$30 million spent to protect PM since 2006: documents

[jdobbin]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...1026?hub=Canada

TORONTO -- Nearly $30 million has been spent to provide security for Prime Minister Stephen Harper since he took office in 2006, newly released documents show.

And the rising cost of protecting the prime minister suggests he may have faced new threats since taking the job, a security expert says.

Harper's security costs totalled $10.7 million during his first year in office and rose to nearly $13 million in the 2007-08 fiscal year, according to documents obtained by The Canadian Press through Access to Information laws.

Partial costs for the current fiscal year totalled $5.6 million.

I wonder how much of this might have to do with the threats from the Toronto youths were taken into custody for the threats they represented to the prime minister?

[noahbody]

It might have to do with crazies planning to storm parliament and behead the PM.

[Who's Doing What?]

He's too much of a wimp to strangle his own attackers.

[craiger]

He's too much of a wimp to strangle his own attackers.

I have been discusing this on other forums the point that bothers me I live in Edmonton the second largest murder capital even with the huge inflation and lack of man power in Alberta we can hire over 120 officers training and all for a few million. bothers me Harper has a damn Army protecting him like the man is not that important. seriously who wants to kill the PM of canada besides some dim witted teens from Toronto. We are talking a canadian PM a peon! $30 million could protect allot of lives.

If a extremist group should choose to carry a attack it won't be our PM but most likely the Oilsand or something similar wich nearly is not as funded as Harpers protection.

Harper needs to get off the dope it clearly is making him to paranoid.

[White Doors]

I have been discusing this on other forums the point that bothers me I live in Edmonton the second largest murder capital even with the huge inflation and lack of man power in Alberta we can hire over 120 officers training and all for a few million. bothers me Harper has a damn Army protecting him like the man is not that important. seriously who wants to kill the PM of canada besides some dim witted teens from Toronto. We are talking a canadian PM a peon! $30 million could protect allot of lives.

If a extremist group should choose to carry a attack it won't be our PM but most likely the Oilsand or something similar wich nearly is not as funded as Harpers protection.

Harper needs to get off the dope it clearly is making him to paranoid.

So you don't think it's important to protect the leader of our country?

Would your opinion change if they were spending that 30 million on Jack Layton if he were PM? I think it would...

Fess up!

[cybercoma]

The PM needs to be protected, regardless of whom it is. Without knowing how the money is spent, it's impossible to make any conclusion as to the worthiness of the amount.

[William Ashley]

The PM needs to be protected, regardless of whom it is. Without knowing how the money is spent, it's impossible to make any conclusion as to the worthiness of the amount.

It's a waste of money. If he needs personal body gaurds to protect him from his bad policies, he should be paying for them out of pocket. There is a limit to state security. Eg. perhaps 4 body gaurds and some monitoring equipment - eg roaving press band that might even pay for the chance.. but if centralization is so heavy on the PM to make sure things keep running then obviously a dictator is not doing Canada good.

Even Israeli head of states travel with less than a platoon of guards.. and they are israel.

Edited October 29, 2008 by William Ashley

[guyser]

It's a waste of money. If he needs personal body gaurds to protect him from his bad policies, he should be paying for them out of pocket.

Only the policies that can shoot. Never seen one do it, but lets not let that stop your plan.

There is a limit to state security. Eg. perhaps 4 body gaurds and some monitoring equipment -

Sure, 4 will do it. Of course they will never leave his side . Want to bet the guards wives and family will be a wee bit upset?

Even Israeli head of states travel with less than a platoon of guards.. and they are israel.

Id sure like to see the link that proves this. Why? For one, Israel is quite secretive, for another , even their planes are guarded by machine gun toting security, for another, far too many whack jobs in the ME are gunning for the Israeli PM.

Our PM, like him or not, can spend this and more without one word of denigration from me.

It is roughly a million $$ a month. Salaries alone could account for $700-$800,000 a month. Add in car costs, radios, other electronic equipment and voila.

Not to mention those sleeves they talk into, those have to be expensive.

[William Ashley]

Only the policies that can shoot. Never seen one do it, but lets not let that stop your plan.

Sure, 4 will do it. Of course they will never leave his side . Want to bet the guards wives and family will be a wee bit upset?

Id sure like to see the link that proves this. Why? For one, Israel is quite secretive, for another , even their planes are guarded by machine gun toting security, for another, far too many whack jobs in the ME are gunning for the Israeli PM.

Our PM, like him or not, can spend this and more without one word of denigration from me.

It is roughly a million $$ a month. Salaries alone could account for $700-$800,000 a month. Add in car costs, radios, other electronic equipment and voila.

Not to mention those sleeves they talk into, those have to be expensive.

