Democracy Day on the Danforth – featuring
special guest NDP Leader Tom Mulcair
Bring your questions and ideas for remaking our democracy.
Starts: September 19th, 2013 – 6:30pm
Ends: September 19th, 2013 – 8:30pm
Where: Auditorium, Eastminster United Church,
310 Danforth Avenue
near Chester TTC Station
I will hand him Lynne Swanson’s article.
Thank you and great catch, Joe! I really think now is the time to get out and show ourselves to these pols wherever they show up, we do too. I don’t think they believe we will be there to hold them accountable. They will draw a crowd that we can use to distribute information to the hapless who do not know about this yet.
@Joe Smith
I will be there in spirit.
@Joe, Good for you!
@Atticus, Every time one mosquito stings, the swarm grows stronger!
Ask Mulcair what the NDP’s position is on FATCA. He knows what FATCA is, or should; God knows he’s received enough emails about it for the past twelve months.
Ask him if his idea of remaking democracy in Canada includes treating a segment of naturalized Canadians as second-class citizens.
Ask him if his vision of remaking democracy includes consulting Obamacrats every step of the way; they’ve already handed over their 2015 campaign strategy to Obamacrat Jeremy Bird (viz. the 2015 campaign funding letter that was sent by NDP national director Nathan Rotman to all NDP members about a week ago; I’ll post more on this over the weekend).
Shubert, I cannot tell you how important your catching that Obamacrat line of thinking in the NDP matters.
Truly, they really over took the dems and not in the end in a good way. Anyone disagreeing with their approach was shoved out and they took a line that said “By any means necessary” while also pandering to corps more than ever before. They will ruin the NDP if the NDP goes down that line. In fact I have already seen the same wording used at the NDP website that was used by the Obamacrats to shame those who opposed what they were doing. Saying we can’t allow “purity” of our old line principles. The “purity” shaming was the exact wording used by the “Whatever Obama wants” people. It is my deepest hope that the NDP is not going to fall for that. If they do there will be in fighting, a split and the NDP will never be as it was because they cannot stand on the same principles as before. If anyone says a thing about bending the charter or principles of the party they will be told they are “purists” and shamed to shut up. I too want to know if the NDP plans on continuing down that path. If they do then they are no longer worthy of the votes of those who wish they would stand for their own principles. If they won’t, then they are no different than the Liberal party or any other party. No excuses, no purity hippy punching, nothing will change what they are trying to get away with wrapped in a “new narrative” FATCA is a b.s law passed by the U.S. and shoved over the border clearly against the wishes of our government who asked for an exemption to begin with so we are being bullied into it. Full.Stop. NDP should oppose fully and completely.
@Joe Smith
I hope you can get Mulcair’s ear.
A sign or two wouldn’t hurt.
@Joe Smith. You should be getting an email from another Brocker in Toronto soon, if you haven’t already. It sounds like there will be at least two of you at that meeting, loaded for bear. Hopefully there will be others who can make it.
I think targeting both NDP and Liberal speakers is a good idea right now. Both parties seem to be trying to ignore this issue. Flaherty hasn’t dodged the question; the Greens have been quite forthright on the issue, as have the Progressive Canadians. Only the NDP and Liberals are being chicken-shit and trying to hide from the issue, as far as I’ve seen. Let’s not let either of them get away with this. Smoke them out. Report what they say, or don’t say, or if they try to censor you, here on this website or at Sandbox. How they behave will affect how we’ll vote, or maybe whether some people will vote. Neither of them can afford to be hacking away at each other while bleeding off people like us who can’t trust them any longer; that will just cement the Tory majority next time around. One hopes they aren’t so stupid as not to realize this, though if the NDP has some Obamacrat unused to multi-party elections advising them how to run a Canadian political campaign, and they actually listen to him, the NDP will richly deserve the electoral catastrophe that will hit them.
Further to my comment above about Flaherty not dodging the question, and Atticus’ comment about Flaherty asking for a Canadian exemption from FATCA from Day One, and thanks to Blaze at Sandbox for reminding us and posting the link:
this is what Flaherty wrote to the NY Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal in September 2011, which they never published but, bless their souls, our Financial Post did publish it. No comments on the story at all; it’s way too late by now, and this was back in the days when most of us were still in shock and hadn’t got ourselves as mobilized as we are now.
Anyone going to the Mulcair circus tonight or in later days for him and other pols elsewhere, maybe even bring a copy of this letter along with Blaze’s article. How about a preamble: “Our government has been very concerned about FATCA from the get-go. They’re still negotiating something; we hope it will be reasonable but we don’t know. Where do YOU stand on this issue, sir? Why should we replace a government that seems to be concerned for our well-being with a party that remains silent on this issue?”
http://business.financialpost.com/2011/09/16/read-jim-flahertys-letter-on-americans-in-canada/
@shubert1975
I did write my MP today…when I read about the NDP American advisor… as I do get the NDP newsletter because I have contributed to them.
this is what I wrote:
“I just finished reading the NDP kick off letter from Nathan Rothman.
