Finance Minister Jim Flaherty Charges the taxpayer $130 for beauty care products like Maybelline, Covergirl and Smashbox.
A document from 2008 details how he and his parliamentary secretary Shelly Glover signed off approval for such a purchase in 2008.
In the May 2011 election, Harper won on the premise that he was a good economic manager and the media touted his management as supreme. Apart from that propaganda, the numbers tell a different story. Despite the 2008 recession being caused by external forces, Harper’s mismanagement is as much to blame for the 2008 crisis and the mess that has yet to be cleaned up.
In light of Harper’s “major transformations” to the pensions of ordinary Canadians, it is time we take a look at MP pensions. MPs are eligible to take home half of their $157,000 per year salaries starting at 55 as pensions and receive benefits as long as they serve for 6 years. This is way more than the pennies any working Canadian will ever see at 65 – now imagine 67. Many more senior MPs get significantly more than that.
Harper announced at the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland that his Conservative government would be bringing in “major transformations” to the retirement pension system, immigration, science funding, and the energy sector but left no concrete plans on how these changes would take place. The opposition charged that his retirement changes would financially cripple millions of Canadian seniors.
The NDP have disclosed documents that prove that Tony Clement had a say in how the $50 million G8 “slush fund” was managed. In response to their findings, NDP MP Charlie Angus is calling on Tony Clement to turn himself in to the police. Clement fought back claiming that the NDP were only reusing old facts and changing the notion of recommendation into order.
Harper’s omnibus crime bill is set to cost Ontario tax payers over $1 billion in increased police and correctional service costs. With this massive jump in spending toward a crime initiative that has failed in Texas, what are the repercussions on the end users – tax payers.
The Harper government has labeled and attacked opponents of the XL Keystone pipeline project on the premise that they received funding from American environmental groups. It turns out that the Harper government has also been getting foreign funding.
Stephen Harper’s Conservative government has been aided by external organizations in their effort to start the exploitation of the Alberta tar sands which is known to be the dirtiest oil source on the planet. With Harper’s tight message controls in Environment Canada, the RCMP, among other departments, it is no surprise that the government’s response on issues surrounding the Keystone project have been very well coordinated and outsourced as well.
Things are starting to look up for the Liberals. For the first time in a long time, a Liberal leader has managed to get a higher approval rating than the Prime Minister. However, rest in mind that there are still enough undecided to sway the curve.
The NDP leadership race is soon coming to a close and they will crown one of 8 people as their new leader. The media has claimed a two-way race between Thomas Mulcair and Brian Topp for leader but this speculation is useless as it will be the card-carrying NDP members that will make the final verdict. Based on Liberal failures in the past 6 years, here are some pieces of advice and caution:
Canadians agree that the gap between the rich and poor is increasing but they aren’t buying that the cause is corporate profits. In fact, a recent poll suggests that Canadians don’t attribute any concrete blame for the issue.
Canada is entering the 21st century based on technology of the 1800s. Our education system is an assembly line. Our healthcare system assumes that patients are not well enough informed to manage their own medical records. Our bureaucratic structure is unnecessarily complex and large for the services we need to produce. Add on the abuses and perks and misplaced priorities and you get a very expensive system that doesn’t work very well.
The Department of National Defense is one of the departments slated for cuts as Harper searches for $4 billion in savings. However, as 2,100 employees are packing their stuff and moving out of their offices, renovations have been slotted as new spending. These renovations, at a cost of $379,000 tax payer dollars, can be found in the deputy defense minister’s office.
What do Lise St-Denis and Irwin Cotler have in common? Apart from being Liberal MPs, they have both been attacked by their opposition using the dirtiest tactics available. The NDP has claimed for years that the Liberals and Conservatives were destroying democracy with vicious politics and offered themselves as an alternative. It appears that the “Fix(ed) Ottawa” that Jack Layton spoke of was hot air and unfortunately, it’s not the first time this blog has come to this conclusion.