30 Million a year is rediculous. The guy isn't the freaken queen. He is an economist that got lucky enough to be put in office, his value is almost neglible. Do other MP's have 30 million dollar budgets for security.

THe guy is not a freaken prophet. If he is such a dickhead people want to kill him let him pay out of his salary and bribes.

A $1 million budget is even high for personal security for an MP. The fact he is prime minister has very

little value. The world would continue after his death quite fine.

I'd rather fee and provide clothing or tuitition for 6000 people than pay overinflated security costs for an MP.

If the local police and military arn't enough to protect him, then this says something about how wonderful the country he has is.

I'd put in some RCMP officers and have them do investigative and paperwork when the perimiter isn't breached. There is no way I would spend tax payer dollars protecting this person more than any other citizen.

Let him live on a military base if that is what it takes, but don't waste 30million tax payer dollars to protect the guy from his own bad policy.

Edited October 30, 2008 by William Ashley

[Alta4ever]

30 Million a year is rediculous. The guy isn't the freaken queen. He is an economist that got lucky enough to be put in office, his value is almost neglible. Do other MP's have 30 million dollar budgets for security.

THe guy is not a freaken prophet. If he is such a dickhead people want to kill him let him pay out of his salary and bribes.

A $1 million budget is even high for personal security for an MP. The fact he is prime minister has very little value. The world would continue after his death quite fine.

So what if it was you and your family, not that you'll ever get elected if you repeat in public what you post here.

[William Ashley]

So what if it was you and your family, not that you'll ever get elected if you repeat in public what you post here.

I wouldn't use security. I'd buy a gun, and run military operations and live on a base if it mattered.

As prime minister though there is very little to do other than make sure that the cabinet function. All that other BS is stuff the Govenor general should be doing.

The PM's real job is to select a cabinet. Help with a few appointments and that is pretty much it.

Edited October 30, 2008 by William Ashley

[noahbody]

I have been discusing this on other forums the point that bothers me I live in Edmonton the second largest murder capital even with the huge inflation and lack of man power in Alberta we can hire over 120 officers training and all for a few million.

Are you getting your police officers from China?

Calgary city council recently voted to commit $25 million a year for five years to add 200 new police recruits, hoping the province would match its pledge

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/story....85-9b0869adc10e

[Alta4ever]

I wouldn't use security. I'd buy a gun, and run military operations and live on a base if it mattered.

As prime minister though there is very little to do other than make sure that the cabinet function. All that other BS is stuff the Govenor general should be doing.

The PM's real job is to select a cabinet. Help with a few appointments and that is pretty much it.

Really you are going to hold up in a bunker? Makes sense you really seem to have no idea when it comes to anything so why should this be any different.

[William Ashley]

Really you are going to hold up in a bunker? Makes sense you really seem to have no idea when it comes to anything so why should this be any different.

The allusion to hitler was wonderful there. Honestly, at this point I don't feel a security concern. Maybe I'd invite a few buddies out to meech lake for shooting practice. Whatever security operations were running would be training exercises to say the least. Without giving too much information out, I don't think a bunker would be needed, but that would actually be sort of cool, as long as living in it didn't increase operating expenses. Really though alot of military personnel live in normal homes or on military bases, and they get along just fine. They are obvious targets for any anti war people or terrorists, and you don't often hear about them.

With the PM's nearly $300,000 / year salary I think they should hire their own body gaurds. I think an honour gaurd may be in order for some historic sites, if there are tourism dollars coming in.. but I don't think 30 million is made from people visiting the PM's house.

With my policies though I may need to live in a bunker. As for harper I think that except for home security and a couple RCMP officers doing office work at his place in the gaurd house, if he is receiving threats (and in relation to those threats)... it should be up to him to buy staff out of his salary as he needs them.

I personally despise how much unconstitutional power the PM has assumed over the last 50 years. I think that the PM should NOT be executive beyond the extent of cabinet and on in agreement with the governor general in council. It is really that simple. The man is one of many Privy Council Officers. He should not receive drastically special treatment and as I stated before a 1 Million dollar budget is high .. 30 Million is ludicrist.

Edited October 30, 2008 by William Ashley

[William Ashley]

The allusion to hitler was wonderful there. Honestly, at this point I don't feel a security concern. Maybe I'd invite a few buddies out to meech lake for shooting practice. Whatever security operations were running would be training exercises to say the least. Without giving too much information out, I don't think a bunker would be needed, but that would actually be sort of cool, as long as living in it didn't increase operating expenses. Really though alot of military personnel live in normal homes or on military bases, and they get along just fine. They are obvious targets for any anti war people or terrorists, and you don't often hear about them.

With the PM's nearly $300,000 / year salary I think they should hire their own body gaurds. I think an honour gaurd may be in order for some historic sites, if there are tourism dollars coming in.. but I don't think 30 million is made from people visiting the PM's house.

