True colours

Garth Turner rightly received some praise for having more principles than other Cons in the wake of Emerson fiasco. But for those thinking he might generally be a voice of sanity within the Con government, his biggest criticism of the Cons' "child-care plan" is that it doesn't go far enough in favouring wealthier, one-income families:

Turner, who was in trouble with his own party last month for publicly criticizing the government, argued Wednesday that many Canadians are not satisfied with a pledge to offer a $1,200 annual allowance to families for every child under six...

“You’re in the highest income tax bracket. You got two people living across the street who are both working, and maybe their family makes exactly the same as your family, but you pay more tax,” said Turner who represents the Halton riding, outside of Toronto. “People say: ‘That’s not fair. And if I were able to split income with my wife or my husband and average between the two of us, we’d end up paying the same taxes as those guys across the street. So why penalize me for caring for my children?’”

While obviously a tax break (without discussing the associated costs in service) would seem to be a plus for all involved, it's amazing that Turner is able to believe the biggest need for child care is that faced by high-income families who can already afford to have one parent stay home full-time. And it surely says something about Harper that he's willing to listen to Turner's full presentation on how to be even more regressive, but not to give a moment's attention to the national movement to build a real solution for those who need it.