Categories: The Bull Meter

The Bull Meter: Stephen Harper on ministerial budgets

Are cuts to ministerial spending just creative accounting?

by Erica Alini on Tuesday, April 26, 2011 3:33pm - 12 Comments

"The budgets of ministers’ offices are being cut by 11 per cent — that’s what the Conservative government is doing"

- Stephen Harper
April 16, 2011

Bull Meter score:

A Canadian Press article from April 16 questioned the soundness of Stephen Harper’s claim, saying it had obtained a document showing that international travel for ministers, their staff and parliamentary secretaries is being transferred from ministerial office budgets to their departments. Some of the cuts alluded to by Harper, the Canadian Press concluded, could be simply “accounting changes.”

To test that hypothesis, we asked Drew McPherson, a Nova Scotia-based computer whiz who keeps tabs on government expenses, to calculate how much four randomly selected ministers’ offices had spent on international in fiscal year 2009-2010. We then compared his data with those ministers’ total gross expenditures, as reported in the Public Accounts of Canada. The result? The transfer of international travel expenses to a separate budget would have only a minor impact on ministerial budget, certainly not enough to make up for an 11 per cent cut in spending.

In his analysis, McPherson picked the offices of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Minister of National Revenue, Minister of State (Agriculture), and Minister of Health. For all four, money spent on international travel ranged from 0.7 to 2.6 per cent of total expenses. Therefore, while the new accounting rules certainly help reduce ministers’ budgets–at least aesthetically–the extent to which they do so is quite limited.

Heard something that doesn’t sound quite right? Send quotes from the campaign trail to macbullmeter@gmail.com and we’ll tell you just how much bull they contain.

Sources:

Public Accounts of Canada 2010 Volume III

Governmentexpenses.ca

Tags: Budget, deficit, Election 2011, ministers' budgets, spending

More by Erica Alini

http://burpnrun.blogspot.com Burpnrun

The Big Con.

Subtitle: How I Learned to Live with the NDP's Higher Taxes, and Love It!

A quickie primer on Jack's (or Iggy's) promises and costs. Fast read, depressing conclusion. Some macabre humour in between: http://burpnrun.blogspot.com/2011/04/big-con.html
YYZ

Agree completely with the posters above – would an 11% hike in expenses be required for a few more bulls?
http://dougsamu.wordpress.com dougrogers

This looks like one of those things which is technically true – so it isn't really bullsh!t – but it's really of no value.
Very old person

I'd like a look at the TOTAL budget, please…considering how many more Ministers there are now than there were 5 years ago…
http://www.redgreenandblue.org Jeremy

Wait… so you found ONE place where accounting changes are actually responsible for the so-called "savings", but that ONE change didn't add up to ALL the savings…

But… um… what about OTHER accounting changes that might ALSO lead to that 11% total?

If they disingenuously moved international travel to the department budget to make it look like they were saving money, MAYBE, just maybe, there are other accounting tricks as well that somebody ought to ferret out?
Thwim

I think the original article must have left out that when looking at the budgets that appears true.

If you put that in place, then this makes sense.. it appears true, the Canadian Press questioned the soundness, but when Macleans investigated they found that the question didn't hold a lot of weight.

ie, that they've cut the budget in general around 11%, but that accounting tricks with the travel budgets may account for 0.7-2.6% of that cut.

That's the only way this makes sense as being a 1 bull story for me.
Lee_JD

This is how I interpreted the article:

The fact that ministers' budgets have been cut by 11% is not being questioned: a Canadian Press article states that travel expenses though have been switched from the ministers' offices to the departments' offices, meaning the 11% may only be an accounting trick rather than a real savings. Maclean's investigated and found that would only account for 0.7% to 2.6% of the savings, meaning the other 8-10% is real savings, making the PM's claim mostly (but not completely) true.

So one bull is probably fair. It depends on whether other accounting tricks were used to obtain the other 10%.
ABHarperRegime

Seriously? regardless of stripes, have you ever seen someone so blatantly lie day in & day out straight to your face the way Stephen Harper does?.

I helped vote this thing into power & am completely blown away ever time I see a clip of his fear mongering campaign each & every day of this campaign, its unbelievable, literally!.

I've voted Conservative, PC, NDP & Liberal over my years so please don't assume I'm just an ABC person, I'm not. but this guy is by far the lowest of the low I've ever seen, straight out of the American playbook of say anything to scare people into following you, regardless of TRUTH & HONOR.

I find it just sickening as a proud Canadian.
LoveMusic

My wife works for the feds. She feels that this transfer onto departmental budgets basically amounts to program cuts (without all the attendant media attention).
OriginalEmily1

I certainly thought so.
Anon

I mean if your analysis is saying:

" money spent on international travel ranged from 0.7 to 2.6 per cent of total expenses. Therefore, while the new accounting rules certainly help reduce ministers’ budgets–at least aesthetically–the extent to which they do so is quite limited."

And Steve is saying:

"The budgets of ministers’ offices are being cut by 11 per cent — that’s what the Conservative government is doing"

That strikes me as a 5 on the BS meter.
OriginalEmily1

Yeah, that's not a little oopsie, that's a big pile.