jdobbin Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...Uz4ruA02zYOhJ9w The RCMP watchdog is warning that a deep funding cut by the Harper government may hurt its ability to police the national police force.Federal budgeting documents indicate that the RCMP Public Complaints Commission will see its funding cut by 40 per cent. The watchdog now fears it may no longer be able to do the kind of work that resulted in the Mounties changing their controversial policy on Tasers. The government has a lot of work to do on the RCMP. Better to deal with problems early than to wait for a judicial review. Quote
Argus Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...Uz4ruA02zYOhJ9wThe government has a lot of work to do on the RCMP. Better to deal with problems early than to wait for a judicial review. I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. So far you've spoken against every cut the Tories have ever made - all while bitching that they should have made $15 billion in cuts to avoid a deficit. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
DrGreenthumb Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. So far you've spoken against every cut the Tories have ever made - all while bitching that they should have made $15 billion in cuts to avoid a deficit. problem is most of the cuts are to departments that watch over the federal government and its agents. I'm still pissed about them cutting the access to information registry. Quote
guyser Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. The snivil service would be a great start. ...ok ok, only half of them. Quote
ToadBrother Posted March 18, 2009 Report Posted March 18, 2009 problem is most of the cuts are to departments that watch over the federal government and its agents.I'm still pissed about them cutting the access to information registry. Well, you see, it's always best to cut in areas where your political interests are protected. Quote
jdobbin Posted March 19, 2009 Author Report Posted March 19, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. So far you've spoken against every cut the Tories have ever made - all while bitching that they should have made $15 billion in cuts to avoid a deficit. Think I have made a list of where cuts should come from. Reverse the money for VIA. $600 million. No more tax money for CBC: $800 million. Reverse Harper's increase in transfer payments: $2 billion End ethanol supports: $2 billion. Close the Royal Military College: $200 million. End the sub program: $2 billion. End oil subsidies: $2 billion. Reduce civil service through cuts and attrition: $2 billion. End regional economic development programs: $2 billion. Cancel the social housing increase: $2 billion. That is $15 billion. Quote
Progressive Tory Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. So far you've spoken against every cut the Tories have ever made - all while bitching that they should have made $15 billion in cuts to avoid a deficit. Funding to the much needed RCMP watchdog group is nowhere near that amount. Reducing the size of his cabinet will pay for it. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Shakeyhands Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Close the Royal Military College: $200 million. k, but please wait 1 more month... Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
guyser Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 k, but please wait 1 more month... Hell, why close it ? I always thought it was a good school. Is there a problem with it? Hell of a campus, and I always liked going there. (probably cuz their teams sucked) Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Think I have made a list of where cuts should come from.Reverse the money for VIA. $600 million. No more tax money for CBC: $800 million. Reverse Harper's increase in transfer payments: $2 billion End ethanol supports: $2 billion. Close the Royal Military College: $200 million. End the sub program: $2 billion. End oil subsidies: $2 billion. Reduce civil service through cuts and attrition: $2 billion. End regional economic development programs: $2 billion. Cancel the social housing increase: $2 billion. That is $15 billion. So what's he gonna do with all that savinging? Hope he has a good place to put it. You must wonder when things are cancelled and money is stopped - that money has to go some where - We get emotional and stop thinking when things are taken away from us - It would be smart to put the emotions aside and not look at where it is being taken from but where it is put - THEN you will know the actuall policy and will of the government - keey your eye no the ball . Quote
normanchateau Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 problem is most of the cuts are to departments that watch over the federal government and its agents. Yes, and sure enough here's what "economist" Harper is now doing to the very watchdog he hired to oversee the budget: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Yes, and sure enough here's what "economist" Harper is now doing to the very watchdog he hired to oversee the budget:http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National That's kind of like someone about to commit a crime, making sure that he pre-emptively frustrates any potential investigator by making sure he has no gas to get to the up and coming possible alledged crime scene.. Quote
normanchateau Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 That's kind of like someone about to commit a crime, making sure that he pre-emptively frustrates any potential investigator by making sure he has no gas to get to the up and coming possible alledged crime scene.. What's bizarre here is that he hired the investigator in the first place then impeded him from doing his job. Quote
Argus Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 Think I have made a list of where cuts should come from.Reverse the money for VIA. $600 million. No more tax money for CBC: $800 million. Reverse Harper's increase in transfer payments: $2 billion End ethanol supports: $2 billion. Close the Royal Military College: $200 million. End the sub program: $2 billion. End oil subsidies: $2 billion. Reduce civil service through cuts and attrition: $2 billion. End regional economic development programs: $2 billion. Cancel the social housing increase: $2 billion. That is $15 billion. The Liberal Party would never accept a cut to the CBC at this time. The CBC is already laying people off and begging the governmetn for more money. They would equally never accept cutting that money for social housing or regional econoic development. They'd go batty if you tried. I don't see how you intend to save $2 billion on the subs, which are already paid for, nor why you feel it's okay to spend billions propping up an auto sector which hasn't made money in a generation and which will probably fold anyway - but not okay to spend money on the oil industry which produces lots of jobs and a huge, huge amount of this country's foreign trade. I don't know enough about the money for VIA, but I doubt it's going to waste. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 What's bizarre here is that he hired the investigator in the first place then impeded him from doing his job. As I've already posted, this guy is the author of his own misfortune. He's politically inept and has involved himself far too much in the public eye. He was just supposed to be an anomyous researcher who provided reports on request to the House. Instead he's calling press conferences and giving interviews publicly challenging government policy statements and opinions. He's history. Everyone in Ottawa has known that for months. If he'd had a clue he would have resigned after the election. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
