Live coverage of PST debate at Free Press News Cafe

Coming to you at 6:00 on Wednesday, May 29.  A debate with 4 participants on the PST increase.  These were Jim Carr, CEO Business Council of  Manitoba, Steve Ashton, Minister of Infrastructure, Earl Porter, Mayor of Portage la Prairie, Shannon Martin, PC Candidate for Morris.  Hosted by Free Press journalist Dan Lett. The whole event was planned as part of the Community News Commons training.  So I am trying to get coverage sort of like taking notes.   The topic is the recently proposed 1% increase to Manitoba's Provincial Sales Tax.

Cloudy evening, threatening rain.  Nice temperature, around 20c.  About 20 people in attendance.

DL: Introduced the group and started by asking SA when the idea for the PST was created.

SA:  Talked about the last 10 years of balanced budgets and sustained growth.  Need to invest more into infrastructure, in particular, flood protection.

DL: Critics say that the money is not going just to flood protection, also into a pool for unspecified infrastructure.

SA:  Today announced 250 million for Lake St. Martin.  Need to work on highways but it would also include hospitals and schools.

DL:  Yes. The premier indicated that he was not interested in a tax increase earlier in the year, the recent  election the NDP campaigned on it.  What changed, and when?

SA:  Tough decision but the pressures of the 2013 budget made it necessary.  They have a ten year plan that will address infrastructures needs.  Rejected an austerity approach.  Looking to 2016 to bring the budget back into balance.  Need the revenue.

DL:  Jim Carr the Business Council came out quite early recommending the increase along with a referendum. What is your perspective, you seem to have been surprised on budget day.

JC:  There is no unified plan about spending responsibility for infrastructure, what level of government. The province needs to work in a coordinated way to address infrastructure concerns. They presented a plan earlier on a consumption tax.

DL:  Other provinces increased taxes for debt reduction whereas Manitoba has been spending money.  Were you surprised by the budget.

JC:  Hundreds of millions of federal dollars available but province had no way of matching it, this was a concern.

DL:  Never enough money for infrastructure.  The mayors recently made an united effort to get money for municipal infrastructure.  Is raising the PST an acceptable method of addressing municipal infrastructure.

EP:  Wants the money spread out with a ten year plan.  Problem is that it is difficult to plan.  Small municipalities get left out.

DL: Municipalities consistently reject tax increases, but now seem to be supporting it.

EP:  If the tax increase was per capita we would be all for it, but as it stands they may be left out.

DL:  The conservatives are not in favor of a tax increase, where would they get the money.  Austerity?

SM: Austerity is realistic, current government has problems in their budgets.  Issue is twofold, raising the PST and also how.  They are breaking the balanced budget law.

DL:  The NDP are gutting the law. They are changing it legally.

SM:  There is a process and the government is not following it.

DL:  Conservatives came up with a 1% across the board spending cut.  That would be very significant.  How do resolve that type of austerity.

SM:  The government is making those cuts now, they are paying 90 million more in financing costs than five years ago.

DL:  What services will be cut.

SM:  Growth in upper levels of government.  Not all departments would be hit the same way, hard to know until you look at the books.

DL:  Jim you have experience in government do you think the opposition has come back with a workable plan.

JC:  In favor of 1% but the government should continuously review programs for savings.  Those savings will not address the infrastructure issue.  Our position is exactly the same as the mayors, the increase is ok as long it is just for infrastructure.

DL:  So many groups have come out against the increase.  Why not have the referendum.

SA:  There is no way to cut across the board without affecting services.  Have gone from 85 to 465 million on highway infrastructure.  Need to spend 4 billion over 10 years.

DL:   At least half a dozen groups are not supporting the increase.

SA:  Addressing the need of the average Manitoban.  Manitobans will see this increase all being re-invested in infrastructure.

DL:  Lots of people agree but they are not supporting it.

SA:  We have spent a lot of money on flood protection.   We have had a lot of growth in the province.  Lots of partnerships.  Challenge is to connect with average Manitobans.

DL:  In general elections NDP has had popular support and yet did not want to go to a referendum.

DL:  Did you contemplate a referendum.

SA:  We have made changes and the act allows to proceed without going to referendum.

DL:  Did the government contemplate a referendum.

SA:  The decision speaks for itself, decided to go with a ten year plan.

DL:  Mayor Porter would you have preferred a referendum.

EP:  Can be done with a dialogue with the community.

DL:  Support the referendum.

EP:  The government should follow the law, but could sell it if it was exclusively for infrastructure.

DL:  The conservative felt that there shold have been more consultation, debate and referendum.

JC:  The BB legislation indicates that no referendum is required if the total tax is not included.  The government could reduce the business tax and then increase the PST.

SM:  The government promised a BB by 2014 and they have changed their promises and are not following the law.

SA:  The Conservative plan did not work

EP:  While you guys argue our infrastructure is falling apart

DL;  The municipalities want the money but are not supporting the increase.

DL:  The majority of federal money will be spent on infrastructure.