The Conservatives like to claim that they shrink government size and spending. Like with Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, spending soared and Canada crashed. Mulroney introduced the GST, but that was not enough to clean his mess. In the 1990s, the Liberals under Jean Chretien took the unpopular decision to make cuts and the way they did it turned out to be widely successful as it gave the Liberal Party 13 years of uninterrupted power. Now, the Conservatives are left with no choice but to try it for themselves – for the first time.
As we go down the list, we will note many job cuts, but as of yet, no MP salaries/pensions, senator salaries/pensions, or executive bureaucrat salaries/pensions have been brought to the chopping block.
Summary of To-Date Cuts by Conservatives
- Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: 42 positions; $15.2 million savings; October 19, 2011
- Bank of Canada: 33 workers; June 6, 2011
- Canadian Museum of Civilization: 8 positions; August 16, 2011
- Environment Canada: 776 positions in air; 300 eliminated; affects main scientists, engineers, and meteorologists; August 4, 2011
- Fisheries and Oceans: 275 positions; $56.8 million savings by 2014; October 13, 2011
- Human Resources and Skills Development Canada: 600 positions; EI processing centers affected
- Industry Canada: 26 positions; June 26, 2011
- National Defense: 2,100 civilian positions over 3 years
- National Gallery of Canada: 5 curators; June 2, 2011
- National Research Council: 52 positions; June 23, 2011
- Public Works and Government Services Canada: 700 staff over 3 years; mainly labor force; August 4, 2011
- Treasury Board: 84 jobs over 3 years; $11.5 million savings
- Veterans Affairs: 400-500 positions; $226 million savings; October 21, 2011
Source: CBC
The Harper government is looking for $4 billion in savings but yet the list of his government’s abuses with money keep adding to the list.
Are the items above worth the purchase? Why not cut those first? Like the trips at the Public Service School, there is no word of it being scrapped as it should. When will MPs and government officials be held accountable for their actions? The Conservatives, lowering spending? Anything but. Conservatives making cuts? The wrong cuts.
While skeptics fought a reasoned fight against some of the Liberal Party’s new constitutional amendments, the party voted with sufficient numbers to pass some of former President Alfred App’s controversial departure gifts. In doing so, they also took a stab at new policy conventions and voted for a “Bold New Red.”
In a previous post, I analyzed the main talking points of the Conservatives and found that a basic logic behind their proposed cuts in spending increases for provincial healthcare transfers made sense. However, while the logic behind the plan was sound, the plan itself wasn’t. The lack of leadership and the misguided neglect of the system will lead to bigger problems in the future – at least, this is what the Parliamentary Budget Watchdog says.
Quebec NDP MP Lise St-Denis crossed over to the Liberals citing the party’s pragmatism and her belief that their values are the best suited for her people. With this drift, the Liberals gain a seat to make 35 in the House of Commons at the expense of the NDP who now have 102.
Sometimes you have to wonder where the Conservatives find the money to afford their new initiatives while they preach austerity. The Conservatives are now making a Religious Freedom Office within Foreign Affairs at the expense of tax payers.
In the 1990s and up to 2004, Harper championed on being the small government, low tax advocate, among other more controversial stances. However, if we compare these positions to his current day actions, it appears that all of his past opposition was worth absolutely nothing.
As if the House of Commons and senate wasn’t enough, the Prime Minister’s Office is the biggest in history. This comes as the Canadian economy is crawling and austerity is coming to find $4 billion in savings. Harper called for small government back in the 90s and in 2004, however, that Harper is gone. In the first 5 years of Harper’s mandate since 2006, bureaucracy has grown 13%, contradicting these small government principles.
As a society and as a community, you would expect that your contribution through taxes would be allocated wisely and as government being a means of allocating resources, you would think that this contribution would translate into some kind of benefit for us all. Well, that isn’t always the case, let’s take a look at the Canada School of Public Service, a department that should be one of the many on the chopping block as it doesn’t benefit anyone except the limited few who get first class trips on the expenses of taxpayers.