In it he refers to the NDP using Jermy Bird, Obamas campaign strategist.
To me this is foreboding…Obama is the one who instigated the FATCA law.
I would like to quote someone else I read recently on this;
“Truly, they really over took the dems and not in the end in a good way. Anyone disagreeing with their approach was shoved out and they took a line that said “By any means necessary” while also pandering to corps more than ever before. They will ruin the NDP if the NDP goes down that line. In fact I have already seen the same wording used at the NDP website that was used by the Obamacrats to shame those who opposed what they were doing. Saying we can’t allow “purity” of our old line principles. The “purity” shaming was the exact wording used by the “Whatever Obama wants” people. It is my deepest hope that the NDP is not going to fall for that. If they do there will be in fighting, a split and the NDP will never be as it was because they cannot stand on the same principles as before. If anyone says a thing about bending the charter or principles of the party they will be told they are “purists” and shamed to shut up. I too want to know if the NDP plans on continuing down that path. If they do then they are no longer worthy of the votes of those who wish they would stand for their own principles. If they won’t, then they are no different than the Liberal party or any other party. No excuses, no purity hippy punching, nothing will change what they are trying to get away with wrapped in a “new narrative” FATCA is a b.s law passed by the U.S. and shoved over the border clearly against the wishes of our government who asked for an exemption to begin with so we are being bullied into it. Full.Stop. NDP should oppose fully and completely
So I am watching…and waiting for the NDP stand on FATCA. I do hope to know soon.
I wonder what Jack Layton would think of all this FATCA . ”
To his credit he responded to me shortly after. and this is what he wrote:
“The strategists working with our party have no say in direction or policy. We are working with them on their organizing tools they used for getting the vote out. This will be essential in 2015. Our party continues to work on getting action on FACTA. It has been a long and hard struggle but we are staying on it”
What do you think. Is he talking , politalk?
@Atticus
I hope you don’t mind me quoting you without credit? I didn’t want to get you in trouble
@JoeSmith: When you hand him Lynne Swanson’s article, please ask him on behalf of Lynne Swanson (aka Blaze) why he hasn’t responded to any of my numerous e-mails to him.
Please tell him also I am following AtticusinCanada’s lead for 2015. “Goodbye NDP. Hello Greens.”
I have advised both the NDP and Liberals in my London West riding of this. No response.
@northernstar
“Our party continues to work on getting action on FACTA. It has been a long and hard struggle but we are staying on it”
I think the word “FATCA” could be replaced with any other issue of concern on Canada’s political landscape.
Joe Smith,
The other Brocker is looking for you at the church event. 20 other people there right now.
Joe Smith,
The “other Brocker” is there. Says there are about 20 others there. No sign of Joe.
Update:
JOE IS HERE; HOUSE IS FULL!!!
Good luck!!!
This is excting; can’t wait to hear from Joe and the other Brocker!
Mulcair was there for about 15 minutes. The questions were moderated by Local NDP MP Craig Scott. The second question asked was about FATCA. I didn’t hear the exact wording but it was clearly whether the NDP had a position on FATCA.
Answer:
NDP does not yet have a position on FATCA, it will be decided in Caucus.
Paraphrase of “follow up” question:
Isn’t it a matter of Canadian sovereignty?
Answer:
I agree.
___________________________________________________________________
The person sitting beside the questioner (who may have known the questioner) tried very hard to then ask a question. Mr. Scott clearly avoided that person.
So, I would say that Mulcair is aware of FATCA but doesn’t want to talk about FATCA.
@ReportonMulcair: I think it’s not a coincidence that the NDP have gone silent on FATCA since Mulcair became leader.
“NDP does not have a position on FATCA. It will be decided in caucus”
They’ve had two years to “decide!” At least Flaherty has taken a stand against FATCA in writing and seems to be holding out for something.
What the heck is there to decide?!? Do all Canadians have the same rights or not?!? That statement tells us what the NDP thinks about our rights. There should be nothing to be decided by caucus.
As I suggested MP Scott very deliberately avoided what he likely perceived as a “follow up” FATCA question.
IMHO: The present Government is the best defense against FATCA. Flaherty (at least in the beginning was courageous). I might add that, the Conservatives were trying to stick up for “regular folks”. Of course the Green Party and Progressive Canadians oppose FATCA but they are small parties. The Green Party may be helpful in making FATCA an issue.
If nothing else, this will expose the NDP for the frauds that I have always believed they are. The Liberals?
Oh I forget this about the question:
The questioner implied that Linda McQuaig (without naming her) supported FATCA.
Why doesn’t the NDP have a position on FATCA; too aligned with the US Democrats? Why is it so hard to determine what they feel are the rights of Canadian citizens and residents who happen to have some US “indicia”? Is that so hard? Have they swallowed hook, line and sinker all the US sells re FATCA? Get off the fence and show some backbone — no matter what your position.
Blaze, a very good question. Do Canadians all have the same rights or not? For now, I would say the jury is still out. Or at least, it’s more of an Animal Farm situation, where all Canadians have rights but some Canadians have fewer rights than others.
