Spending in prime minister's 'department' soars

[jdobbin]

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Spend...3884/story.html

Spending in the government department supervised directly by Prime Minister Stephen Harper soared by 14 per cent last year, despite a directive from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty that government must "show restraint."

Financial statements released this week show that spending by the Privy Council Office for the fiscal year that ended in March hit $172.5 million, compared to $151.8 million in fiscal 2008.

It is part of the stimulus package for...the Tories.

[DrGreenthumb]

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Spend...3884/story.html

It is part of the stimulus package for...the Tories.

Harper and the cons are nothing but thieves.

[capricorn]

And they spend like drunken sailors.

[Slim MacSquinty]

And they spend like drunken sailors.

And the other parties, who are critical of too little spending, would spend like ...?

Must be a tough go for the Harper hater, not a lot of ammunition. Whereas it's been easy to hate the Liberals when they steal your money.

Or perhaps we could compare the fabled "neo-con hidden agenda" to Iggy's magic fiscal plan which alternatively would spend faster, spend less and make the inevitable deficit disapear like magic. It's kinda sad when the supposed uber intellectual leader of the Liberals is unable to keep track of his own fables.

[capricorn]

Oops. That was sarcasm Slim. I thought it was an appropriate retort to the laughable claim that "the cons are nothing but thieves". A definite eye-roller.

[Slim MacSquinty]

I would find it humorous too if these Harper haters didn't seem to earnestly believe the tripe they publish.

How many years now of the most highly scrutinized minority government in memory and the only scandals they can come up with are a playboy minister forgetting documents in his well endowed conquests house, or a woman who got detained in foreign country because she changed her appearance drastically from her passport photo and some third level bureacrats in Kenya botched it.

Not a lot of sticky mud to throw but throw they will.

[capricorn]

Don't forget the wafer Slim. The Prime Minister supposedly pocketed a communion wafer. Now that's a scandal to rival Adscam.

[jdobbin]

And they spend like drunken sailors.

You gotta admit that is a huge increase year after year.

[Slim MacSquinty]

As has been reported by many scandal seeking Harper haters the PM's office has expanded under Harper as there are more ministers and more central control so no suprise bigger spending.

I would be more interested to see if all parlimentary spending increased drastically.

[jdobbin]

As has been reported by many scandal seeking Harper haters the PM's office has expanded under Harper as there are more ministers and more central control so no suprise bigger spending.

I would be more interested to see if all parlimentary spending increased drastically.

For all Harper lovers, the answer is yes. It has been above the promised spending limit of the Tory election platform each year since they were in power. And yes, it was drastic and continues to be drastic.

[Visionseeker]

I would find it humorous too if these Harper haters didn't seem to earnestly believe the tripe they publish.

How many years now of the most highly scrutinized minority government in memory and the only scandals they can come up with are a playboy minister forgetting documents in his well endowed conquests house, or a woman who got detained in foreign country because she changed her appearance drastically from her passport photo and some third level bureacrats in Kenya botched it.

Not a lot of sticky mud to throw but throw they will.

No scandal! I'll give you scandal:

- a medical isotopes fiasco - once thought as sexy - now threatening the lives of thousands of Canadians

- a derilict Department of Foreign Affairs that not only fails to help Canadians abroad, but actively assists in their wrongful prosecution and even execution

- Khadr

- presiding over the highest level of job losses in decades

- presiding over the first negative balance of payments in decades

- massive patronage appointments to the senate and other government bodies

- a $50 billion dollar deficit from a finance minister who claimed we would not go into one less than a year ago

And through it all, a non-existent list of accomplishments.

I'm sure others can add to the list of shame above.

[Slim MacSquinty]

No scandal! I'll give you scandal:

- a medical isotopes fiasco - once thought as sexy - now threatening the lives of thousands of Canadians

- a derilict Department of Foreign Affairs that not only fails to help Canadians abroad, but actively assists in their wrongful prosecution and even execution

- Khadr

- presiding over the highest level of job losses in decades

- presiding over the first negative balance of payments in decades

- massive patronage appointments to the senate and other government bodies

- a $50 billion dollar deficit from a finance minister who claimed we would not go into one less than a year ago

And through it all, a non-existent list of accomplishments.

I'm sure others can add to the list of shame above.

So we'll blame the Tory's for underfunded nuclear program which leaves Chalk River (a fourty year old reactor) in poor shape. Weak.