One of the ways that Canada trains its bureaucrats is to spend $145 million per year to send them on fancy and expensive foreign ‘study tours’. These flights are costly per person and luxurious indeed. Below is only a sample of bureaucratic traveling costs that are charged to our bill so that they can see how other countries operate. Note that each price tag below links to the purpose of the charge.
- Richard Wex, Assistant Deputy Minister for policing, law enforcement and the interoperability branch. $21,999.23, $21,745.32.
- Marie Lemay, CEO of the National Capital Commission. $21,745.86, $23,826.87
- Anil Arora, Assistant Chief Statistician at Statistics Canada. $24,548.58, $17,081.60, $7,891.92
- Barbara Ritzen, Justice. $17,909.53, $17,337.31
- Thanh Thao Pham, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. $17,951.47, $13,825.72, $8,401.90
- Jean-Pierre Blais, Heritage. $19,266.31, $10,718.95, $15,645.12
- Catherine MacQuarrie, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. $19,751.64, $15,565.90, $8,244.27
- Don Head, Correctional Service Canada. $20,604.95, $11,822.29, $7,958.36
- Helena Borges, Transport Canada. $22,877.55, $14,369.82
- Daniel J. Caron, Library and Archives Canada. $21,807.44, $11,238.77, $8,063.74
- Keith Clark, RCMP. $16,483.40, $11,296.24
- Martine Dubuc, Canadian Food Inspection Agency. $15,149.61, $21,582.81
- Greg Fyffe, Canada School of Public Service. $22,497.70, $9,336.80
- Christine Hogan, CIDA. $19,604.16, $18,286.86
Every wasted cent adds up, and represents billions of dollars that could have been reallocated to the stuff we really need. Governments and political parties are now coming strong with their tax hike notions, ask yourself: Why should I pay for the mistakes that Ottawa made with my money? Remember, if you misspent your cash, would you get money as easily as they raise taxes? Demand accountability and efficiency and prudent government (regardless the governing party), because if you don’t they simply won’t care about you nor I.
The Conservatives and their followers like to brag about how the Conservatives are small government, non-interventionist government. Before you listen to them, let’s take a look at the facts.
In terms of cabinet size, as in higher profile and higher-paid MPs, the Harper Government has pushed the limit. Armed with a majority, Harper joins Brian Mulroney and Paul Martin as the man running the largest cabinet in Canadian history; composed of 39 members and a cumulative cost of $9 million per year. Add on 30 new MPs and you get $6.4 million in MP salaries. We haven’t even gotten to the pensions or the perks that they will all enjoy courtesy of the tax payers.
When it comes to the senate, Harper repeatedly broke his campaign promise to not appoint senators. He achieved his majority in 2011 and is kicking off 2012 with the addition of 7 more senators. Harper promised senate reform, an expensive reform that would essentially create a second House of Commons and waste our money. The Conservatives claim they believe in small government, let’s compare the costs and size.
Costs Comparison
*This cost doesn’t include the salaries of other staff or maintenance costs. Nor does the cost include other additions for certain other of the included senators’ roles and thus this cost will be less than actual.
Year 2006 (Pre-Harper) 2011-2012 (Harper) Salary Standard $122,700 $132,300 Salary Gov Rep. $195,622 $209,922 Salary Opp Rep $156,500 $168,300 Total Senators 61 104 Total Cost* $7,468,722 $13,872,822
Stephen Harper added the new senators to get a majority and absolute power in the senate.
Seat Distribution Comparison
2006 (Pre-Harper) 2011-2012 (Harper) Conservative 17 60 Liberal 41 41 Independent 2 2 Progressive Conservative 1 1 Total 61 104
Stephen Harper clearly increased the cost of the senate by more than 2% before his reforms and the amount of senators who have been appointed to Canada’s red chamber. His increases are even more notable when compared to his predecessors.
