A plausibility gap

CanWest reminds us that the Cons' child care cheques will benefit those who need child-care support more than those who don't, in particular by eliminating the young child supplement under the child tax benefit. But don't worry, the Cons are at the ready with their excuse as to why that fact hasn't been highlighted:

Fiona MacLeod, a spokeswoman for National Revenue Minister Carol Skeleton, called the lack of an explanation about the benefit cut an oversight caused by "a communications gap."

So where does that gap in communications originate? Well, one could look to the Cons' platform, which promises "$1,200 per year for each pre-school child". Then there's Diane Finley's comments about "a $1,200-a-year benefit for all parents of preschoolers". And then again after the introduction of the budget, Finley continued to insist on an actual gain of $1200, with a convenient lack of any mention of the clawback. And I'm sure there are plenty more examples of the Cons trumpeting the $1,200 number while merrily ignoring the planned clawbacks.

But now, Canadians are supposed to believe that it was simply because of an unintentional oversight that the Cons went out of their way to avoid mentioning the clawbacks in their child-care plan.

Which I'd think is fair enough...but only if the Cons will at least acknowledge the need to close the gap starting now. So I can only assume we'll see a summer of Finley, Skelton and others giving their public appearances in front of a backdrop printed with "-$249. Screw the Poor" to even things out.