Political parties and the family: the conservative record: conservatives table budget favourable to families.

Ottawa -- The federal Conservative government's second budget, tabled by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty on March 19, was a mixed bag. But it included items that were family-friendly:

* a new child-tax benefit that will save most tax-paying parents $310 per year for every child under age 18;

* an increase in the limit of the Registered Education Savings Plan;

* a rise in the value of the spousal deduction to the same value as that of the principal earner, yielding an additional $90 in after-tax income a year for single-income families;

* a Registered Disability Savings Plan, which will start in 2008 for parents of severely disabled children; and

* allowing the splitting of pension income between married senior couples. (It was reported that the government "didn't have the fiscal room" in this budget to extend income splitting to all couples, as many had hoped would happen.)

These measures follow in the wake of the annual $1,200 child-care payment to families that was introduced in the first budget (2006). The Liberals wanted to institute a national daycare system that would have taken children out of the home and put them into the hands of bureaucratic daycare establishments.

The tax code and families

According to Tom Flanagan, "The tax code will (now) recognize the contribution that all parents make to society, and compensate them, at least to a degree, for the financial burdens they undertake in raising children." Flanagan is a political science professor at the University of Calgary and a former Conservative campaign manager.

"Children are not merely a lifestyle choice; they represent the future of the community," he added. "As such, they embody everything we care about ... The new changes to the tax system are welcome recognition that people come in families. The new policies ... will provide modest, but real, incentives for more of our young people to get married, stay married, have children and invest in their future" (Globe and Mail, Mar. 26, 2007).

The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada (an Evangelical group) also indicated it was pleased to see the tax advantages that were introduced for families in the budget. "It is apparent that the finance minister understands the importance of a strong family in Canadian society," said executive director Dave Quist. "I would urge this government to continue to bring forward family-friendly policies that will benefit society." The institute listed universal income splitting and more childcare funds in the hands of parents, rather than institutional, centre-based daycare, as further measures it would like to see enacted (Press release, Mar. 28, 2007).

For his part, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty used words that would have been anathema to recent Liberal finance ministers: "We need to make it more affordable for people to have children and to raise them ... We made a choice. We chose to support hardworking families," he said (Canadian Press, Mar. 19, 2007).

Commentary

National Post columnist Father Raymond de Souza commended Flaherty's "family-friendly budget" for being "wise and creative," noting that, because of financial incentives, parents of children with physical challenges in utero may be more likely to bring them to birth, rather than abort them. In this regard, de Souza said, Flaherty "made good social policy and did right by those who might otherwise never have a chance to thank him" (Mar. 29, 2007).

Budget critics

Conservative critics took aim at the "unconservative" spending spree. "What we're getting ... is either reckless overspending or more of the same fiscal smoke and mirrors we used to get from the Liberals," commented Lorrie Goldstein (Tor. Sun, Mar. 21, 2007).

The Christian Heritage Party cited Flaherty as "the most free-spending finance minister in Canada's history" (Press release, Mar. 23, 2007).

Columnist Claire Hoy cynically observed that when it comes to spending public money, all politicians are pretty much the same. Stephen Harper, he said, "has been touring the country making grandiose spending promises that, well, make one think the profligate Liberals hadn't been booted out of office after all." Hoy characterized the extra $2.3 billion showered on Quebec as an attempt to both influence the provincial election and make an investment in the next federal election (Caledon Citizen, Mar. 28, 2007).