Senate Appointment By Prime Minister
- Pierre Trudeau, Liberal: 5
- Brian Mulroney, Progressive Conservative: 15
- Jean Chretien, Liberal: 26
- Paul Martin, Liberal: 15
- Stephen Harper, Conservative: 43
As far as non-interventionist, the Conservative war on crime and copyright amendments bring the government to our living rooms.
It goes to show that the Conservatives have formed the largest and most intrusive government we’ve ever seen. If there is anything that the government should be doing is abolishing the senate, slicing down the number of MPs, getting out of peoples’ lives and cutting MP salaries and pensions.
The Harper Government is quietly looking into a $3.7 billion purchase of new search-and-rescue planes. When the idea was pitched 6 years ago by the Conservatives, the cost was $3.1 billion, $600 million less than now. The project was put into a bureaucratic limbo a long time ago when Paul Martin first approved it and it never got done.
It goes to show that the government is not too good in choosing purchase times. While we don’t need these new planes and no one is looking at job creation, but rather how to split up dwindling funds, they’re being bought anyway. The same goes to the F-35 deal which would essentially be the expensive purchase of lemons that the United States on all sides of political spectrum have agreed that the value of their purchase was just not worth it.
You have people learning how to use coupons and how to shop when there are sales and how to play on the competitive key of Canada’s economy along with how to be minimalist and only buy the necessities. When will the government finally learn the same thing? Imagine how much we would and could have saved if the government was actually prudent with their use of limited funds – a skill that Canadian families and individuals in the lower and middle class have had to master in order to survive.
The Conservatives scrapped census and the gun registry under one principle: freedom and privacy. The Conservatives deemed their decisions were beneficial as the government got out of the affairs of Canadians. However, some Conservative supporters and MPs are making the push to re-open the debate on abortion laws in Canada and tell Canadian women what they can and cannot do with their body in the name of justice. Does that make sense?
The Conservatives will tell you that they believe in your freedom but when you ask them if they are allowed to surf the web freely, they respond with bill C-52 which allows police to act on you without a warrant whenever they think something isn’t right. They will tell you that gun owners aren’t criminals and then say that the government shouldn’t monitor them – the exact opposite of the standard internet user – and abolish the gun registry and effectively get the government out of their faces. They will tell you that you would not have to give your personal information to a census bureau and so you shouldn’t be required to fill out the form and that government should stay out of your face.
But while they say this, they are ready to tell you that they don’t want to interfere with your way of life, but they have full control to make you a criminal based on whatever you do with your body. Whether it be do fill yourself with toxins that will eventually lead to your death, or whether it be abortion, the Conservatives are ready to impose their views upon you and jail you if you disagree.
Now, let’s not make any mistake as to where I am going with this article. Abortion is a hot topic and the arguments all try to pin black or white on a very grey area. However, if you believe that a child is not a child until birth, or part way through the process or if you believe that any fetus is life regardless of the stage, you believe two different things which are relatively right or wrong. It is like a religious man telling a scientist that everything he has studied was created and brought to him by a god and thus he should learn to have faith; or a scientist preaching that all faith should be dissolved because there is no concrete evidence that any god exists. How can you tell either of them that they are wrong? Who on this planet really, absolutely knows for a fact how the universe came to be? Why would you jail someone for thinking and believing what they will?
What these Conservatives are proposing is that anyone who doesn’t believe that a fetus is always alive goes to jail and gets punished because the people who believe that they are say they are. Many on the pro-life side will argue that abortion is murder of a potential child and from a moral sense, they are correct, albeit pro-life activists have a good track record of blackmailing, killing and attacking abortion clinics, its staff, and its clients.
What these Conservatives are essentially saying is that people are only “free” on their terms and that goes against the whole principle of freedom. It also goes against the whole principle of getting government out of the way because now government is controlling the bodies of every pregnant woman or these women get slapped with murder charges.
