Voice of joy and sunshine
26th May 2003
Schofield;5565394Yeah, but $20 million is a lot of money. There are people in the government who are there for that, and if they aren't good enough then they should be replaced, not kept in office being overshadowed by outside help.
Okay, replaced by who? If you want to attract the best people you have to lay the best hearth. I don't think that's purely money, you can get good staff on a shoestring, or even for free. The problem is it's also in terms of the complexity of the problems you can give people, the ability for them to see their decisions changing things. That sort of thing. I could go on listing stuff, but... In short, you're trading the fulfilment of your utility functions.
And government - with its incredibly complicated internal politics - just ain't capable of drumming up much on that front. Too many competing interest groups.[/SIZE]
I'm not really surprised by this at all, not after some of the more recent 'scandals' that have come to light. There was the issue of Tony Clement, the former minister of industry, using his influence to bring some $50 million dollars in federal money to his riding to make it pretty for a G8 meeting that never happened in that town (it was supposed to, but it was moved), highlighted by the creation of an artificial lake near where the leaders were supposed to stay or where the meetings were supposed to occur, and it was literally 5 minutes away from an actual lake.
The defense minister, Peter MacKay, used a search and rescue helicopter to pick him up from a fishing vacation in a remote part of Newfoundland to take him to the airport (which he explained to Parliament as taking part in a SAR training exercise) where he took an air force jet halfway across the country to Southern Ontario to deliver a speech. He then got back on the jet to go back to his riding in Nova Scotia (back to the East Coast for those who don't know Canadian geography) for a lobster dinner fundraiser.
The Harper government recently announced plans to go ahead with a controversial "American-style" tough-on-crime bill despite crime figures being their lowest in the country since 1973. The minister of public safety, Vic Toews, said something along the lines that Statistics Canada's figures on the crime rate were wrong or weren't important. Kinda funny since all Stats Canada does is compile relatively accurate figures on all sorts of things and if they don't matter, then whose figures are they basing the need for all these new crime initiatives? Some of the new laws/proposals make sense, but some of the mandatory sentences related to drug offences are just plain stupid.
I sometimes wonder how these guys get elected, but then I remember the opposition has been too stupid and disorganized to ever call them on this shit during elections. For a government that promised to get rid of the scandals of the Liberal era (the Sponsorship scandal, looks like nothing compared to this crap), this is just ridiculous.
They're also expected to reintroduce their new copyright bill into Parliament soon.
Schofield;5565379They're doing so by paying a consultant firm $90,000 a day for 8 months for advice on how to do so.
If there's one thing that no government is good at it's cutting spending.
Wanna go Double Dutch?
9th December 2003
The wage does sound rather high but if he can find efficient but still reasonable ways to cut many hundreds of millions or more (were a the officials themselves couldn't or wouldn't wish to find them), then it would be worth it.
President of Novistrana
19th January 2003
Although this isn't exactly connected, it makes fun of similar scenario