Craig Scott was one of the NDP MPs who responded to an e-mail I sent. The first part of his response indicated that he had a good grasp of the FATCA facts and then he wrote …
“New Democrats have repeatedly raised concerns over FATCA with the Conservatives and asserted that the government has a responsibility to protect innocent Canadian citizens from the improper and unreasonable intrusion of a foreign government.
New Democrats are fighting for the Conservative’s to finally get serious when it comes to tax havens. We believe the Canadian Government has a responsibility to protect Canada’s tax base, and we understand the United States’ desire to protect their own tax base, but this cannot come at the cost of the rights of individuals in our own country. We are demanding answers and transparency from the Conservatives on FATCA, and will not support an agreement that violates the privacy rights of individuals.
Again, thank you for writing. Please be assured that my New Democrat colleagues and I will continue to stand up for fair taxation and privacy rights.”
Sincerely,
Craig Scott, M.P.
So what’s all this about not having a position on FATCA? MP Scott didn’t sound too wishy-washy on the issue back in February when this e-mail exchange took place.
Thanks to those who attended this evening’s NDP “Democracy Day on the Danforth” and, again, raising questions and thus awareness of FATCA!! Little by little; one step at a time. Awareness is crucial for all Canadians.
Let those attending come to their own conclusions re the non-answers of the NDP. Hope there is some media coverage of the “event.”
Mulcair is aware of FATCA, and has been since at least some time in 2011 – and so are some of the other current NDP MPs ih the cabinet, such as Peggy Nash and Murray Rankin (current Finance critic in Shadow cabinet and National Revenue and Pensions critics respectively http://www.ndp.ca/shadow-cabinet ).
Review these committee proceedings with comments by Scott D. Michel (Caplin & Drysdale) from 2011, where Mulcair was present;
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4937782&Language=E&Mode=1
40th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION
Standing Committee on Finance
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Review also these minutes from the FINA House of Commons committee with Peggy Nash and Murray Ranking present;
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Mode=1&DocId=5971039&Language=E
41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
Standing Committee on Finance
Thursday, February 7, 2013
Search the word FATCA and look for the comments of Cardamome, and then Rosenbloom. The current Finance critic Murray Rankin attended. The NDP knows about some of the problems with FATCA. The US experts they invited to answer questions about FATCA and tax evasion very clearly note that all over the world FATCA is seen as intrusive, and that it is causing foreign relations and other problems. At one point they speak of FBAR; …”…
(Mr. H. David Rosenbloom (Caplin and Drysdale, New York University, School of Law, As an Individual)
Mr. H. David Rosenbloom:
“Yes, of course.
The worst aspect of FATCA is what it did to the United States. It basically deflected large numbers of our resources into writing these incredibly detailed rules for something that’s not going to produce a lot of revenue. It never made much sense to me to take people off corporate tax audits and have them writing rules for the rest of the world.
I also have severe doubts about how FATCA is going to play out. We’re going to get tons of information from all over the world, but exactly who is going to read that information? When last I looked, they had one individual up in a warehouse in Detroit looking through our foreign bank account reports.
You know, I just doubt that we’ll go on spending all these resources indefinitely on this.
Now, I’m sure you’re not focused on that. I think most of the rest of the world is focused on the intrusion into other countries’ processes, etc. I appreciate that FATCA’s a very…. Nobody ever did a cost-benefit analysis on FATCA. There’s a huge amount of cost required of financial institutions around the world, and there’s a lot of foreign policy, foreign relations, and negative effects of FATCA, but to me it’s kind of a stupid piece of legislation just within the U.S. context….”
Comments by the US experts also allude to the problems with the US OVD programs and repeatedly advise the committee that it is important to make meaningful distinctions between the situation re individuals vs. the actions of corporations. Also the first committee presentation mentions that the situation of individuals outside the US should be distinguished from those deliberately acting to evade US taxes.
Read the NDP policy book and see where support for a Canadian IGA on FATCA would conflict with stated aims and values:
http://xfer.ndp.ca/2013/policybook/2013-04-17-PolicyBook_E.pdf
I don’t want to jump to conclusions, and I am trying very hard to be objective, because I have been a lifelong NDP supporter, but I am finding it hard to find any reasonable explanation for why NDP Leader Mulcair couldn’t answer our letters and emails with questions and concerns about FATCA – and at least acknowledge that the NDP does not have a position on FATCA. Or, start a public discussion with Canadians on the benefits and drawbacks to Canadian citizens, residents, and Canadian society as a whole, and our economy of signing on to FATCA.
To me, after 2 years of knowing about this, and the negative effects on many Canadians, and all the contacts made with various individual NDP MPs to provide information and detail the depth of the suffering we have experienced, I question whether having ‘no position’ is in fact a position?
FATCA is very intricate and complex, but if we can master some of that – with no dedicated research and parliamentary staff, then so can Mulcair and MPs.
I want to make clear that my criticisms extend to the LIberals as well – since we don’t see the party as a whole coming out against FATCA.
Failure to act and failure to speak up has consequences to harm just as overt actions do.