Leading by example

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 10:35 AM - 0 Comments

The Prime Minister raised the issue of MP pensions in his interview with the CBC earlier this week, but, as the Finance Minister has noted, it is beyond the official purview of the government. Today the Globe reports that support for the reforms will come from the Conservative caucus. Tony Clement meanwhile muses of leading by example.

“I think you’ve got to be fair to the employee [the MP] but you also have to be fair to the taxpayer,” he told CTV’s Don Martin. “We are very cognizant of that.”

He added that no decisions have been made and that already the government is leading by example as MP and cabinet-minister salaries have been frozen this year. MPs earn $157,000 a year; cabinet ministers make $233,247 and the Prime Minister earns $315,000.

Granted, whatever they are paid, those cabinet ministers presently comprise the second-largest ministry and second-largest cabinet in history—the minister now seven larger and the cabinet now 12 larger than the groups Mr. Harper presented upon first taking office. Back then, one of Mr. Harper’s advisors enthused that reducing the cabinet from 39 (as it was under Paul Martin) to 27 would save $15 to $20 million per year. Presumably, reducing it from 39 (as it now is under Mr. Harper) to 27 would save roughly the same amount now.

Looking the wrong way

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM - 0 Comments

Alex Himelfarb attempts to put austerity in perspective.

Today’s austerity, however, is not primarily about fiscal prudence. If it were it wouldn’t be proceeding in tandem with large, unaffordable and unnecessary tax cuts for the most affluent among us. These tax cuts make deeper program cuts inevitable. The persistent emphasis on low taxes and cuts to services and public goods  looks more like ideology masquerading as fiscal common sense. In this light, austerity seems rather to be about cutting back the state and rolling out the free market agenda. Less public, more private; less collective, more individual. It is, in other words, the fulfillment of the neoliberal counter-revolution rather than an economic plan for the future…

We need to have the debate – and the starting point cannot be some assumption about the inevitability of austerity. In fact, it ought not to be about big government versus small government. It ought to be focused on what will work to enhance the quality of life for most Canadians and what will make Canada more resilient for future generations. It ought to be a debate about what challenges, what problems, most urgently cry out for our collective attention and action. The preoccupation with austerity should not blind us to what really matters for our collective well-being.

Public sector swelled under Tories

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 9:50 AM - 0 Comments

The number of federal public servants soared by 34 per cent over the past decade, far outpacing the 11 per cent rate at which the country’s population grew over the same period, documents obtained by Postmedia News through a freedom of information request reveal. The ranks of core public servants rose from 211,925 in fiscal 2000 to 282,955 in fiscal 2010. The pace of growth reportedly picked up during the Harper government’s nearly six years in power. The data comes from briefing notes presented in April to Treasury Board President Tony Clement, who is leading the Tories’ effort to slash public spending.

Postmedia News

That’s a lot of gazebos

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 10:45 AM - 12 Comments

Postmedia tallies $10.5 million in spending on news conferences since the Conservatives took office.

Since 2006, more than $10.5 million of taxpayers’ money has been used for rentals, staging, lighting, audio and other production equipment for announcements and public events, according to recently released government documents. Foreign Affairs racked up the highest bill — $2.79 million since 2006 — while Veterans Affairs trailed behind closely with a $2.55 million total, records show.

The Commons: If you don’t support MacKay, you don’t support the troops

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, October 3, 2011 at 5:42 PM - 67 Comments

The Scene. For a full 13 questions this afternoon, the opposition insisted on pressing the government about matters—the economy, trade, the separation of powers in a proper functioning democracy—unrelated to whether or not the Defence Minister should be ashamed or at least embarrassed.

Finally, the Speaker called on the NDP’s Tarik Brahmi, a francophone apparently of Algerian descent, who nonetheless looks to me like a tough English soccer fanatic.

“Mr. Speaker, according to a release by the Canadian Press, the Defence Minister was kept out of key decisions about Canada’s role in the Afghan war,” he said. “This was a top defence priority, yet the Prime Minister was calling all the shots. The Prime Minister could have used some advice. Most agree our efforts should have focused more on peace talks and diplomacy. Is he still making foreign policy and defence decisions on his own, or does he now let his cabinet in the room?”