Actively assist in wrongful conviction and even execution, hardly. Do not expect the federal government to save your sorry ass for being an axe murderer. The feds can hardly control what every second string diplomatic appointee does. Minor at best.

Khadr, few right thinking Canadians have much sympathy for these folks, As far as I'm concerned taking up arms in a foreign country against an allied nation should forfeit your citizenship. Little traction with average folks lots with those who already hate Harper.

Presiding over the horrible world economy, people just are not stupid enough to believe crap like this, in fact most folks realize thankfully that we've faired better than most if not all G20 nations. Not going to get much mileage here.

Massive patronage appointment? what filling a dozen senate seats to counter balance the liberal majority who block legislation in a wholly partisan fashion instead of being the chamber of sober second thought. Yawn even the Star couldn't keep that headline alive for more than a morning.

Deficit, just imagine what it would be if that ridiculous coalition would have weaseled into power. $50B under the current financial situation is modest compared to just about any other industrialized nation.

Accomplishments, not like I`d expect you would acknowledge them if they were written backwards on your forehead, but there are some, and given the total lack of cooperation from the other parties any accomplishment is amazing, but I will indulge you.

Finally funding the military.

Ascerting artic ownership and funding it.

Moving to revamp immigartion policy.

Holding steady on the economy during tough times.

NOT turning EI system into modified welfare.

Tougher crime legislations

Ignoring the gun registry

Promoting free trade.

What people like you probably do not understand is that the Conservatives have been paying down our debt up till now: The IMF reports that Canada’s debt-to-gdp ratio dropped from 72.36 in 2004 to a projected 58.45 in 2009.

When this recession is over we will be in a positioin Canada has not been in our lifetimes, the cost to do business in Canada will be less than America, that will make us a magnet for business investment. Something that Martin did not forsee despite our economic success.

[Jack Weber]

No scandal! I'll give you scandal:

- a medical isotopes fiasco - once thought as sexy - now threatening the lives of thousands of Canadians

- a derilict Department of Foreign Affairs that not only fails to help Canadians abroad, but actively assists in their wrongful prosecution and even execution

- Khadr

- presiding over the highest level of job losses in decades

- presiding over the first negative balance of payments in decades

- massive patronage appointments to the senate and other government bodies

- a $50 billion dollar deficit from a finance minister who claimed we would not go into one less than a year ago

And through it all, a non-existent list of accomplishments.

I'm sure others can add to the list of shame above.

Yes....

How 'bout the non-existent majority the Cons desperately crave to try and rid this country of its Trudeauesque underpinnings of the last 4 decades?You know,the one Nanook Guardian of the Arctic has'nt been able to deliver on.

The reason?

Most Canadians recoil at the thought of unchecked prairie Reformism!

By the way,the only reason Sweatervest Stevie is spending anything at all is because the bully got scared last December by the fact that he almost lost his job because of his autocratic and ideological ways!I fear if he did have his way,he would have used "free market priciples" to "fix" the economic woes we still have.If that had been the case,I suspect we would have unemployment hovering around 15% and our "Economist in a tank" about to be soundly defeated in a federal election...

Edited September 7, 2009 by Jack Weber

[Moonbox]

You gotta admit that is a huge increase year after year.

Depends on what the money was actually spent on. I wouldn't mind seeing that.

[g_bambino]

Spending in the government department supervised directly by Prime Minister Stephen Harper soared by 14 per cent last year, despite a directive from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty that government must "show restraint."

But, of course! President Harper has to have a bigger motorcade and more bodyguards than even the Governor General.

[Slim MacSquinty]

How 'bout the non-existent majority the Cons desperately crave to try and rid this country of its Trudeauesque underpinnings of the last 4 decades?You know,the one Nanook Guardian of the Arctic has'nt been able to deliver on.

The reason?

Most Canadians recoil at the thought of unchecked prairie Reformism!

By the way,the only reason Sweatervest Stevie is spending anything at all is because the bully got scared last December by the fact that he almost lost his job because of his autocratic and ideological ways!I fear if he did have his way,he would have used "free market priciples" to "fix" the economic woes we still have.If that had been the case,I suspect we would have unemployment hovering around 15% and our "Economist in a tank" about to be soundly defeated in a federal election...

