The Liberals position on an IPOD tax is a bit shaky to say the least. They currently claim that they do not support one but...
On April 14, 2010 a vote was held in the House of Commons:
Pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mrs. Lavallée (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pomerleau (Drummond), — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, presented on Wednesday, March 17, 2010, be concurred in.
The vote carried: YEAS: 156, NAYS: 137
And what exactly was the "First Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage" that they were voting on?
That the Committee recommends that the government amend Part VIII of the Copyright Act so that the definition of “audio recording medium” extends to devices with internal memory, so that the levy on copying music will apply to digital music recorders as well, thereby entitling music creators to some compensation for the copies made of their work.
It was an IPOD tax, and it was only one year ago.
(A special note to Evan Solomon from CBC's Power and Politics where this issue came up yesterday. Yes, Martha Hall Findlay did vote for it, as did her leader Michael Ignatieff and the entire Liberal caucus) (Related: Having Ignatieff attend a vote in itself is quite a feat)
Present day and almost a full year after that vote the Liberals are now claiming the opposite and that they do not support an IPOD tax. I guess that is to be expected considering their complete reversal on long standing party support for corporate tax cuts , immigration reform (that one cost them an MP), HST, asbestos, Afghanistan and the list goes on (including the coalition but jury is still out on this one) but with such a long history of such flip flops how do we know what their position, on anything, will be tomorrow? How can we trust them not to change their minds yet again?
We can't.
BTW From the Liberal Platform: “Liberals have worked to pass effective copyright legislation, including a private copying compensation fund instead of any new tax on consumers”.
A 'private copying compensation fund'? And how exactly is that going to be funded my flip flopping Liberal friends? They may not call it an IPOD tax but I somehow doubt that we are going to get away without it costing us more in one way or another.
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Tomorrow they will support ipod tax.
If the liberals can raise taxes during an economy boom for no reason at all other than for themselves you can bet your sweet petuinas, they will again.
Remember the excuse the liberals used for raising taxes " the reason why we have to raise taxes is because Mulroney left us with a deficit."
Ignatieff recently said the first thing they have to get rid off it the deficit which may I add, were demanded by them (Libs/ndp/bloc).
The beauty is that the media that share Ignatieff views on everything will no doubt that the accept with glee an imposed tax on their IPODS. just as the liberals raised taxes on them as well.
Ignatieff is repeating his president Obama concern on the Alberta oilsands.
As he puts it "Obama is the President of the United States.....
Ignatieff addresses PM stephen Harper as sulphure, that guy.
The MSM bows to the President and trillion dollar spending while ousting the canadian PMSH canada recovery plan.
Oh, just a reminder the coalition is very much alive and I feel the msm is heavily involved (duh)
Another flip flop?
Holland said NO tough on crime legislation would be repealed,
but:
Fife tweet:
''Ignatieff refuses to say what Tory crime laws he will repeal to send fewer people to prison. #elxn41 #cdnpoli
''Ignatieff refuses to say ''
Another day, another policy position.
Just what I don't want in a government.
Post a Comment