With my policies though I may need to live in a bunker. As for harper I think that except for home security and a couple RCMP officers doing office work at his place in the gaurd house, if he is receiving threats (and in relation to those threats)... it should be up to him to buy staff out of his salary as he needs them.

I personally despise how much unconstitutional power the PM has assumed over the last 50 years. I think that the PM should NOT be executive beyond the extent of cabinet and on in agreement with the governor general in council. It is really that simple. The man is one of many Privy Council Officers. He should not receive drastically special treatment and as I stated before a 1 Million dollar budget is high .. 30 Million is ludicrist.

I'm geussing the NSA/CIA would pay for security anyway (if they liked me)

[Alta4ever]

The allusion to hitler was wonderful there. Honestly, at this point I don't feel a security concern. Maybe I'd invite a few buddies out to meech lake for shooting practice. Whatever security operations were running would be training exercises to say the least. Without giving too much information out, I don't think a bunker would be needed, but that would actually be sort of cool, as long as living in it didn't increase operating expenses. Really though alot of military personnel live in normal homes or on military bases, and they get along just fine. They are obvious targets for any anti war people or terrorists, and you don't often hear about them.

With the PM's nearly $300,000 / year salary I think they should hire their own body gaurds. I think an honour gaurd may be in order for some historic sites, if there are tourism dollars coming in.. but I don't think 30 million is made from people visiting the PM's house.

With my policies though I may need to live in a bunker. As for harper I think that except for home security and a couple RCMP officers doing office work at his place in the gaurd house, if he is receiving threats (and in relation to those threats)... it should be up to him to buy staff out of his salary as he needs them.

I personally despise how much unconstitutional power the PM has assumed over the last 50 years. I think that the PM should NOT be executive beyond the extent of cabinet and on in agreement with the governor general in council. It is really that simple. The man is one of many Privy Council Officers. He should not receive drastically special treatment and as I stated before a 1 Million dollar budget is high .. 30 Million is ludicrist.

Do you not get it its not about policies its about crack pots, something I am being to beleive you are.

What is this about hitler? There was no allusion. I was just pointing out to you that you can't hide from public sight and run a country be visible on the world stage or command the respect of nation if you can't even show your face.

300,000 wouldn't even buy the man power to protect you, let alone the aircraft, aircrew, motorcades and ect required to go one over seas meeting or Canadian function.

Just being the leader of a nation makes the PM a target not policies, or how much power they were given under the statute of Westminster. The PM no matter which party should have all the protection they need. This is not a waste of money they should have the security of well being to carry out the job we elected them to do. The PM deserves this special treatment because we elected them to this position.

BTW packing heat isn't going to stop someone hidden and determined. It would all be over before you even new what had happened. Don't be foolish.

Just these few posts you have made in this thread have taken away what little crediblity I thought you had, I am begining to see you as nothing but a troll.

Edited October 30, 2008 by Alta4ever

[Mr.Canada]

30 Million a year is rediculous. The guy isn't the freaken queen. He is an economist that got lucky enough to be put in office, his value is almost neglible. Do other MP's have 30 million dollar budgets for security.

THe guy is not a freaken prophet. If he is such a dickhead people want to kill him let him pay out of his salary and bribes.

A $1 million budget is even high for personal security for an MP. The fact he is prime minister has very

little value. The world would continue after his death quite fine.

I'd rather fee and provide clothing or tuitition for 6000 people than pay overinflated security costs for an MP.

If the local police and military arn't enough to protect him, then this says something about how wonderful the country he has is.

I'd put in some RCMP officers and have them do investigative and paperwork when the perimiter isn't breached. There is no way I would spend tax payer dollars protecting this person more than any other citizen.

Let him live on a military base if that is what it takes, but don't waste 30million tax payer dollars to protect the guy from his own bad policy.

It's 30 million dollars since 2006, not a year. I'm with guyser on this one. Even of it's Layton, the PM is our leader and needs to be protected at all costs. I'd take a bullet for our PM no matter who is in office.

Edited October 30, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[Hcheh]

It's 30 million dollars since 2006, not a year. I'm with guyser on this one. Even of it's Layton, the PM is our leader and needs to be protected at all costs. I'd take a bullet for our PM no matter who is in office.

Not saying that Harper is, but I wouldn't take a bullet for a terrible P.M. Why take a bullet for someone failing your country? Unless of course, you have no problem taking a bullet for anyone. Anyhow, I agree that the P.M. position generally needs good security. Maybe 30 million is quite a lot though..

