Tories slash spending by $1B

Written By: 4Canada
Date: 2006-09-26 08:26:00
<a href="/article/190704172-tories-slash-spending-by-1b">Article Link</a>

“We’re going to budget prudently like people budget in Canada — not like big shots budget.”

The $1-billion figure, over two years, included savings accrued from tighter spending, such as $47 million less for having a smaller cabinet. And it covered areas where money was allocated but never spent, such as a proposed new citizenship act that cost $20 million.

But Flaherty and Treasury Board President John Baird made it clear that the Conservatives were largely making choices about what their government felt were priorities, with many of those choices made in areas that were nurtured by the Liberals.

Some of the cuts, over two years, included:

$4.6 million in assistance to museums.

$5 million from Status of Women Canada.

Elimination of the $4-million medical marijuana research program that tested the impact of pot on ill Canadians.

Elimination of Law Commission of Canada.

Elimination of $9.7 million in support to Canadian Volunteerism Initiative.

Elimination of $10.8 million First Nations/Inuit tobacco control strategy.

<a href="http://tinyurl.com/nk62s">http://tinyurl.com/nk62s</a>

[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 27, 2006]

Let's not forget monies cut that were allocated for dealing with the Mountain Pine Beetle.

Hill and Harris are going to answer for that one here in central BC.

Their being unable to answer questions due to their master's command not to say anything not clear by the PMO will definitely go against them next election.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

No one should be surprised by this. It is perfectly in line with the ideology that the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance advocated for years. They opposed all of those programs and many, many more.

This ideology is based on the principle that wealth is the only measure of quality. Those without wealth are inferior and hence undeserving of governmental patronage. That patronage is reserved for "people of quality" such as CEOs of huge corporations.

The promotion of war is the perfect means of ensuring that the "quality" are rewarded with more of the wealth of the nation in profits from the industrial defence complex and the "poor" get the honourable role of taking the bullet.

Actually, it looks like they cut spending mostly from the right places - politically correct do-gooderism and corporate welfare to Bombardier.

tell you what Individualist, when the Mountain Pine beetle eventually does get across the Rockies (and it will, make NO mistake), and destroy virtually every adult Pine tree in it's path, you can take solace in the fact that your anti-do-gooderism have been well served by the Harper regimes short sighted policies.

Harper's "Christian" point of view is mean-spirited and as always benefits him and his cronies. I am a Christian and his high handed arrogance, and total disregard for his fellow man, make me ill.

Bloody short sighted idiots.

Just shows how ignorant "Conservatives" really are.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

It's true some of these areas are things we could do without eg. the government pays people to hire lawyers to oppose government policy. hey,who,want!!??!! Others may be more useful. Perhaps this is the way the Conservatives get away with their push to the right. Support a few reasonable changes in the hope we wouldn't notice everything else. I found a television comment by the Canadian Taxpayer's "federation" kind of funny. First Williamson praises Harper for spending 13.2 billion against the federal debt and then claims that the existance of such a surplus is "proof" that taxes are too high. I might agree with the latter part but still can we make up our minds? CTF is basically a one man show anyway so why would anyone except his drinking buddies at the National Post really give a tinker's dam? Actually I would go much further than the "new" tories who seem to believe that "state control" is bad except when it's carrying a gun. [Gee whiz, isn't that what the "great helmsman" of Beijing said about political power?]. Getting out of Afghanistan and maybe giving back those useless submarines to the British would save a few billion. A little loose change spent on an investigation of RCMP cronyism might yield a few savings. Actually getting rid of the RCMP altogether might be a real consideration. The rural community in which I work could hire itself a local constable "to shake hands with doorknobs" and generally act as a friendly watchdog for much less money then the "mounties" and their PR campaigns and phoney roadside "safety" checks. [None of their horseshit stopped a recent death by an underage and drunk teenager from driving a stolen car at 100 kph through a 40 kph zone. He missed a turn, crashed and was killed. Hoorah for law and order...]. Actually we could start an entirely new thread listing the areas where governments could cut back on spending .... areas which these counterfeit "libertarians" would not like to see diminished.

There are no doubt a lot of places to cut gov't spending. such as flat rate salaries for senators, program duplication, etc but the pine beetle has been the recipient of gov't cut backs since Vanderzalm and that is why it is as widespread as it is. This cutback along with Campbell's policies are only going to make it worse. The explanation from the tory gov't yesterday was kind of funny though, it went something like...
the money we've cut from the Mtn Pine Beetle program was old money. That has already been replaced with new money [nothing actually cited] so actually we've increased funding.