Wow I can almost taste the bile from here, but lets read this intellectually stunted diatribe again and parse it for factoids; paragraph one prose with no facts, paragraph two the most compelling of the lot, no facts. Paragraph three do you know most Canadians? Me neither, but I can pretend to speak for them too. Factvoid.

Paragraph four, so the apparent bully, has been bullied into spending, gee he's either not much of a bully or there is a bigger bully on the block, should I be confused or was that your intention? Funny I do not recall the Tories platform handing the economy over to free market principles perhaps I missed something since you used quotes there is no doubt you can correct me? I sincerely hope you are engaged in public service using your economic soothsaying abilities to the full advantage of Canada especially the "Most Canadians" you referred to earlier. Still looking for facts!

[jdobbin]

Depends on what the money was actually spent on. I wouldn't mind seeing that.

Big salaries maybe.

[Smallc]

But, of course! President Harper has to have a bigger motorcade and more bodyguards than even the Governor General.

Maybe he should appoint himself GG?

[Topaz]

Stephen Harper may be good at something, but being PM he isn't or a leader of a political party. If the Tories want to be taken seriously then Harper has to go as leader. Being the PM, one has to be more worldly, has more life experiences. Granted, being PM the Harper family has travel more than they would have if he hadn't been the PM. I just don't think he comes off that well, especially when he's the one that starts the personal attacks in the Commons. He doesn't have the personality for a PM and and he been caught in the bathroom too many times, when on a summit!!

[Slim MacSquinty]

Ah the Liberal electioneering talking points start, Harper is boorish because he hasn't hob-knobbed with the fashionable on Soho street or isn't a Harvard insider, I prefer our Prime Minister has Canadian experience. In fact this Canadian government has done a good job internationally, not sucking up to China and pointing out the obvious issues with Kyoto.

[g_bambino]

Maybe he should appoint himself GG?

Constitutionally impossible, thank god.

[Oleg Bach]

Harper is not really spending our money - He's giving it away to the lazy louts that are big buisness and the banks - Notice that most of his spending is geared to supporting a failing status quo. He will "spend" feverishly till the very end - because he does what he is told - to punder on behalf of the rich before he is run out of town and office.

[nicky10013]

So we'll blame the Tory's for underfunded nuclear program which leaves Chalk River (a fourty year old reactor) in poor shape. Weak.

Actively assist in wrongful conviction and even execution, hardly. Do not expect the federal government to save your sorry ass for being an axe murderer. The feds can hardly control what every second string diplomatic appointee does. Minor at best.

Khadr, few right thinking Canadians have much sympathy for these folks, As far as I'm concerned taking up arms in a foreign country against an allied nation should forfeit your citizenship. Little traction with average folks lots with those who already hate Harper.

Presiding over the horrible world economy, people just are not stupid enough to believe crap like this, in fact most folks realize thankfully that we've faired better than most if not all G20 nations. Not going to get much mileage here.

Massive patronage appointment? what filling a dozen senate seats to counter balance the liberal majority who block legislation in a wholly partisan fashion instead of being the chamber of sober second thought. Yawn even the Star couldn't keep that headline alive for more than a morning.

Deficit, just imagine what it would be if that ridiculous coalition would have weaseled into power. $50B under the current financial situation is modest compared to just about any other industrialized nation.

Accomplishments, not like I`d expect you would acknowledge them if they were written backwards on your forehead, but there are some, and given the total lack of cooperation from the other parties any accomplishment is amazing, but I will indulge you.

Finally funding the military.

Ascerting artic ownership and funding it.

Moving to revamp immigartion policy.

Holding steady on the economy during tough times.

NOT turning EI system into modified welfare.

Tougher crime legislations

Ignoring the gun registry

Promoting free trade.

What people like you probably do not understand is that the Conservatives have been paying down our debt up till now: The IMF reports that Canada’s debt-to-gdp ratio dropped from 72.36 in 2004 to a projected 58.45 in 2009.

When this recession is over we will be in a positioin Canada has not been in our lifetimes, the cost to do business in Canada will be less than America, that will make us a magnet for business investment. Something that Martin did not forsee despite our economic success.

How 'bout the non-existent majority the Cons desperately crave to try and rid this country of its Trudeauesque underpinnings of the last 4 decades?You know,the one Nanook Guardian of the Arctic has'nt been able to deliver on.

The reason?

