114 billion deficit over the period, but it would be a good start. Considering that the GST cut was poor tax policy to begin with, let's start putting our fiscal house in order -- again! -- by reversing the ill-advised and short-sighted tax cut that the Conservatives brought in.

Update: The GST credit system provides relief to low income Canadians who pay sales taxes.

• iBooks and entering the e-book and e-reader space is a great idea. I've been holding off on buying a Kindle and now I'll buy an iPad instead. I love the touch screen of my iPhone and would love to have one that is better for reading.
• I would guess that upwards of 75% of my non-work time on a computer could be easily done on the iPad. Browsing the web, reading and sending e-mail, looking at photos, playing music and videos, etc.
• Some features are missing or underwhelming. But consider how much the original iPod sucked in comparison to what it does now.
• The price is right. If I had an extra $500-$1,000, I'd buy one right away.

My fellow panelists work for the Ontario Public Service. One works in communications for the Minister of Health; one works in policy in the Cabinet Office; and one works as counsel in the Office of Legislative Counsel. As the only panelist who is working in the non-profit sector, I focused my remarks on my experience finding my first job after graduation.

Some advice that I gave to the class:

• Keep your options open and stay broad. I was very focused on working for the federal government generally and joining the foreign service in particular. As a result, I passed on or didn't pursue a number of other policy-related opportunities.
• There are lots of great charities and non-profit organizations out there, especially in Toronto. But there are also a lot of poorly-run non-profits that lack vision, focus, and resources. It is essential to do your homework on the organization, its finances and its people before and during your interview.
• Engage with the network of MPA grads and friends of the program. I spent too much of my job search time submitting resumes online through the public, formal recruitment campaigns and not enough time speaking with current and former executives in the Ontario and federal governments.
• On work-life balance, I noted that I don't know anyone who is very successful in their job, regardless of what sector they are working in, and who works only eight hours per day.

I really enjoyed participating in the Queen's Park session, and similar trips to Ottawa and Washington, when I was an MPA student. It was fun to come back to speak to the class.

Home Buying with Google Maps

We are looking to buy a home in London. Since we don't have a car, we are using the My Maps feature of Google Maps to visualize our geographic preferences. The circles (really complex polygons created using Scribble Maps, since Google Maps doesn't have a good way of creating circles) are roughly 9km in diameter. Once you create and position the circle in Scribble Maps, you can export it to a KML file and then import the KML to your My Map. The green circles are for city golf courses, the yellow one is for the train station and the purple one is for UWO. The red polygon is the riding of London West. We can add potential homes to the map to quickly see where they fall in relation to these preferences, and we have also mapped other useful things, such as grocery stores. Neat, eh?

Tip: when you use circles, the maps become too complex to display all at once. Use this tip about importing your map's KML file to create a map where the placemarks and polygons are shown all at once.

No, this isn't a tracking poll for the Liberal Party's popularity, it's a graph of my handicap factor for the past six months. I'm glad that I've been able to lower my factor by 46 per cent, from 14.4 to 7.8. My improvement is largely due to an improved full swing and overall better power game. My wedge game and my putting have also improved, but not as much.

As the end of this golf season approaches, I am quite pleased with my swing, which feels as simple as it ever has. With better wedge play and better chipping, I could be shooting just over par. My goal for next year is to bring my factor as far as possible below 5.0.