Opening this debate opens the doors to many others which over time have been a common mantra of Conservative movements. We saw remnants of one them in the Ontario Provincial election where Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak promised to bring daily prayers to the public education system, a move that would impose religion on students. So, now, Christians, how would you feel is Muslims told you that you had to follow their faith? Does it make sense to you? Probably doesn’t, so where does it make sense for Christians to preach upon students who are atheist, and a mix of other religions and tell them what they should and should not believe?
This is not the only common Conservative argument type, look at gay rights, the conservatives believe that being gay is a choice and in the United States, many Republican leader nominees do plan to take those tights away and when they were passed here in Canada, Stephen Harper led the protest against them.
It seems that as much as the Conservatives try to play centrists, they cannot hide their true identity of being radical right-wing leaders who want nothing more than to impose their beliefs on your lives. From abortion to religion to gay rights, why should the government be allowed to dictate what you believe? Aren’t you a free and independent person?
The Conservatives, contradicting themselves again, refusing to acknowledge people’s freedom of speech, thought, and control over their own bodies. When you think about it, it makes those Liberal ads back in 2006 and Chretien’s staunch warnings seem so much less inflated and so much more realistic.
When you think of healthcare funding, you will likely think that the money we spend goes directly to healthcare. Unfortunately, it doesn’t. Instead, the money goes to hospital administrators and CEOs who have a tendency of treating themselves well and when cuts come along, they are never the first to get the front end. As the NDP scream that healthcare lacks funding, it is becoming more and more evident that healthcare is properly funded, but mismanaged, yet another strike against a political party that is already well known for being unrealistic.
In Ontario, new transparency rules came into place with the new year and hospital executives are scrambling to throw their luxuries under the bus. The fancy perks, the generous salaries, all paid by tax payers, are now going public and the picture isn’t pretty.
Ontario is under pressure to make cuts and with new transparency rules, administrators would face public scrutiny so they are be-riding their private club memberships and fancy perks that are all obtained on the taxpayers’ bill. The new rules force every hospital to make their employment agreements for top executives public, including benefits.
“We knew when the contracts were going to be opened up to public scrutiny that it would raise a lot of questions,” Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews said. “For me, the issue is, are we getting the best value for money at a time when health-care dollars are going to have to be stretched even more than before?”
The simple answer to her question is no, and the simple solution is an overhaul of salaries and administrative structure.
Rita Bura, a board member at the University Health Network defended hospital executives asking people who will look at these records to reflect in the improvement in patient care and not to be interested in car allowances which most executives have. She argues that the UHN has a strategic plan to innovate and make better use of research dollars – arguably, something thy should have done a long time ago.
The Globe and Mail found that dozens of contracts contained benefits and perks until the implementation of the transparency law.
As an example of some of these public paid perks:
If every province enacted this transparency law, how many other hospitals would turn up the same results? How much more of our money was wasted because public sector workers thought they could get away with it?
There is more waste in the system, and some of it has to do with diagnosing techniques. Canada’s healthcare system is broken. If one thing is for certain, the past decade of boosting spending hasn’t improved the system, it just threw more money out the window.
The Conservatives are cutting it, which is a good step forward as the increasing cost is unsustainable and the scale back forces these misusers out to public for scrutiny, but they have left every province to fend for themselves without a plan. We know from Harper’s days at the National Citizens Coalition that he was no fan of public healthcare and fought to replace it with an Americanized private model.
As for the NDP, they may have the right heart in the matter, but ultimately, their plan to pump money through a broken pipe is just a means to waste more money and get nothing done.
The Liberals haven’t left a clear stance and we have yet to see what they will say.
If one thing is certain, however, it is that the system as it stands doesn’t work and needs an overhaul and that privatization and spending aren’t the answers.
September 11, 2001 will never be forgotten. The day of the largest attack on democracy in modern times has been marked by that date. It is the collapse of the World Trade Centers that led to much of what is happening right now, but if one thing is for certain, the terrorists won.