Most Canadians recoil at the thought of unchecked prairie Reformism!

By the way,the only reason Sweatervest Stevie is spending anything at all is because the bully got scared last December by the fact that he almost lost his job because of his autocratic and ideological ways!I fear if he did have his way,he would have used "free market priciples" to "fix" the economic woes we still have.If that had been the case,I suspect we would have unemployment hovering around 15% and our "Economist in a tank" about to be soundly defeated in a federal election...

Wow I can almost taste the bile from here, but lets read this intellectually stunted diatribe again and parse it for factoids; paragraph one prose with no facts, paragraph two the most compelling of the lot, no facts. Paragraph three do you know most Canadians? Me neither, but I can pretend to speak for them too. Factvoid.

Paragraph four, so the apparent bully, has been bullied into spending, gee he's either not much of a bully or there is a bigger bully on the block, should I be confused or was that your intention? Funny I do not recall the Tories platform handing the economy over to free market principles perhaps I missed something since you used quotes there is no doubt you can correct me? I sincerely hope you are engaged in public service using your economic soothsaying abilities to the full advantage of Canada especially the "Most Canadians" you referred to earlier. Still looking for facts!

Most Canadians would be the 60% that voted against Stephen Harper. You think it's a coincidence that after 3 kicks at the can he hasn't won a majority? People don't trust the guy. End of story.

You're grasping at straws, speaking of intellectually sparsed diatribe. You can use nifty words to keep your head above water but in the end your argument sinks to the bottom. All things you brushed off ARE major scandals. Yes the Foreign Affairs minister left documents at his ladie's house, but considering the sensitive material inside, he should've known better. It's called responsibility, something Conservatives usually claim to have, especially over their tax and spend Liberal friends. Sorry, brushing it off just doesn't cut it.

The Isotope issue has been in the pipeline for a while. Stevie has been wanting to sell Canada's nuclear industry for a while. The plants were underfunded because Mr. Harper slashed the budgets, which is why Lisa Raitt's aid got fired because inside her binder were said politically motivated cuts which weren't disclosed to parliament. What really stank about this is that this was news 18 months before the final shutdown. The plant was shutdown, the government was embarassed, and the Conservatives, like they always do, fired the person in charge. However, the head of the regulatory agency sued because she was essentially fired for doing her job. She was replaced by a Tory lacky who apparently doesn't know how to do their job. In the end, surprise surprise the plant breaks down again but this time we're just going to sell...there's TOO many problems cry the government! Right, it was problems they created to fit their ideological leanings.

As for Omar Khadr, it's distasteful for a lot of Canadians, however, the kid was 14 when he did what he allegedly did (there is A LOT of disagreements around those events). Even if he did, he still qualifies under the Geneva Convention as a child soldier. These kids in Afghanistan are given heroin or other opiates and are brainwashed into fighting. Should we let him rot at that torture facility? No. Just because he may have thrown a grenade at an American doesn't make him any different from drugged out African kids thrown into civil wars that kill other drugged out kids. They're brought here and we marvel at their willingness to survive and make it through horrible circumstances. Yet, he's a "terrorist" so who cares. Wire him up to the battery and strap him to the waterboard, we've got a confession to extract!

As for the economy, Canada was in deficit BEFORE stimulus spending. Argument shot down. Yes, we've faired better than the rest of the world but Canada is struggling to climb out due to Harper playing politics with the stimulus money. Baird only 2-3 weeks ago announced that the money would actually be getting out. Is there a connection between this and the downright awful employment numbers? I'm willing to bet heck yes. Another argument shot down.

As for his achievements? Please. THEY'RE ALL GOOD OPTICS, BUT NO SUBSTANCE. Funding the military? He's had to buy new equipment due to Afghanistan. Something which the Liberals would've done as well. Most of the other purchases have been used which the Liberals were alwasy riled for, yet Harper never hears a squeak about. Furthermore, the massive supply ships have been cut. What a surprise. I'm not moved by the military argument.

Neither am I moved by the "tough on crime" act. Everyone knows with a brain that harsher sentences don't result in a decrease of crime. Thinking outside the box with things like the liberalisation of posession laws and injection sites have proven to lower crime in a serious area: drugs. Oh wait, that issue is icky so we'll just cut funding to something that has been a proven crime reduction technique in Vancouver. Furthermore, I especially like how he cut the faint hope panels. He's making people safe alright. Those panels only heard 7 appeals a year and on average let 1 person out. Yet those who don't support the conservatives on this were labelled lovers of crime and pedophiles. Rich. Optics at its best.