Peter MacKay stood here not only to enthuse about how cooperatively the Harper government operates, but also to state his objections to talks with the Taliban. Continue…

On a jet plane

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, September 29, 2011 at 10:00 AM - 27 Comments

Our national crisis of official air travel protocol reaches the two-week mark with news of Peter MacKay’s Challenger usage.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay outranks almost all his cabinet colleagues when it comes to using federal government executive jets, racking up more than $2.9-million in flights on the Challenger planes in the past four years…

Total flying hours for planes transporting Mr. MacKay comprised 17 per cent of hours flown by all ministers in 2008, 34 per cent in 2009 and 60 per cent in 2010. As of June, 2011, jets arranged for him made up 32 per cent of all flights by ministers other than Mr. Harper.

Planes and accountability

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, September 23, 2011 at 3:42 PM - 19 Comments

The latest development in our national crisis of official air travel protocol involves the Defence Minister using a Challenger jet to fly to a lobster-related celebration (the Pictou Lobster Carnival perhaps?) in his riding. Peter MacKay continued to take questions from the opposition this morning in regards to the use of a search-and-rescue helicopter to pick him up from a fishing trip, but questions about the lobster festival were handled by House leader Peter Van Loan. Mr. Van Loan’s first response to the NDP’s Christine Moore was as follows.

Mr. Speaker, taxpayers expect government officials to conduct the nation’s business at a reasonable cost. It is something that our government takes very seriously. I want to be clear. Our use of government aircraft by our ministers is always in compliance with policy. We do follow the policies. And we have reduced the use of government aircraft significantly, as we have said. When we look at Challenger use by the Liberals who spoke earlier about this issue, we have reduced our use 80% since they abused them as personal limousines constantly. We only use them for government business.

The Commons: The Finance Minister goes rogue

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, September 21, 2011 at 6:36 PM - 80 Comments

The Scene. Bob Rae was making fun—pointedly, but sarcastically, mocking the government’s decision to spend $20 million for advice on how to reduce spending. It was, if nothing else, a decent bit of amusement for a Wednesday afternoon.

“Mr. Speaker, a review of public accounts show that the government spending on professional and special services, including the use of consultants, has gone up from $7.24 billion to well over $10 billion, a cumulative increase of over $7 billion,” the Liberal leader informed the House. “I’d like to ask the minister of finance, what does he think the chances are that the $20-million consultants he’s just hired are going to come back and say, ‘You know what a good way is to save money, cut the use of consultants?’”

Here Mr. Rae returned to his seat and here the Finance Minister stood. And here—after some superfluous mocking of Mr. Rae’s time as premier of Ontario—are the altogether remarkable sentences that Jim Flaherty offered in response.

“Yes, we are having experts from outside look at government spending. Yes, we should. Government should not be the sole judge of the way it’s run. We need advice from the outside.”

Had he mispoken? Had he momentarily lost control of his mouth? Did he realize people could hear him saying these things?

Apparently not, because a a few moments later he was saying such things again. Continue…

The quiet cuts

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 3:53 PM - 18 Comments

Among various cuts at Environment Canada, the government is apparently about to eliminate an ozone monitoring program.

The British journal Nature says scientists and research institutes around the world have been informally told the Canadian network will be shut down as early as this winter, putting an end to continuous ozone measurements that go back 45 years.

“People are gobsmacked by this decision,” Thomas Duck, an atmospheric researcher at Dalhousie University, said in an interview with Postmedia News. He and his international colleagues say they’ve been told the network and a related data archive will be closed down as part of the Harper government’s deep cuts at Environment Canada, where hundreds of jobs are being are eliminated.

See previously here, here, here, here and here.

More than $250B in spending to bypass normal scrutiny

By macleans.ca - Friday, June 17, 2011 at 11:22 AM - 14 Comments

Members of Parliament in the House of Commons are facing criticism over their unanimous support of a motion that allows more than $250 billion to escape normally-required scrutiny. According to parliamentary rules, 24 House committees should examine bills that approve spending before they’re allowed to pass in the House of Commons. But on June 3, MPs unanimously approved a motion that will allow billions of dollars in spending to by-pass that process. The money will be available for government spending by June 23, after being looked over by just one House committee. A former MP speaking anonymously told The Hill Times that “this is like Christmas for the government, it came early.” The move came just eight days after former Auditor General Sheila Fraser issued a warning that Parliament is failing on its responsibility to properly scrutinize government spending.

