Site Search

Custom Search

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Nannygate: An important principle, which is far more important than the cost to taxpayers of two nannies

Many, mainly Liberal party supporters, claim the “nannygate” controversy is a lot of fuss about nothing. But is that a fair assessment? Didn’t this prime minister go on record several times as saying specifically he did not need financial help with the care of his children?

Didn’t he also specifically tell Canadians that Stephen Harper, as the then prime minister, also did not require government assistance? So what has changed? If, as he said the Harper family did not need government assistance when they occupied the official residence, why then does the Trudeau family?

Let’s be clear: this has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the incumbent prime minister employing a nanny at taxpayer’s expense. That is quite acceptable. We should not stoop to such stinginess for it is unbecoming of us as a nation. Other taxpayer-funded household help is also acceptable, or should be in my opinion.

But Prime Minister Trudeau sought to gain a political advantage by claiming he and the then prime minister did not need taxpayer-funded childcare and, therefore, should not not be receiving it now. He even boasted that he planned to contribute to charity any amount he did receive from a proposed government program. There is an important principle at stake here, which is far more important than the cost to taxpayers of two nannies.

PM Trudeau’s reversal of position on his family’s need for taxpayer-funded childcare sets a horrible example of the cynical nature of political promises and assertions. It suggests his is a party of entitlement in which cheap bravado masquerades as thoughtful political rhetoric.

It is time to do the right thing, Prime Minister.

4 comments — This is a moderated blog and comments will appear when approved. Please don’t resubmit if your comment doesn’t appear immediately, and please do not post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable.

  1. The principle is the idea that Trudeau's kids are too precious to use the Parliament Hill day care.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You hit the proverbial nail right on the head. I was concerned by PM Trudeau statement
    " I will not lie to you I will be glad to return to Ottawa"
    Pardon has he lied to anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Same old liberals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Forget the nannies - though not the hypocrisy - and let's take a look at the cost of flying the children plus nanny over to Europe for various photo ops. In the private sector, even if the company is okay with taking the children along on a business trip, it's definitely a "taxable benefit". Even taking the spouse along is a taxable benefit under CRA rules unless said spouse is actively involved in the business activities (think Mrs Harper at the various events she attended; spouses work hard at these events as there are a lot of "social" activities during which the spouse is expected to keep the flag flying while being diplomatic and charming).

    The only exception I can think of is when the employee on the business trip is a nursing mother, and - of necessity - the dependent offspring and attendant have to come along.

    ReplyDelete

ShareThis