EP:  The municipalities have to pay PST on their projects.

SA:  Province has to have funding in place to get federal money.

DL:  Next referendum will be the election.  Can the Bus. Council support the government.

JC:  The government has the authority to change the law.  Not in favor of Bill 20 which guts the BB bill.  That will allow the government to spend PST on hospitals and schools instead of infrastructure.  Will support the government with or without a referendum if the money is used for infrastructure.

DL: No one seems to believe that the conservatives can find this money.  What is the most salient arguement that the conservatives have for not holding a referendum.

SA:  We have had growth.  Second highest growth in the country.

SL:  When does money have to be on the table for Build Canada.

DL:  Is a PST referendum winable.

JC:  When should a government go to a referendum.

SA:  We elect governments to make decisions.  It was a tough decision and we made it.

DL:  How much of the 280 million will not go into infrastructure.

DL:  If the government could show where it is going they would have support.  How much will go into hard infrastructure.

SA:  Its all going to go to infrastructure but not all to municipalities.

SA:  Want to be able to point to specific infrastructure tasks.

DL:  Is the Bus Council satisfied with the way the government is implementing.

JC:  Not our role.  We are indicating our position and that's all.

EP:  Seems that they have lost communication with the community.  Rural Manitoba is being left out.

DL:  Are you saying the Conservatives would never consider a tax increase.

SM:  Too hypothetical.  The government is talking accountability and yet going against the spirit of the law.

DL:  Are you confident that the government has enough time to show people the value of this legislation.

SA:  Quite happy with the government's record.  Infrastructure from 85 to 468 million, etc.

MOOC addict

Well I have been busy for the last few months with the various MOOCs that I have been taking.  In the last three months I have been involved in the following:

Calculus of a Single Variable:  Excellent graphics and presentation, the assignments were unrealistic.
Bioelectricity:  Disappointing and frustrating.
Irrationality:  I had read the books so I thought I would take the course.  Very advanced production but somehow I did not get into it.  Probably it was because I felt like I was being manipulated by the instructor.
Digital Signal Processing:  Interesting course and the presentation was not too bad given that the instructors are European.  Once again, the assignments were unrealistic and frustrating.
Control of Mobile Robots:  I have dabbled in robotics myself so I found this to be interesting.  The math was a little too involved for my level of interest.
Data Analysis:  Useful course, heavy reliance on examples with R.
Fundamentals of Electrical Engineering:  Once again, fairly heavy depth mathimatically, but useful nonetheless.
Introductory Human Physiology:  Very informative.  The tests were too nit-picky so I didn't bother with them  but I found the lectures quite interesting.
"Pay Attention" ADHD through the Lifespan:  Good but stretched out, should probably be a six week course instead of 12.
Web Intelligence and Big Data:  I was disappointed in this one.  It was too ambitious in its scope and left too many gaps for the student to fill.
Synapses, Neurons and Brains:  Quite enjoyable and very informative.  The unit quizzes were quite fair, I haven't seen the final yet.
Medical Neuroscience:  This is a great course.  A tremendous amount of information and very well presented with lots of excellent diagrams.  The workload level is very high and the quizzes are very difficult.  I haven't had an exam yet but I'm not looking forward to it.  Unfortunately the tests seem to be more of the type that cause un-learning as opposed to learning.  There is also a draconian participation requirement for the course forums.  I refuse to post simply for the sake of posting.
Mathematical Biostatistics Bootcamp:  A strange survey of topics, probably not in-depth enough coverage of material.
Computational Neuroscience:  So far it is has been highly mathematical and it is has been one of those courses were you seem to be expected to know the material before they teach it.
Introduction to Data Science:  This was disappointing.  The organization of this course left much to be desired.  Lots of problems getting software to work to do the assigments, not enough guidance.
Statistical Molecular Thermodynamics:  I took this to review some of my Chemistry background.  I am not going to do the assignments and tests.  So far it is very good with lots of demonstrations.

The above courses are all offered by Coursera, which seems to be my preferred source of MOOCS.  The Computer courses offered by Udacity tend to have a more consistent user interface and less issues with the programs needed for the coursework.  During this time I was also taking a course offered by the Santa Fe Institute called Introduction to Complexity.  There were technical issues with this course and the delivery was uneven but overall it was quite good.  I haven't seen the final exam yet, so I can't comment on how fair the assessment is.

On top of these I was attending a course locally on Citizen Journalism that was about 7 hours a week for six weeks.  So I have been busy.  There are still some courses on-going and always some new ones coming up but it will be a little more reasonable from here on. One good thing is that I decided to buy a new laptop because the old netbook just couldn't cut it anymore.  It was starting to give me random hard  drive errors.  So I got a new Lenovo ThinkPad Twist.  It has Windows 8, which is just kind of an unnecessary complication.  What is really good is the keyboard, it is well designed for serious typing.

So, yes, I should have been writing more but I think it is fair to say that I was just too busy.  I want to try and write more and hopefully contribute to the Community News Commons as well.