Promoting free trade? All he's done is sign a free trade adreement with Colombia. As I recall, if we're FOR free trade of course, that it was Chretien who signed onto NAFTA. Furthermore, despite him loving Free Trade, he completely NUKED talks with the EU on a complete free trade act when he declared that Czechs needed visas. More optics. Most refugees for the Czech Republic are Roma and according to Embassy Weekly (or some other name, you get the point) declared that 94% of Czech refugee claims are accepted. Why? In the last EU parliamentary elections a party ran an ad calling for "the final solution" to the Roma question. I'd want to leave, too. But nope, not welcome.

As for the gun registry, I support the idea. I like the idea of having a national databank with every firearm in it. What, are the Conservatives SOFT ON CRIME?

As for turning EI into modernised welfare, this is GARBAGE. Michael Ignatieff only wanted to TEMPORARILY decrease the hours needed to qualify for EI by like a weeks worth of work time. He also wanted to make it even across Canada. Why should a woman in Ontario be denied EI with almost 900 hours of work when most people in the country would have been accepted nearly 300 hours earlier? It isn't fair and that's what he wanted to address. However, I guess you don't care. I bet you're from Alberta. Can't let those Liberal liars in Ontario get any more of my hard earned cash! Unbelievable.

As for the arctic, he hasn't done shit. He shows up, rids on a ski-doo, eats seal meat and then leaves. The one thing that the north desperately wants is a commercial port that would cost $50,000,000 to build. It would make things a lot cheaper in every respect and would make life a lot easier and spur a lot of new work. They got their $50,000,000 as essentially a welfare cheque, certainly not for the harbour. As someone who hates the idea of welfare shouldn't you be outraged by this?

No of course not, you would just rather call people intellectually stunted when they don't agree with your warped take on reality.

[Moonbox]

Big salaries maybe.

Could be a lot of things.

[Moonbox]

As for the economy, Canada was in deficit BEFORE stimulus spending. Argument shot down.

Canada's revenues were sinking well before the stimulus spending. We went into deficit originally because our tax revenues disappeared. You didn't shoot down anything. A little more thought into the issue might have helped.

As for the gun registry, I support the idea. I like the idea of having a national databank with every firearm in it. What, are the Conservatives SOFT ON CRIME?

You can like the idea all you want. We have about a decade of proof to show it doesn't work and just costs crazy amounts of money.

As for turning EI into modernised welfare, this is GARBAGE. Michael Ignatieff only wanted to TEMPORARILY decrease the hours needed to qualify for EI by like a weeks worth of work time. He also wanted to make it even across Canada.

What Ignatieff wants to do is garbage. If someone can't show they worked a decent amount before they claim EI they shouldn't get it. If you've been out of work for the better part of a year, that's too bad. EI was not designed as a recession fighting tool. It was designed a short-term solution for hard working people to keep their houses while they look for new jobs. Economic paradigm shifts were never really what it was meant to protect against.

Why should a woman in Ontario be denied EI with almost 900 hours of work when most people in the country would have been accepted nearly 300 hours earlier? It isn't fair and that's what he wanted to address. However, I guess you don't care. I bet you're from Alberta. Can't let those Liberal liars in Ontario get any more of my hard earned cash! Unbelievable.

Hey good question! Why DO most people in the country qualify for EI after only a few months of work? The solution shouldn't be to offer blanket coverage of absolutely bullshit EI eligibility, but rather turn EI back into what it was meant to be. NOBODY should get EI after a 9 week work year. NOBODY.

As for the arctic, he hasn't done shit. He shows up, rids on a ski-doo, eats seal meat and then leaves. The one thing that the north desperately wants is a commercial port that would cost $50,000,000 to build. It would make things a lot cheaper in every respect and would make life a lot easier and spur a lot of new work. They got their $50,000,000 as essentially a welfare cheque, certainly not for the harbour. As someone who hates the idea of welfare shouldn't you be outraged by this?

The presence and intentions of Canada's leader in and of itself is a step in formalizing our claim over the Arctic. Sure, more could be done, but it's more likely to get done under Harper than under Ignatieff.

Oh, and nice rant btw.