Whoever was talking about the P.M. buying a gun is pretty ridiculous. I don't think anyone would like the idea of the Prime Minister shooting anybody up

[William Ashley]

Do you not get it its not about policies its about crack pots

A lot of these crack pots likely have "good reasons" for being crack pots. It is easier just to say they are nuts though. True I will give you charging parliament and cutting off peoples heads is a pretty cracky proposition. Or two people trying to do a mass murder of black kids people while wearing white top hats, is pretty cracky, but in their heads I'm geussing it made sense to them, or they were drunk or high.

Wat is this about hitler?

Hitlers last stand at the Bunker? Was the allusion I detected. It made much better rhetorical sense to do the allusion. Living in a castle would be way cooler than a bunker though. Perhaps Canada needs a castle or two rather than "town homes". Castles are still pretty defensible today, and you could always build a bunker.. under one for added effect.

one

can't hide from public sight run a country be visible on the world stage command the respect of nation if you can't even show your face.

Personally I don't want to see harpers face when he isn't on official business. Eg. when he is at home, there are things he can do at home, like whipe his but, have s-e-x with his wife, and yell at his son for playing his electric guitar at 2am on a school night on maximum volume - these are things that really make no difference whether on a military base or sussex drive. As far as hiding face.. lots of people live on military bases, and they are just another type of community. It is way more meaningful to spend money on national security than it is one persons security so why not lump it in for cost savings. If you are claiming the military is full of crackpots and the prime minister would be less safe surrounded by them, then I have you question the whole premise of security by people able to protect the prime minister.

300,000 wouldn't even buy the man power to protect you, let alone the aircraft, aircrew, motorcades and ect required to go one over seas meeting or Canadian function.

What does the PM need motorcades for? Does Jim Baseille use motor cades? No the guy drives some car or a limo, and he is a billionaire. Like I said though any security operations would be included in with training exercises where possible. But the best security is not to let people who don't need to know know. It is called Need to know. Eg. don't let people know where the PM is staying or doing. Also as far as need to go over seas... That isn't the PM"s job, that is foreign afairs or the govenor generals job, etc.. let the ambassadors do the overseas work, they are there anyway. The GG is suppose to host state visits.. it is really that simple. Keep the PM to their legal role.

Just being the leader of a nation

THe PM ain't the leader of the nation. They help manage the country. They arn't the president.

The PM deserves this special treatment because we elected them to this position.

The PM is not an elected post, it is an appointed one.

BTW packing heat isn't going to stop someone hidden and determined.

the Gun isn't for them.

Look who you are calling a fool.

You are a republican, and a traitor to Canadian Law.

Edited October 30, 2008 by William Ashley

[Mr.Canada]

William Ashley have you been drinking tonight?

Your above post is bordering on insane.

lol.

[Alta4ever]

A lot of these crack pots likely have "good reasons" for being crack pots.

Do you have personal insight into this?

[Mr.Canada]

Do you have personal insight into this?

Lol

[Hcheh]

The PM is not an elected post, it is an appointed one.

You are a republican, and a traitor to Canadian Law.

1) TECHNICALLY. But not practically, just like the Queen's powers. The one with the most seats in the house will 99.9% become the Prime Minister. So, in that sense, the P.M. IS elected. At any rate, "The PM is not an elected post, it is an appointed one." was a pretty anal statement considering that we all accept the fact that conventionally, the P.M. has to run a campaign, win votes and then takes office.

Anyway, would you want George W. Bush to take office, just because he was "elected"? 100% Guaranteed elected office is not always a good thing, especially when the situation could be so easily corrupted. \

2) Dude, we're just havin' a debate.. Who are you calling a "traitor to Canadian law"? haha

[August1991]

I wonder how much of this might have to do with the threats from the Toronto youths were taken into custody for the threats they represented to the prime minister?

It has nothing to do with this except how it plays with Ottawa's bureaucracy.

IMV, this is Harper telling the RCMP (and DND) that he supports them. They can spend what they want.

IMV, Harper is making a mistake here.

----

During the FLQ crisis, Pierre Trudeau rightly told his wife that if she were kidnapped, he would not negotiate. (Margaret reported this in her memoirs in a negative light.) Trudeau had it right. Churchill flew extensively during World War II.

A true leader must be prepared to assume a greater visible risk than anyone else.

I hold Bush Jnr in low esteem largely because he flew off to North Dakota on 11 September 2001. He should have returned to the White House. Rumsfield didn't leave the Pentagon that morning and Churchill kept residence in London.

[William Ashley]

1) TECHNICALLY. But not practically, just like the Queen's powers. The one with the most seats in the house will 99.9% become the Prime Minister. So, in that sense, the P.M. IS elected. At any rate, "The PM is not an elected post, it is an appointed one." was a pretty anal statement considering that we all accept the fact that conventionally, the P.M. has to run a campaign, win votes and then takes office.

That is really unfortunate that you don't see parliament and the commons as a means for the people to have voice in the legislature.. that is the whole point of the election - NOT - electing a PM.