---
Dear Abby, Dear Abby my fountain pen leaks, my wife hollers at me and the kids are all freaks

I guess the best way to phrase it would be like Sir Humphrey on Yes, Minsiter:

"Based upon projected surplus' and taking into account such things as the preferred policies of the Prime Minsister regarding anything beyound his actual sphere of knowledge, the Finance Minsiter has decided that in order best serve the needs of the people, monies areleady allocated will be diverted away from their intended purpose' and replaced with a negetive increase in already allocated funds to be replaced by projected monies which as yet have not proceeded beyond the planning stages and may or may not actually be allocated."

Try saying that in one breath.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

Make no mistake about it, the Harris gang is now in charge of the Federal coffers. Flaherty and Baird are the two main architects of these cuts. They are exactly the type of cuts Flaherty introduced for Harris. What is more frightening is that they would do this in a minority government. I think Baird was social services minister in August 2001 at the time the worst incident in the Harris regime occurred.

Frank

Ya that's it!! Also reminiscent of Jean Cretien's... well if you have the proof then it would be proven but if it isn't proven then there was no proof because to be proven the proof is in the proof!

---
Dear Abby, Dear Abby my fountain pen leaks, my wife hollers at me and the kids are all freaks

"Actually getting rid of the RCMP altogether might be a real consideration. The rural community in which I work could hire itself a local constable "to shake hands with doorknobs" and generally act as a friendly watchdog for much less money then the "mounties" and their PR campaigns and phoney roadside "safety" checks. [None of their horseshit stopped a recent death by an underage and drunk teenager from driving a stolen car at 100 kph through a 40 kph zone. He missed a turn, crashed and was killed. Hoorah for law and order...]."

That is interesting logic that should lead you to the position that it would be just as well to get rid of all laws because a few people won't obey them anyway!!

<a href="http://z3.invisionfree.com/GoBC/index.php?showtopic=1298&st=0&#last">http://z3.invisionfree.com/GoBC/index.php?showtopic=1298&st=0&#last</a>--- "Son, if you wanna get ahead in this world, never work for another man as long as you live."

Abolishing the RCMP may not be a good idea, but overhauling it's structure and mission so that it's an actual force dedicated to enforcing the laws of the land instead of being the enforcers of the will of whatever idiot is currently in the PMO would be a grand idea in my book.

A totally politically nuetral and impartial organization dedicated purely to law enforcement without being in any way being obliged to those in governemnt.

Too bad it'll never happen.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

The issue IS the general safety of people has very little to do with the actions of the police. It has very much to do with the "small stuff",ie the example set by adults for children and the degree that neighbours look out for each other, worthwhile employment etc, etc.. I live in a city, Regina, which for years has had one of the highest murder rates in this country. In most recent years we have been no. 1 in this category. Most ugly stuff takes place in the poorer areas of the city. In the 50s and 60s, when provincial crime rates overall were considerably lower then now, many small towns never saw a policemen for years at a time. One former resident of Silton, Sask related that in the thirteen years of his life there were absolutely NO police in that town ... except ONCE when another local killed his wife [apparently by accident or a fit of temper no one seemed to know which] and the murderer figured it was time to turn himself in to the cops. The RCMP did show up at the local general store after a hour or two, no rapid response teams in those days, and took the guy away.

The general attitude of "law and order" is no different then in many areas of government "service" and in some cases is notably worse. In the eighties a couple of Regina city cops were arrested for "breaking and entering and theft" [definitely over fifty dollars!]. Apparently they were casing local retailers mostly hardware stores in their squad cars and then returning after their shift to rob same. Well before this in the early seventies the Regina police went on strike, well actually more or a "restricted response" thing so they said, and anything less than serial murder would not be investigated [as if anyone would notice]. There WERE a few minor "incidents", public drinking, a few unlicenced beaters filled with kids,etc.. One stereo store got nailed a few times although I don't think it was those two cops above ... they would have been too young ... but you never know. In those days there was no increase in major crime, no serial killers, no big traffic accidents almost like nothing had really happened at all! I can't speak for what would occur today although most of the unfortunates living in "moccasin heights" probably wouldn't even notice.