We need a statesman not an authoritarian

Dear Premier:

It is very sad that I feel I need to write this letter to you. This is a time when we need to be coming together to deal with the many existential crises facing us at home and abroad. Now, more than ever, we need transparency, accountability, evidence informed decisions and an openness to debate them to ensure that we, collectively as a province, are well served. However, the actions of your government as demonstrated in the recent omnibus legislation instead suggest a government more concerned with control over message and information and a revisiting of issues such as the doubling of the deed transfer tax on non-residents, an action for which there is little policy justification, and to the contrary much downside. We deserve better than this.

I am aware that you recently obtained a supermajority. However, that does not and should not give you carte blanche for you to enact your wish list.  Instead, for the long-term success of both your government and the Province, I believe a different approach is required. Claiming a mandate for actions, particularly those not mentioned or extensively discussed during the recent election, is neither accurate nor defensible – nor in the long run wise. Given what is going on south of the border, a heavy reliance upon the temporary powers of a supermajority is not a good look. 

The recent omnibus legislation included such troubling provisions as trying to control the AG and restrict access of the public to their reports, reducing the protections of non-union employees of the Province, taking away the fixed election date (you had campaigned for your first term on the basis of reducing politicking with elections) and reductions to the ability of citizens to access Freedom of Information provisions (which are already weak). Together with actions such as the removal of publicly available data such as on the Need a Family Practice Registry and the discontinuance of the annual report on emergency room closures, this is an extremely concerning approach to governing. While you have backed down on the AG provisions there are still many significant problems with what you are trying to push through.

I want to focus particularly on your proposal to double the deed transfer tax on non-residents. Last time around, when you brought in the 5% deed transfer tax on non-residents it was paired with the even more problematic and unacceptable property tax increases for these same non-residents. In neither case was there any evidentiary basis for such policies or consideration of the potential fallout. To the contrary, it emerged during the public debate of the issue, that you were not aware that two decades previously, under John Hamm’s leadership, similar proposals had been made. In that case, Premier Hamm responded to public concerns by asking Voluntary Planning to do an assessment of the issue. Their expert report made it clear just how bad an idea it was, and it was withdrawn.

In the end, you listened to Nova Scotians saying that you didn’t want to cause reputational damage to Nova Scotia. As the property tax was so much more egregious, the Deed transfer tax increase for non-residents survived mostly (in my view) as the result of the activists (including myself) putting a little water in our wine! However, it was a bad idea then and is a bad idea now. 

You are the Premier that was an early mover in the whole of Canada movement in response to the threat of tariffs stating that we in Nova Scotia under your leadership would be “taking the “first meaningful step to eviscerate internal provincial trade barriers.” When opposition by a provincial politician to the Eastern pipeline surfaced, you quite rightly said: “It is only small-minded thinking that causes Canada to be dependent on foreign nations”. Debates on pipelines aside, both these statements were, and are, important for all of us in Canada during this significant crisis and we need to be guided by them.

And yet, the deed transfer tax on non-residents is clearly a tariff. Instead of doubling it you should be removing it, or at the very least restricting its application to non-Canadian citizens. It might be different if there was a strong evidentiary basis for this proposal but that is clearly not the case. You previously indicated a concern for the reputation of Nova Scotia as your justification for pulling the non-resident property taxes. It is hard to understand why, during this time in which Canada is urgently working to come together, you are now seeking to strengthen what is effectively an interprovincial trade barrier. Just how seriously do you think the rest of Canada will take us when our actions bely our lofty proclamations? 

The claim that this will support additional and much needed accessible housing does not fly as it didn’t the last time, we discussed this issue. And while there is admittedly the need to seek options for raising more money for what is likely to be a stressed budget, there is absolutely no evidence of assessment of net financial impact of this proposal, which given the reputational damage that we can expect should be mandatory. 

Indeed, there are other options that could be considered that are much more likely to be effective. How about preventing those owning two or more homes (in a time when too many are homeless) from having their property taxes capped at the cost of living? This protection was of course, originally to ensure people were not taxed out of their homes and not to protect the bank accounts of those who can afford more than one residence. Yes, this may be politically difficult as developers and those owning more than one home object. However, we could easily justify following the approach of the Federal Government which provides relief to homeowners from capital gains tax on the proceeds from the sale of real property to one Principal Residence per individual / couple only. I am confident that the majority of Nova Scotians would support such an action given the homelessness crisis we are currently experiencing. Given what is happening south of the border, I suspect that we all know that we will need to make difficult choices and face significant financial challenges and, further, that we must all pay our share. 

Or you might consider pulling the provision on cancelling Bridge Tolls in the Halifax Municipality. You floated this proposal originally to reduce congestion and traffic bottlenecks despite the lack of evidence that it would do so and contrary to expert commentary from traffic engineers. This is also a proposal that is going to strip millions from our budget for the sole benefit of residents of the Halifax Municipality and neighbouring suburbs.

Please Mr. Premier. Show yourself to be the statesman that we really need right now. We cannot and must not be out of step with our fellow Canadians during this crisis. Reverse the doubling of the deed transfer tax and instead amend the omnibus to remove the excessive 5% tax already set. What a wonderful way of showing the rest of the Country that we are putting our money where our mouth is and confirming Nova Scotia as an early mover in this crisis.

And while you are at it, you might want to consider what you want your legacy as Premier to be. Do you want to be known as the Premier that undid Nova Scotian progress on transparency and accountability at just the time when it was needed the most? Withdrawing the provisions in my third paragraph would be an excellent way to show us your answer. Keep in mind that the trouble with autocratic styles of governance is that they are highly destructive of public trust and ultimately make that approach the only possible way of governing. You, and we, must be better than that.

Thank you for considering this letter. I will also be sharing it more widely as I believe that this discussion is incredibly important for us during this difficult time.