DrGreenthumb Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 As I've already posted, this guy is the author of his own misfortune. He's politically inept and has involved himself far too much in the public eye. He was just supposed to be an anomyous researcher who provided reports on request to the House. Instead he's calling press conferences and giving interviews publicly challenging government policy statements and opinions. He's history. Everyone in Ottawa has known that for months. If he'd had a clue he would have resigned after the election. So he is NOT supposed to inform the public of mismanagement on the part of the sitting government? That is his job. Harper talks about accountability but he only wants it for other parties not his own. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 What's bizarre here is that he hired the investigator in the first place then impeded him from doing his job. Kind of like the 9 11 commission...Politically it was a must to set up an investigative team..and it was good pacifying theatre for all - but no one was going to go as far as to who financed the operation...so they investigated only to the point that would not compromise the adminstration. I guess that the RCMP watch dogs actually really wanted to do their jobs right and that is a no no. Quote
jdobbin Posted March 20, 2009 Author Report Posted March 20, 2009 (edited) The Liberal Party would never accept a cut to the CBC at this time. The CBC is already laying people off and begging the governmetn for more money. They would equally never accept cutting that money for social housing or regional econoic development. They'd go batty if you tried. I don't see how you intend to save $2 billion on the subs, which are already paid for, nor why you feel it's okay to spend billions propping up an auto sector which hasn't made money in a generation and which will probably fold anyway - but not okay to spend money on the oil industry which produces lots of jobs and a huge, huge amount of this country's foreign trade. I don't know enough about the money for VIA, but I doubt it's going to waste. The subs are not already paid for. They have a $1.5 billion contract to fix them in B.C. And they still require $500 million to operate them and crew them. They are very expensive to run. Some military analysts have wondered just how much of a drain the program has been on overall Navy program. Paul Martin didn't increase money for social housing in 2004 and 2005 because it a program best taken care of by the provinces with the budget of $3 billion they already had. In fact, Martin axed the Housing minister position as PM. When he was Finance minister, he axed all social housing spending and when it was restored, it had a terrible record of carrying out the job, hence the freeze on any more increases. The Liberals just don't believe the program functions that well at the federal level. I think Harper has been suckered into this by the provinces. The regional economic development programs are just duplicating service already in place at the federal level in various ministries. It is a waste. They can stand to lose $2 billion in spending, especially if the municipalities have a share of the gas tax as they do now and if other ministries like Science, Transport and the like deal directly with provinces. As for the CBC, I think they should remain a public broadcaster, go commercial-free, sports-free and free of Hollywood fare and their budget should come out of a share of private broadcaster, cable companies and ISP providers revenues. Since giving up commercials and sports would be a $200 million to $500 million gift to the private sector and not having to compete with the CBC in bids for Hollywood fare, the private sector can certainly afford a trimmed down CBC. All direct taxpayer money would end. Stable funding based on revenues would be the rule. I think the Liberals can live with that and that is what a lot are proposing. Indirect costs to ratepayers through passed on costs would be much lower. The private sector would make a lot more money if they had hockey and other sports as well as the $200 million of commercials the CBC sells. The Liberals cut $600 million to VIA because it does go down a black hole. I didn't mention anything about auto industry since my understanding is that the money is a loan that needs to be paid back. It is also contingent on working in Canada. If it was an ongoing cost never to be repaid, I would have said no. The oil industry doesn't need the subsidies it gets. Harper at one time talked about cutting subsidies for business including a very profitable oil industry and I wish he had followed it up. Everyone of the areas I have mentioned for cuts has been considered, some the Liberals have cut in the past such as VIA and social housing. Some like the CBC just need to be taken off the taxpayer hands while still filling the need of a national broadcaster. I know some Tories want it gone completely but I think that won't work. You have to consider its huge popularity in Quebec or be devastated electorally. This is the best solution. Take it off the tax rolls and let the private sector have the frothy hockey and commercials and make them pay a percentage of revenue. They can hardly say they are being treated unfairly. Edited March 20, 2009 by jdobbin Quote
Argus Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 So he is NOT supposed to inform the public of mismanagement on the part of the sitting government? That is his job. Harper talks about accountability but he only wants it for other parties not his own. No it is NOT his job. It is NEVER the job of a government employee to challenge the government. It is his job to provide information to the House when the House requests it. If the opposition wants to use that information to challenge the government they are, clearly, free to do so. That is THEIR job, after all. Even the Auditor General, whose job it is to actually investigate public mismagement, btw, does not hold news conferences and challenge government ministers. He quietly audits departmental spending and performance in a variety of areas, and issues a report to parliament on how well those departments and programs are functioning. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
