19 8 5年S月i 3日
家經濟報吿
PENDULUM'S SWING
當奴皇家調查委員會的國家 報吿書已兮翻發表,很多經濟學
者認爲它是d代同類報吿書中最重
要的一份。暴否眞的",重要",
那得視乎報4書中的搴議有多少: 實行了 °'
在目前的情1况下。委員會很多 未必有實行的機會。就拿改革参
議院來說e目前的参議員都是由衆 議院的^政黨所委任的;但實際上 我們的國會是由参議院和衆議院所 組成-而國會就是代表整個加拿大 政府。委員會認爲現在的安排並不 民主,因^乂民並沒有像美國-直接選出参議院議員。但這項建 將不會受到支持,因爲加拿大人對 参議院還未,心到要改革它的程 a我們把参議院看成是一灘渾水 是執政黨對*ti的忠心黨員的"犒 "一一不論是他們的籌款人員還是 失敗的政,。
但報吿書上的其他建議^會引起 民衆的公開辯論。其中最爲人民所
關心的莫如:H失業保險金的申請
資格和應得福利;W跟美國進行自 〇率漸取締家庭津貼(卽
由貿易 牛奶金) 實行的 首先
。這三項建議究竟有多少
,率應5,:〕:纏顏謹議:讓震:: 我們談談失業保險計劃, 吿書的建議是絕對有可能實行的
9因爲該建議可以節省一百甘億元
報吿書稱。現時失業金的運作方 法,使申請者太快得到福利◎人ffi
The Report of the HacDonald Royal Commission on the state of the economy is in. Alreadyi, some economists are calling it possibly the most important document of its kind in contemporary times. Whether this early prognosis can stand up depends wholly on how much of the Report's recommendations are ever rpalized through legislative, enactment.
As mattejrs now stand some of the Royal Commission's ideas will be stillborn. Take Senate reform. Senators are curreatly appointed by the party in command of the House of Commons. But both Commons and Senate make up our Parliament, the institutional embodiment of the Canadian state. The Commission feels that this arrangement is undemocratic for the people dp not directly elect Senators, as is the case in the United States. But there will not be a stampede of support for the Commission's sensible suggestion. The majority of Canadians do not care ^riough about the Senate to ref orii^ it, I we think of it as a patronage cbsspool for rewarding the governing party's faithful functionaries, be they fundraisers or flunkies.
Other recommendations g however, w^ill generate enormous
應該至少作四至五個月時爲兩'
個月)才可以有«格申請4業福利
。委員會認爲,由於工作•定的時
間太短,受惠者從保險計豳中得到 太多金錢9而這些"寬大1的金額
»成爲一種嚴重的反剌激作用,受 惠者不會積^地找尋工作:,故此, 委員會建議,最高的失業救濟,額 應降低六分一》從二百七+六元*
減至二百卅元。 (
這些建議中,有關申請争格和福
利金額將會非常受梅隆尼府的歡 迎-尤其是財政部長韋遜I。減低支
持失業入士的費用'是降本赤字的
一條捷徑。原本失業金在籴些程度
上就像是二項社會福利,谏多加拿 大人,就算不是保守黨的束持者也
會同意這種說法。他們都^我們在 壞失業人士》而沒有向命們推行
努力工作"這些社會觀4: °
在我看來》報吿書的建^是在反 映,長久以來對失業的恐妹,而擴 大成爲責罰那些受害者,*如報吿 書所指出,是我們的經濟^景》 理天然資源不善,稅收制余過於 謹。和其他無數因素導致傘們的高 失業率-而並不是由於失i人士所
public debate. And perhaps none more than those asspciatexi with a) eligibility and 【benbf丄t enti tlemehts under the^ I unemployment insurance p'lan, b) free trade with the U.S." c) the qradual abolition oi the family allowance system.; How likely are the suggestions related to the above trio to b<s, carried out? {
Let1s Degin with oul \ ' unemployment lasur^nce system. Here changes may be afoot givefi the $12 billion annual cost of the plan- \
As the insurance scheme now operates, says the Report, insured applicants are doo quickly eligible for beriefits. People should have to wdrk at least feme to five months instead of the current f requiremeht of two montHs before qualifying . Havijng met that relatively short j requirement, complains t|he Commission, beneficiaries of the system are given tod much money. The 'generous1 [payments are a serious dis-incentive for receipients to aggressively look for work of any kind. 】 Thereforef in the Report*'s opinion, maximum benefit's should be trimmed by a sixth, ffrora $276.00 weekly to $230.0;0 weekly. :
These recommendations;
畔調flL
MQOERU TIMES
DESMOND GLYNN
造成的o 、 、 !;
當然很多人會指同情失業者的人 爲"同情心過於豐富* 。但郊柬委 員會的建議被接受的話9會,H多 人排隊申請失業福利。 i :
毫無疑問s報吿書的自由琳易建
是急進的3 K現實的"保謙主義
大相逕庭。自由m易的建酏與5^ : 失業金保險非常相似。我ffl很|| 業是受pj保護的》我們的關稅加 在入q貨上來阻止外國^司瞌本地 貨競爭"力效就如人們收取牵業金 —樣"太寬大會寵壞受益人—;, ,將北美洲變成一個自由區f ^保 護的工業必須改善產品來跟人競爭
»否則便面臨淘汰的命運。沛最受
影響的加^:大工業是:製衣f訪織 、鞋、傢具和家庭用品。而晕反對
自由、貿易的其中一名委員是ii拿大
聯合鋼鐵工會的會長朱華先牟:,他 警吿這建議將嚴重影響到廣太的勞 動階餍,但大部份人的意見認爲自 由貿易是値得的。在十年內、天然
資源如木材、礦產、漁產等,由於 市塲的擴大而增加三百億元—: '大部份對自由貿易的爭論,^會 變成是浪費氣力的。要得到*由貿 易的協議,首先美國人得找刦一些 對他們,利條件,現時却仍有待磋
商.o美國人正在處於"保護±鈾"
的情緖中»便宜的外國貨南卞;,一 樣令很多商人不快-正如加:^大商 人希望擁有自己的國家市場、一樣。 自由貿易需要很多調整9才^烤雙
regarding eligibility and | re-丄mbursement will surely;sound welcome to the Mulroney '-government, and particuAariy Finance Minister Wilson- A sure path to reducing the deficit is to reduce the cost of maintaining the jobless in: some degree of welfare - Hany ; Canadians who are not | :、
necessarily Conservatives bgree。 They say w;e are 'coddling' t the unemployed instead of enforcing the '»ork-ethicf upon them:-;
What I see in the Reporjt'js recommeadations on unemplolyment insurance is a reflection ;of a deep seated, traditional fear about unemployment which ;: manifests itself in punishing the victims. As the Report1 makes abundantly clear in [those sections dealing wich the [broad economic causes of our mal|ise, mismanagement of our naturlai resources, the rigidities !of our tax system and numerous ot|her items are to blame for our; current high unemployment f 1 instead of the people*who : | experience it.
