In response to Royce Schmidt’s Letter to the Editor (Eliminating HST may not prevent more tax, Trail Times June 16).
Royce’s letter said, “The provincial government can very easily impose PST on many things that were previously excluded from PST in the past, so within days of extinguishing HST, we could just see PST on restaurant meals, haircuts, theatre tickets, etc. They could also change the rules so that businesses would be exempt from PST on their inputs. So, the HST may be gone, but the end result may not be much difference than the HST as it is today.”
He said he voted no and encouraged us to do the same.
I agree that the provincial government could do this, but somehow, faced with an impressive outcry of “No,” to the HST (by having to say “Yes,” to the former PST/GST) – (you must admit that the government was quite clever in the way it worded that question.... blurring the issues and a bit of smoke and mirrors always helps confuse the issue at hand...), I think they’re smart enough to back off.
When Premier Clark actually gave us the deciding move, the government’s options were instantly restricted.
To act against the majority’s decision on this matter, “No,” to the HST, “Yes,” to the former PST/GST (yes, I am presuming that this will be the final result of the referendum) - the government has made itself responsible to the will of the taxpayers. I don’t think they’ll even consider reneging on their agreement to bow to the will of the taxpayers.
And if they did do anything that stupid, we’d just vote them right out of office at the next election. I don’t consider any of our government’s members to be dummies, so I don’t anticipate having to deal with that scenario.
Annette Gallatin
Trail