What a waste

[jdobbin]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

The federal government burned through seven years worth of money in nine months last year in a failed effort to cut costs in its massive procurement machine, an internal audit has found.

In the latest administrative nightmare to emerge from Public Works Canada, auditors say high-level bureaucrats lost control of a $24-million contract with cost-cutting consultants.

The goal of the contract with A.T. Kearney Inc. was to pare down the department's annual procurement costs by $2.5-billion over five years through private-sector solutions. But the money for the seven-year contract ran out in less than a year, bringing the work to an end without achieving the full savings, said the audit released yesterday.

"The financial burn rate of the contract was approximately four times as great as originally envisioned ... and the achievement of all the benefits originally outlined in the contract was not possible," the audit said.

Call in the Auditor General on this one. Sounds like someone is ripping off the government.

[geoffrey]

I know, I hate when the government hires consultants to cut costs! Sheesh! Reckless abandon with the taxpayer dollars!

It could be much better spent violating the campaign rules of the soveriegnty campaign and paying for Liberal ad-man vacations! Damned Fortier, spending money on good investments!

(By the way, that's a tiny contract in relation to the savings, I've worked with such people in the past, they aren't cheap... that was definitely better than any comparable deal I've seen in the private sector).

--

By the way, the taxpayer got awesome value for this one:

Public Works is expected to cut costs by only $1.1-billion over five years, while reaching its original goal of $2.5-billion in savings over a longer period.

Compared for a few hundred dollars a golf ball, I'll take 'er.

Be reasonable dobbin, your partisanship is making you irrational.

[jdobbin]

Compared for a few hundred dollars a golf ball, I'll take 'er.

Be reasonable dobbin, your partisanship is making you irrational.

I'll believe those cuts when I see them.

I still think an auditor should look at this. An internal audit is not good enough by people who believe that churning through that many dollars should be rewarded with more dollars.

If only someone had looked at the sponsorship program earlier and acted upon it, we might not have seen the mess that came to be. Two of the people involved in the program mentioned have proved to be unreliable. One of them already has shown that he falsified meetings with British officials. I can't say that I am confident that a lot of good came from his involvement. It is like saying that the sponsorship program despite its corruption helped unite Canada. That was rot. This is rot as well.

[Michael Bluth]

Be reasonable dobbin, your partisanship is making you irrational.

Well said Geoff. Well said.

As a victim of said irrationality I can't say more than that....

[geoffrey]

I still think an auditor should look at this. An internal audit is not good enough by people who believe that churning through that many dollars should be rewarded with more dollars.

Fine by me. Makes sense.

[jdobbin]

Fine by me. Makes sense.

I hate government waste whether it is the Liberals, NDP or Tories who are in power.

Fortier was smart not give into more money for this group. A report from the Auditor-General should be able to determine if there has actually been a full accounting of what was spent. Warning bells should be going off all over the PMO over this. Some incompetent bureaucrats or overpaid consultants can do a lot of damage to the credibility of the government if the signs are ignored.

[FTA Lawyer]

Fine by me. Makes sense.

I hate government waste whether it is the Liberals, NDP or Tories who are in power.

Fortier was smart not give into more money for this group. A report from the Auditor-General should be able to determine if there has actually been a full accounting of what was spent. Warning bells should be going off all over the PMO over this. Some incompetent bureaucrats or overpaid consultants can do a lot of damage to the credibility of the government if the signs are ignored.

If we are not partisan, then we must be objective, no? Objectively, when I look at a topic entitled "What a waste...in Fortier's department" it clearly suggests that Mr. Fortier is responsible for the waste.

Then, after you get criticized for taking a partisan stance, you come back with a post crediting Fortier for having stopped the waste.

If you are trying to objectively denounce government waste (a laudible goal I agree) you could have chosen a much less suggestive title.

FTA

[jdobbin]

If we are not partisan, then we must be objective, no? Objectively, when I look at a topic entitled "What a waste...in Fortier's department" it clearly suggests that Mr. Fortier is responsible for the waste.

Then, after you get criticized for taking a partisan stance, you come back with a post crediting Fortier for having stopped the waste.

If you are trying to objectively denounce government waste (a laudible goal I agree) you could have chosen a much less suggestive title.

As minister, Fortier is responsible for the department. If it had been in the Environment portfolio, I would have said Baird's department. Given how many ministry department's there are, is it not better to identify which minister of the government is responsible? While you may have thought the thread title was suggestive, there was no such confusion about what I wrote in the body of the message. In no way did I say it was Fortier's personal spending.

I think Fortier was correct in stopping the spending. I don't think he is correct in not referring it to outside auditors. Some of the people responsible for churning through that money are still in government. I want to know if their spending is was out of line.

[Argus]

Compared for a few hundred dollars a golf ball, I'll take 'er.

Be reasonable dobbin, your partisanship is making you irrational.

I'll believe those cuts when I see them.

I still think an auditor should look at this. An internal audit is not good enough by people who believe that churning through that many dollars should be rewarded with more dollars.

If only someone had looked at the sponsorship program earlier and acted upon it, we might not have seen the mess that came to be.

An auditor did look at the sponsorship program but no action could be taken at the civil service level because the minister, backed up by the PMO, wanted it to continue as it was. Perhaps you forgot that.

[jdobbin]

An auditor did look at the sponsorship program but no action could be taken at the civil service level because the minister, backed up by the PMO, wanted it to continue as it was. Perhaps you forgot that.

I think I pointed out that it was rot under the Liberals and that the outside auditor indicated as much. Until Chretien left office nothing was going to be done about it. It is the type of waste and corruption that I can't stand and it is why I wanted Chretien to leave office.

In the case of Fortier's department, I don't think an internal audit is good enough. Millions have been spent and I don't know that we can count on the department to verify that it was money well spent.

[Argus]

An auditor did look at the sponsorship program but no action could be taken at the civil service level because the minister, backed up by the PMO, wanted it to continue as it was. Perhaps you forgot that.

I think I pointed out that it was rot under the Liberals and that the outside auditor indicated as much. Until Chretien left office nothing was going to be done about it. It is the type of waste and corruption that I can't stand and it is why I wanted Chretien to leave office.

And now you are slavishly devoted to his chosen successor, his hand picked boy who was his Quebec lieutenant - but of course, he knew nothing whatever about the corruption involved with the sponsorship mess.

[jdobbin]

And now you are slavishly devoted to his chosen successor, his hand picked boy who was his Quebec lieutenant - but of course, he knew nothing whatever about the corruption involved with the sponsorship mess.

It seemed to me that Chretien's people were not supportive of Dion at all. Chretien's pretty much kept the Quebec file to himself and his key advisers. What Dion knew has been subject to question by his critics for a long time. Perhaps the latest Conservative investigation will turn up something.

[Michael Bluth]

It seemed to me that Chretien's people were not supportive of Dion at all. Chretien's pretty much kept the Quebec file to himself and his key advisers. What Dion knew has been subject to question by his critics for a long time. Perhaps the latest Conservative investigation will turn up something.

Any new information that helps explain the issues around the file justifies a new investigation.