Big Guy Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Ottawa has announced a plan to cut $4 billion a year in an attempt to get rid of our $multi-billion deficit. This will include cutting programs, services and workers. Every department was asked to produce a plan for a 10% cut and one for a 5% cut. These plans have been submitted and the ministers have their knives and scissors ready. While the process appears to be sound I do not trust Tony (what $50 million?) Clement and/or his boss in what criteria they will be using to make the cuts. The Harper government has to take much of the blame since under Harper, public service employment shot up 33,000 to a total of 282,000 (not counting defence) and spending has also ballooned, from $209 billion to the current $274 billion. Many pundits have noted that this extra spending went disproportionately to Conservative friendly ridings and causes. Will these new cuts reflect the same domestic pro-conservative criteria? There certainly are a number of programs that have been proven unsuccessful and should be terminated but I fear that effective programs, but ones which do not fit into the right wing dogma, will also disappear. Will this new trimming process be based on fiscal responsibility or another process of right wing dogmatic cleansing? More importantly, with a weak recovery, is this the time to be making cuts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Will this new trimming process be based on fiscal responsibility or another process of right wing dogmatic cleansing? What they're asking for in terms of cutting spending isn't even close to what Chretien pushed through in the 90s. Was he involved in a process of right wing dogmatic cleansing too? Get a grip people. Geez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 What they're asking for in terms of cutting spending isn't even close to what Chretien pushed through in the 90s. Was he involved in a process of right wing dogmatic cleansing too? Get a grip people. Geez. I do not disagree that Chretien used the excuse of finances to push the Liberal agenda at the time and to bleed the armed forces – that does not make the practice acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayItLoud Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 How do you suggest we balance the budget then? And where's your proof that we have a weak recovery? Canada came out of the recession, best in the world and you're suggesting it's weak? How good is that Kool-Aid, that you gulp it by the barrel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Every department was asked to produce a plan for a 10% cut and one for a 5% cut. How could anyone be opposed to this? Government waste is the stuff of legends, now we get to see where is really is, and deal with it accordingly. The departments are submitting their own plans, and even get to propose options as to how deep those cuts might be. This is a huge change from the way governments of all levels usually work in this country where decisions get made from "on high" without consulting those it effects. If anything, the Feds should be congratulated on this big step forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 A 10% decrease is just a joke. The amount of waste that goes into almost every public service is just pathetic. I have a couple family members who work for CRA in Kitchener and the stuff they tell me about there is just scary. First, in a group of 20 hirees, my cousin was the only male, and one of two white people. Yay affirmative action. The hiring process was also 8 months long, but when you apply it takes about ~1-2 years to hear back. Huh? The funniest story of all, however, is a "contest" the CRA office held there for a new management position. I guess some of the auditors there were told that whichever of the potential candidates had the best results would be the one to get the new management position. Well, it turned out to be a fiasco, it went to COURT, the contest was thrown out, and after a year and a half the position still isn't filled. I know that's really anecdotal, but the above examples are just some of the ways government workers make it cost probably 30-50% more to run a department than it should. They don't hire the best candidates (they hire according to racial quotas), they take forever to do anything and the benefits the employees receive are generally far above what hard working people in the public sector receive. It's a sad joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 The government and its supporters keep saying Canada is ok, we have one of the best economy in the G8. So what, all countries are in bad shape and to compare us to others, while Canada could be in danger when those mortgages come up for renewal and the owners of those mortgages lose their jobs in the middle-class especially in Ontario and Quebec. If the government really wanted to trim the fat, they would stop the pay increases every April 1st for themselves and redo THEIR pensions by paying more towards their pensions then the taxpayers. Two departments that shouldn't be touched are EI and Revenue Canada. People who lose their jobs need the money sooner than the government takes to get it to them and that goes for any tax refunds. If a government does keep the people content, they it will show how discontent they are, in the voting polls! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 If the government really wanted to trim the fat, they would stop the pay increases every April 1st for themselves and redo THEIR pensions by paying more towards their pensions then the taxpayers. For a change I totally agree with you. If a government does keep the people content, they it will show how discontent they are, in the voting polls! Unfortunately people are generally too stupid to know what's causing their discontent and who can change it and how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 A 10% decrease is just a joke. The amount of waste that goes into almost every public service is just pathetic. I agree. Hopefully the 5% and 10% plans are just the start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 A 10% decrease is just a joke. The amount of waste that goes into almost every public service is just pathetic. I have a couple family members who work for CRA in Kitchener and the stuff they tell me about there is just scary. First, in a group of 20 hirees, my cousin was the only male, and one of two white people. Yay affirmative action. The hiring process was also 8 months long, but when you apply it takes about ~1-2 years to hear back. Huh? The funniest story of all, however, is a "contest" the CRA office held there for a new management position. I guess some of the auditors there were told that whichever of the potential candidates had the best results would be the one to get the new management position. Well, it turned out to be a fiasco, it went to COURT, the contest was thrown out, and after a year and a half the position still isn't filled. I know that's really anecdotal, but the above examples are just some of the ways government workers make it cost probably 30-50% more to run a department than it should. They don't hire the best candidates (they hire according to racial quotas), they take forever to do anything and the benefits the employees receive are generally far above what hard working people in the public sector receive. It's a sad joke. Very true. My mother is an executive in another big fed government department and she has recounted countless horror stories about employees and how impossible it is to fire them. One of them involved a fat woman who always expensed 2 executive class seats for her travel until my mother banned her from going on the trips anymore. Basically in the government, if you are a useless employee, you will be offered a "secondment" to another department rather than being fired. There are countless employees who shuffle around in "secondments" for their careers doing almost nothing productive except collect a fat paycheque and pension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I do not disagree that Chretien used the excuse of finances to push the Liberal agenda at the time and to bleed the armed forces – that does not make the practice acceptable. There was no excuse. Our debt to GDP was reaching dangerous levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battletoads Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Anyone claiming otherwise is likely a member of the con booster club. Canadians need another good does of the ideological insanity that is conservative governments, evidently the Mulroney fiasco wasn't enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 5, 2012 Report Share Posted January 5, 2012 How do you suggest we balance the budget then? And where's your proof that we have a weak recovery? Canada came out of the recession, best in the world and you're suggesting it's weak? How good is that Kool-Aid, that you gulp it by the barrel? Best is a pretty low bar to pass given the weakness we see all around us. And you might consider losing the attitude. It won't endear you to anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.