The Hill Times

The quiet cuts

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, June 16, 2011 at 10:23 AM - 9 Comments

Chris Cobb finds a 20% cut to the budget of the National Research Council.

Although the cuts at NRC are “significant,” added Corbett, the issue is less about numbers and more about expertise. “If you have a rocket scientist going out the door, you can’t replace that person with an insect scientist,” he said. “It’s a pretty specialized field and that’s the part the government doesn’t appear to understand.

“The government is putting its fiscal policy ahead of everything and ordering all the science-based departments and agencies to cut,” he said. “And they are having a hell of a time doing it. On one hand they are trying to deliver the programs they are mandated and legislated to do, but on the other hand they are having to make some serious choices. It looks like one essential program will live at the expense of another.”

The quiet cuts

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, June 15, 2011 at 3:03 PM - 33 Comments

The hunt for the government’s mysterious cuts—as initiated by our Paul Wells—continues. Bill Curry finds $45-million taken from the Green Infrastructure Fund. Meanwhile, Tim Naumetz reviews the main estimates.

Almost all of the government’s security and public safety programs are increasing either modestly or substantially, including a 21 per cent hike in spending for the Correctional Service to $2.98-billion. The Canada Border Services Agency is receiving a 14 per cent increase, to $1.84-billion, and the Office of the Correctional Investigator, responsible for hearing complaints from offenders, is going up by 21 per cent, to $4.3-million.

But spending by the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is being reduced by 5.9 per cent to $414.6-million … The National Research Council will have its spending cut by 7.8 per cent to $690,836,000. Spending by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is set to drop by 10 per cent to $118,264,000 … The Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission is targeted for a 20 per-cent reduction in its spending, to $4.5-million from $4.7-million. Among the other agencies where cuts are planned, the Public Health Agency of Canada is set to have its spending cut by 8.2 per cent to $622-million.

Irish legacy

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 11:09 AM - 34 Comments

Brian Topp draws lessons from Ireland’s meltdown.

The state is awash in debt (thanks in part to excessive tax cuts); the deregulated private sector has gorged itself in an orgy of speculative greed, and finally expired in a property and banking bubble; and now the working and middle class – and their children, and their grandchildren – get to pick up the tab while the winners enjoy their properties in the Grand Caymans. Nobody in Ireland stood up to the special interests. They “ran like a business.” Now the bill has come due.

These are the real stakes between those who work for moderate, prudent, incremental progressive government, moving forward within its means in the public interest, and the other side – the mouthpieces for greed and reckless irresponsibility. The shills and charlatans of the populist right, and those who fund them.

Easier said than done

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, November 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM - 70 Comments

The enduring riddle of opinion polling and the relationship between what people say they want and what people actually want is perhaps best captured by this bit from a new Environics poll commissioned by the Council of Canadians.

71% of Canadians strongly or somewhat agreed with the statement: “The money spent on wars and the military would all be better spent on efforts that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the impacts of climate change.”

Dan Gardner mocks. The necessary follow-up would be this: Do you agree that all the money in the defence department should be shifted to environment?

Zero means zero

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, May 21, 2010 at 5:01 PM - 78 Comments

Maxime Bernier muses on government spending and taxation in a speech to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy in Winnipeg.

Let’s try a thought experiment. Let’s say that the federal government is big enough as it is and that expenses are not going to grow anymore. And I’m not saying zero growth adjusted for inflation and population or GDP increase. Just zero growth. The overall budget is frozen. From now on, any government decision has to be taken within this budgetary constraint. Every new government program, or increase in an existing program, has to be balanced by a decrease somewhere else.

We will no longer have debates about how much more generous the government can be with this or that group, as if the money belonged to the government instead of taxpayers. The focus of the debate will shift to a determination of priorities: what are the most important tasks for government to achieve with the money we have? Is this government function really important and should we have more of it? Then where should we do less or what should we stop doing and leave in the hands of the free market, voluntary organisations and individual citizens? The silent majority’s interests are always being protected.

A sad day for fans of Michael Ignatieff caricatures

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 5:01 PM - 13 Comments

As of April 1, MPs will have to restrict their junk mail to their own constituents.

