provincial
are respon-
eanio: pon
the awe and financ-
Cation of their ci-

€

bag oMent of Manitoba

the main ae responsibilities
School pe local and divi-

T® sch Oards. It directs
They 5 ol boards to raise

the _.<YYing a property tax

NE regi
lity, *Sidents of its muni-
Th

© sch

no ae boards, however,
” their to levy an income
Propert Wealthier citizens.
“ai tax, on the other
ete 9 : of the powerful
Sts in ae big business in-
is not municipal coun-
Mery based on the property
i ility ¢

is O pay.

7

BUR:
Ss in + +
Pe P Winnipeg as in

y u i j

uy malities in Canada
a fallen taxation has al-
“least ab On the backs of
tor le to afford it.

More
Sete than’.
by lection years now

ag platf
in; Election tform of the
~ommittee in

Nici 4S advocated
that
‘bility ees should be based
® pay. Let the rich

ow

‘y

wD

°meowner.

on taxes and ed

e

n

k, In ty for more education keeps growing. But so
Moblen article, a school trustee suggests some ways
Mm without increasing the burden on the wage earner an

Some frank talk

Winnipeg has enjoye
sentation 0O
several decades.

other provinces use the experiences of
entatives in proposing mec
high tax burden on the small

peg's labor repres
sures to ease the

fom a Winnipeg School Trustee

ucation

d continuous labor repre-
n civic government bodies for
Can the labor movement in

Winni-

homeowner and businessman?
At right: an aerial view of Winnipeg.

pay their fair share! We who
have run and have been elected
on that platform have advocated
that the large business and
financial corporations, who now
pay only the same rate as an
ordinary homeowner, should
pay:

1. Taxes on the full assess-
ment, not on 66 percent of the
assessment.

2. A graduated property tax,
that is, the bigger the corpora-
tion the greater the tax.

3, A graduated business tax,
also based on ability to pay.

Such a tax arrangement is the
only democratic way of financ-
ing municipal services. Business
benefits from all the municipal
services many times more than
does an ordinary worker and
should be paying taxes com-
mensurate with the benefits de-
rived from such services.

does the
of solving

Besides, corporations are sub-
sidized by the federal govern-
ment: they can deduct property
and business tax payments from
their income tax. No home-
owner can or is allowed to de-
duct his property tax from his
income tax. If we don’t increase
taxes on corporations, then, in
effect, we allow the federal gov-
ernment to collect some of the
taxes that rightfully belong to
the municipalities..

This is why we have been ad-
vocating for many years that the
federal government take over
the cost of elementary educa-
tion, grades one to six.

Because corporations are al-
lowed: to deduct property and
business taxes and rent expen-
ses from their income tax, We
have also been demanding that
property owners be allowed to
deduct their property tax or rent
costs from their income tax.

Our position that the provin-
cial government should assume
a larger share of the cost of
education is also soundly based.
The provincial government has
wide powers of taxation. They
can tax the profits of mono-
polies. For example, the Interna-
tional Nickel Company made a
net profit of $72.5 million in
1963. This company has a huge
mine and smelter at Thompson,
Manitoba.

It would be interesting to find
out how much the manitoba
government collected in income
taxes from the International
Nickel Company in 1963. Very
little, comparatively speaking,
since the announced policy of
the Roblin government is “that
corporations and their incomes
are taxed to the limit—to tax
them more would mean riding
them out of the Province.” (Pre-
mier Roblin, in a statement to
the Winnipeg school trustees,
March 23, 1963.)

If the provincial government’s
policy in 1964 is the same as it
was in 1960, then the provincial
treasury obtained less than five
percent on profits taken out of
the province by the Wall Street
owners of our natural resources,
or less than seven-tenths of one
percent of the value of our pro-
duction

The .$20,000,000 of new
“sales” taxes proposed by the
provincial government means
still greater tax burdens on the
people and hardly any burden
on the large corporations. For
example, only $400,000 of the
$20,000,000 is to come from the
huge mining corporations in
Manitoba.

The $50 reduction in school
taxes by way of refund will be
less than a homeowner will pay
in new taxes. Those living in
rented homes or apartments will
get nothing back at all. We must
keep in mind that of the $20,-
000,000 of new taxes it will col-
lect, the Roblin government will
give back to the homeowners
and the municipalities only $8,-
000,000. In other words, Pre-
mier Roblin collects $20, keeps
$12 and gives us back $8 — a

bargain that will fool few
people.

- This.is why we are demanding
that the provincial government
should increase its education
grant to the Winnipeg school
board from 18.5 percent of the
cost of education in 1963 to 50
percent. It is the only answer
to the constantly increasing
costs of education. The provin-
cial government should also
take on a larger share of the
cost of relief, welfare, health.

3 It is also why we are demand-
ing that there should also be a
$1,000 tax exemption on homes,
since they are a living necessity
and produce no revenue to the
owner.

Taxes based on ability to pa
is and will continue to be ithe
only solution to the problem of
financing our education system.

September 25, 1964—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 5

a ae ie Nuove (Rome) ;
s easy to criticize—you don’t suffer from insomnia.”