There are, of course, some:' people who readily denigrajte sympathy for the unemployed las 'bleeding heart* sentimentality However, if the Commissiori* s advice is acted upon^ many !more people are likely to find \ themselves lining up for \
出版:信達傳播機搆 i
published by: synapsis comm—cations INC. 地址:291 DUNDAS ST. WEST SUITEJ328 TORONTO OMT M5T 161 TEL: 597^ 16S48 597- 167S
方達成^議。
在家庭津貼方面,敏吿
應逐歩取消a代替它的是一個收入. 保障計劃或每年收+保證計劃力委:
員會稱。每―個四人的加拿大庭 每年保證可得到接举一萬四千元的 收入,建議無疑爲加拿大人設立一 個生活水準。預料將,受到廣大的 爭論。因爲該建議的的是希望將 中產階級的收入v移交收入較低的 家庭&遣移交的程^是如何肆疔釣
首先a取、消所有木鈿^家庭津貝占:
者的福利金,將ii*rF籴的支撥 入"收入保證"計劃中◎其次,所+,
有收入超過三萬元巧人士 a取^個
人入息免稅額n所械亦入"牧入 保證"基金中。1 . 現在所建譲的"收入保證"計劃* ,使聯邦政府背棄麥當奴委員會的1 前身一一著名的盧維,舒路斯委員會 在卅年代末期和四十年代初的建譲. 。盧維舒路斯當時成的目的,是,. 爲當時的政府建議如何處理加拿大' 在卅年代的"嚴重經濟衰返"―'
也就是所謂"汚穢的卅年代"。: 盧維舒路斯委員會爲後來的家庭 津貼和失業保險計劃,鋪下道铬,在 當時上述兩者爲認爲'是福利國家的 兩大支柱。第二次"ti^大戰後的社 會安定繁榮,一直被認爲是由於採 取仿似上述計劃所促成的。而最幽:: 默的是,現在麥當欢委會卻認爲除 非消途這兩項歷晦悠久的計ffl,否 則經濟復甦將會是艱'苦而長遠的道 路。麥當奴委員會希望將福利國家 的鐘擺移向相反的方向。現時的問 題是:誰人的"脂喷"將隨着鐘擺
的方向被割離體外6
unemployment benefits. Without doubt r the Report's proposal lor a free trade agreement Is among its most radical. At the same time. this radical/departure; ^ fcom existing trading policy' (called protectionism) is held out as the best long term remedy for our ailing economy.
The thinking behind the . free-trade idea is somewhat similar to the ideas underlying reform ot the unenhploymerit 、、 insurance system. Many-of our -industries which are shielded from foreign competition by custom taxes on imported ^oods. have grown too projtected - The effect is similar to what 、 happens to people living on unemployment insurance, Generosity spoils the recipient. By creating a single free: zone in North America,protected industries wii丄fiave to shape up to the competition or go uncter.. Which Canadian industries are likely to be most vulnerable to American compecition(?): textiles, clothing, footwear / farnituce and nousehold appliances. Sigaificaritly, the only commissioner to reject the free-trade optioril is Mr . E.― Gerard, riatioaal Airector of the United Steelworlceirs of Canada. He warns!that it will have serious repercussions for many
working Canadians.
con't on A8
慶大打字行595—1272
CHflTTAI CHINESE TYPEStTTING DIANA T. YEH 姚!
,輯:羅鏘鳴
EDITOR. ICHIEF: FOSTER C. M; L0
編輯助理:,^儀
EDITOIUAL ASSISTANT: LAURA FUNG
業務郜經理:林維裹 | business manager: james LAM I
業務顧問:徐潤泉 i
BUSINESS CONSULTANT: CHUI YUN- CtJIUEN
廣吿都經理:伍啓照 ADVERTISING MANAGER: MWUE m 廣吿鄯副,理:黃志揚 ASSISTANT ADVERTISING MANAGER: HENRY WONG
.':,等
製作/美術經理:雷德、
art/ERomtemnr manager*, peter lus
製作/美術助理:李得
ART/PRODUCTION ASSISTANT: KENT Lfi