Your ‘downturn,’ their ‘upturn’

By Mark Steyn - Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 8:40 AM - 76 Comments

Image by Everett Collection

I can’t remember exactly when I first encountered a pop-culture jetpack. Was it James Bond’s, courtesy of Q, in Thunderball? Or was it some comic book? At any rate, I no longer have to wait for mine. Martin Aircraft of Christchurch, New Zealand, have put one into production, for the cost of a top-of-the-line automobile—or about $100,000. It’s not clear to me where you’d be able to fly it, since government air-traffic agencies don’t seem eager to contemplate a world of individual human flight patterns. But still: the Bond jetpack is belatedly here.

Other than that, the future seems unlikely to be quite as futuristic as expected. The problem facing the developed world isn’t so very difficult to figure out. We’re living beyond not just our means but everybody’s means. You can strap on your jetpack, but where would you go? In the United States, Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute calculates that if the federal government were to increase every single tax by 30 per cent it would be enough to balance the books—in 25 years. Except that it wouldn’t. Because if you raised taxes by 30 per cent, government would spend even more than it already does, on the grounds that the citizenry needed more social programs and entitlements to compensate for their sudden reduction in disposable income.

In Canada, the average household’s debt-to-income ratio reached an all-time high in 2009. Credit-card holders at least three months behind with their payments increased by 40 per cent.

Continue…

Free speech and propaganda (II)

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 8:26 AM - 95 Comments

In something of a surprise—at least to me as I sat in the gallery waiting for Francine Lalonde’s bill to be debated—the NDP stood Tuesday evening and voted in favour of a Liberal motion that directs an end to the practice of ten-percenters. Those votes, together with those of the Bloc Quebecois, were just enough for the motion to pass by a count of 140-137.

Free speech and propaganda

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 at 10:38 AM - 53 Comments

Buried in a Liberal motion yesterday was a proposal that the House direct “its Board of Internal Economy to take all necessary steps to end immediately the wasteful practice of Members sending mass mailings, known as ‘ten-percenters,’ into ridings other than their own, which could represent another saving to taxpayers of more than $10 million.”

The resulting debate starts here and, later, resumes here. The gist would seem to be that the government side opposes the motion on an assertion of free speech, while the NDP would like the program to continue with some kind of rule against negative content.

Enough to own all podiums into eternity

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 11:27 AM - 32 Comments

The Liberals figure the Conservatives could save $1.2-billion if they cut advertising, consulting and polling expenditures back to pre-2006 levels and reduced cabinet back to 31 members.

Own the spending issue

By John Geddes - Monday, March 1, 2010 at 2:15 PM - 21 Comments

A few weeks back I tried making the case for tax hikes over spending cuts as the main way the federal government should tackle its deficit problem. My argument relied heavily on the rather obvious observation that not spending is hard. I rhymed off a list of stuff people don’t like governments to scrimp on: funding schools, filling potholes, equipping soldiers, and—this was before the Vancouver games opened—winning Olympic medals.

Today, Michael Ignatieff left little doubt that after the West Coast gold rush, his Liberals aren’t going to let the Conservatives off easy the last of my just-for-instances. Ignatieff threw his support behind the plea from the athletes’ lobby for Ottawa double its contribution to the winter sports portion of the Own the Podium program to $22 million from $11 million.

Continue…

Recalibration reconsidered

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, February 25, 2010 at 3:03 PM - 5 Comments

Two days after an unnamed government official told reporters there would be no new spending in the upcoming budget, an unnamed government official (the same unnamed government official? a different unnamed government official?) says the upcoming budget will include new spending, just nothing “extravagant.”

Dear prudence

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, November 17, 2009 at 1:15 PM - 78 Comments

James Rajotte, in Question Period yesterday. Mr. Speaker, as Canada continues to cope with the effects of the global economic recession, it remains essential for the federal government and for federal agencies to spend tax dollars wisely.

Globe and Mail, today. Reports that Tory MPs ran up $6.3-million in costs last year by mailing out so-called “ten-per-centers” to people outside their ridings have opposition MPs calling for new limits on the free-mail privilege … All the parties do it, but the Conservatives have taken to it with zeal: Adding up the costs, the Montreal newspaper Le Devoir found that MPs with the minority Conservatives spent $6.3-million on the mailers, while opposition MPs spent $3.8-million. The average Conservative spent $38,337, including eight who spent more than $80,000, while the average opposition MP spent $17,977. Ontario Conservative Rick Norlock topped the list at $87,749.

Fun with maps (II)

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, October 30, 2009 at 11:56 AM - 3 Comments

Another interactive map to explore, this one with pretty colours.