DrGreenthumb Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 No it is NOT his job. It is NEVER the job of a government employee to challenge the government. It is his job to provide information to the House when the House requests it. If the opposition wants to use that information to challenge the government they are, clearly, free to do so. That is THEIR job, after all.Even the Auditor General, whose job it is to actually investigate public mismagement, btw, does not hold news conferences and challenge government ministers. He quietly audits departmental spending and performance in a variety of areas, and issues a report to parliament on how well those departments and programs are functioning. Gimmee a break Argus, if the Liberals were in power and cutting back on the watchdogs, you'd be the first one to bitch about it. Quote
Argus Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 The subs are not already paid for. They have a $1.5 billion contract to fix them in B.C. And they still require $500 million to operate them and crew them. What you appear to be doing is trying to get $2 billion in savings - this year - off a multi-year maintenance and operations budget. Economics doesn't work like that. Paul Martin didn't increase money for social housing in 2004 and 2005 because it a program best taken care of by the provinces with the budget of $3 billion they already had. In fact, Martin axed the Housing minister position as PM. When he was Finance minister, he axed all social housing spending and when it was restored, it had a terrible record of carrying out the job, hence the freeze on any more increases. What? Are you saying Martin was a two-faced liar who claimed he cared about public housing but didn't really? Since taking office, the Mulroney government has drastically cut housing budgets and programs, transferred its responsibilities to the provinces without the requisite financial resources, and ignored the crying needs of hundreds of thousands of Canadian households. The Conservative government has demonstrated a total lack of leadership and compassion on this issue. National Liberal Caucus Task Force on Housing - chair, Paul Martin Junior And when Ignatieff said to the Canadian Club We need affordable housing, public transit, energy grids, high speed rail and programs to help lift many Canadians – and their kids – out of poverty. are you saying he didn't really mean it? Because it sure sounds like he thought the federal government ought to led a hand here. In fact, on his home page we read But the budget also contains important concessions—concessions forced on Stephen Harper by the force of a united Opposition. Affordable housing. ..... These measures are only in the budget because the opposition parties did their job, because the Liberal Party in particular remained resolved to hold Mr. Harper to account. So it looks here like comrade Michael is actually taking the credit for this. It certainly doesn't sound like he has any desire to cut housing out of the budget. The regional economic development programs are just duplicating service already in place at the federal level in various ministries. It is a waste. They can stand to lose $2 billion in spending, especially if the municipalities have a share of the gas tax as they do now and if other ministries like Science, Transport and the like deal directly with provinces. I've never liked the regional economic programs. But they were started by the Liberals and I've never heard any Liberal in authority calling on them to be eliminated. I can just imagine how the Liberals would react at this time if the Tories announced they were ending regional economic development. They'd have a field day! So don't try and tell me the Liberals would ever allow this. As for the CBC, I think they should remain a public broadcaster, go commercial-free, sports-free and free of Hollywood fare and their budget should come out of a share of private broadcaster, cable companies and ISP providers revenues. Since giving up commercials and sports would be a $200 million to $500 million gift to the private sector and not having to compete with the CBC in bids for Hollywood fare, the private sector can certainly afford a trimmed down CBC. Why should the private sector pay for something you want? For that matter, how do you think they'd be able to do that when they're laying people off now? The CBC no longer competing with them would certainly be helpful, but the CBC is losing money as it is. How in God's name do you think they would fare without the popular American shows and without commercials? They'd need double their current subsidy - maybe triple. The Liberals cut $600 million to VIA because it does go down a black hole. You mean because it's used to subsidise train travel to the West and to rural areas, and the Liberals didn't care about the West or rural areas. Let's see them cut dairy subsidies to Quebec. Yeah, that'll be the day. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 Even the Auditor General, whose job it is to actually investigate public mismagement, btw, does not hold news conferences and challenge government ministers. Argus, would you like tickets to the news conference the Auditor General is holding the week after next? March 31st, 2009 ,starts at 12:30 and goes to 1:15 and then the Auditor General will be available for interviews after 3:30 Sorry, I cant be there. Quote
bjre Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear you tell us just what you want cut from the budget that will save $15 billion per year. So far you've spoken against every cut the Tories have ever made - all while bitching that they should have made $15 billion in cuts to avoid a deficit. Reduce crime and abolish unnecessary laws can do this. COST OF CRIME$70 billion — estimated total cost of crime to Canadians in 2003 $47 billion – amount borne by victims, including stolen property, pain and suffering and loss of income. $13 billion — amount spent on criminal justice system, including police, courts and correctional services $10 billion — amount spent on security devices and protective services Source: Department of Justice http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/460773 And cut CAS can save $1.42billion a year only in Ontario. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...ildrensaid.html Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
guyser Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 Reduce crime and abolish unnecessary laws can do this.Can we do this with a magic wand or does that cost extra? And cut CAS can save $1.42billion a year only in Ontario. Did you miss this part?.... " children's aid societies in Ontario, the provincial auditor general says" Quote
guyser Posted March 20, 2009 Report Posted March 20, 2009 (edited) edit:dbl post Edited March 21, 2009 by guyser Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.