OnTheIce OnTheIce:
You don't dish out BILLIONS in project overnight just to coincide with "construction" season. That would be irresponsible. Had they done that, Harper would have been slammed for lack of accountability, etc etc. You know it and I know it.
And Baird knew it but has apparently forgotten:
$1:
John Baird in 2009:
“It’s not up to his government to closely monitor how money intended for road, sewer
and other projects is actually spent, suggests the federal minister in charge of infrastructure.
“‘It’s not big government’s role and Ottawa to centrally manage everything,’ Baird said
when asked how his department is monitoring spending.” (Canadian Press, July 29, 2009)
John Baird in 2006:
“There’s only one taxpayer, and my job is to ensure that there’s accountability. My job is to ensure there’s due diligence. My job is to ensure taxpayers are protected, and I take that very seriously.”
(John Baird, CBC Radio − The House, October 14, 2006)
“Going forward, the government will make responsible spending the norm by requiring that all new and existing programs go through a systematic and rigorous examination. This will ensure that this government only approves funds that are actually needed to achieve measurable results, in a way that is effective and that provides value for money. Our new expenditure management system will be built on the principles of fiscal discipline, managing the results, and maximizing value for money… Canada’s new government will ensure significantly greater transparency, accountability, and value for money in all federal spending. We will settle for nothing less.” (John Baird, Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, October 17, 2006)
The Gas tax has been in place all along. If this was an emergency that required $10 Billion to save our economy then that fire hose must be turned on before the house burns to the ground rather then let the flames rise to a good tempo that everyone is screaming for action. You know that we have never done a spending package like this before intended to shore up the economy. Now that the government has committed to such levels of spending it doesn't get to just pass the cash to its buddies, we can't afford cronyism on that scale and expect the economy to sort itself out.
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Second, many of these projects need approval(s), environmental assessments and permits.
These are projects on the minicpal level that have already BEEN aproved but need funding. AKA the Victoria’s Johnson Street Bridge bridge:
Victoria council not abandoning bridge project despite funding rejectionThere are THOUSANDS of such projects in BC alone that have already been approved and have the cities and towns already ponying up half the cash, they are just waiting on the feds and they have said NO.
Check out the Non-construction GalleryOnTheIce OnTheIce:
To say that they're just "throwing money" at their own ridings is misleading and false.
Have a look for yourselfYou can see that the findings were on target:
$1:
• In Ontario, the Conservatives promised 15% more dollars on average to their own ridings ($13.1 million) from the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund (ISF) and the Recreation Facilities fund (RinC) combined, compared to $11.1 million average for Liberal-held ridings.
• In British Columbia, Conservative ridings garnered more than fourteen times as much funds as opposition ridings ($11.3 million to $800,000) from the ISF.
• In Quebec, Conservative ridings received 2.68 times more projects per riding on average than opposition ridings.
• In the stimulus program for rehabilitation of community and recreation centres, the $500-million RInC, eighteen out of the top twenty ridings by number of projects granted in Ontario are held by Conservatives.
• Industry Minister Tony Clement, the minister responsible for the RInC program in Ontario, gave his own riding the second most projects with 28, four times the provincial average.
• The average RInC grant for Conservative ridings in Ontario was $2.1 million, 33% higher than opposition ridings.
• In the RInC program, Rob Merrifield, Minister of State for Transport secured $1.4million for his riding and Jim Prentice, Minister of the Environment secured $1.7 million. These 2 ministers had 2 out of the top 3 ridings receiving funding, 5-6 times the average riding funding.
• In the $1.2-billion Building Canada Fund, in the Communities component for cities and towns under 100,000 population, Conservative ridings in 5 electorally competitive provinces (NS, Ontario, PEI, BC, MB) received an average of $8.8 million, compared to just $5 million for opposition-held areas.
Now what were the economic reasons for those discrepancies? That's pork barrel politics plain and simple and they didn't need an environmental study to get it.
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
When all is said and done, we have an economy on the rise, directly attributed to this stimulus (according to the Bank of Canada) regardless of how fast it's being pushed out and when the money really kicks in towards the end of 2009 and into 2010 things will get even better and places all around Canada will have new facilities, new roads and new jobs.
No, it is not the stimulus as the bulk of the projects have yet to be started. Unemployment has gone from 6% in January to nearly 8.5% in May and personal bankruptcies have doubled in that same time frame from 6,000 to 11,000. The demand for the stimulus was intended to soften that blow and it is far to early to see what the reaction will be to our economy will be when the program of spending was designed over two years. The BOC interest is inflation and what is driving that up is the debt not the stimulus.
Government to reveal new timetable for reducing deficit in weeks: FlahertyWhen the government has no credibility on a when we will return to a surplus and no plan that will fuel inflation via speculation.