The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) is calling for the federal government to shut down the department of Western Economic Diversification;
Since 1987, the department has handed out over $3.9-billion in funding to various organizations, businesses, governments and individuals through a number of grant and loan programs. A mere 51.8% of "loans" have ever been paid back.
"Over the years there has been a striking correlation between the department's spending spikes and the timing of federal elections," said CTF Manitoba director Colin Craig. "It's too bad that legitimate projects have to wait for an election in order to receive funding. The fact that the department funds everything from airport lighting to cemeteries doesn't help its reputation as a 'catch all' political slush fund either."
"It's quite a stretch to call some of these payments 'loans' when the government barely even collects half of the dollars back,"
why just pick on the western pork fest ? The CFT needs to look at the national picture.
There are similar porkers for Quebec and the Maritimes that are far worse, waste far more.
Take all the wasted dollars and use it to fund the urgently needed re-equipping of our Armed Forces.
I suspect they will, if they haven't already.
Why doesn't the CTF hold a Tea Party type event or something? They've been issuing press releases all my adult life, hasn't accomplished a damned thing. Protip: when a movement is that useless, they're probably infiltrated by the other side.
While the CTF has to be commended for bringing these issues to the attention of the public, superficial political change will not correct things very significantly.
People have to come to grips with a deeper, more philosophical issue. As long as large numbers of people continue to believe that they are entitled to something for nothing, at the expense of the people who actually produce that "something", then we are a long way from getting out of messes like the ones that the CTF highlights.
That’s a very interesting link. After a cursory look at the Saskatchewan projects alone, I have to agree with the CTF. Although I did note that the women of SK were well treated by this program.
“Women Entrepreneurs of Saskatchewan Inc”, whose initial project description was to “Establish a centre for women entrepreneurs” managed to glean $12,531,298.00 during the reported period.
Does this augur well for the new “Delisle Centre for Advanced Blogging”?
I should probably check into that, glasnost...
Slightly O/T Kate but watching the Breakfast Show this morning, they had an article on an upstart airline called 'Pet Airways'. Perhaps you can tap into that fund to get to your dog shows with all that unenviable driving...and more worthwhile than a lot of 'diverse' projects that come to mind.
Cost: $149.00/pet-one way. Go for it.
Good thing we have a Conservative government keeping a stern hand on the nation's finances. They'll get right on this.
I mean, they just opened an economic development agency for Southern Ontario...think of the jobs they'll create!!!
I should probably check into that, glasnost...
Posted by: Kate at April 29, 2009 12:02 PM
Here's a handy instructional guide:
1. Donate the maximum to the Cons for the year
2. Call your MP. Love him/her. Have a BBQ in their 'honour'.
3. in a year or two, tell them you have something worthwhile, and ask them for their support and assistance.
And BAM! Some magic money will pop up somewhere for you, from some arcane fund hidden somewhere in the bowels of the gub'mint.
There you go, all laid out.
But remember most of all, they don't need you until you need them!
Now go get your tax dollars....
Now it's time to juxtapose. Over that same time frame taxpayers have shelled out over $110 billion
to a certain, not-to-be named, conservative friendly special interest. And without any pretense of one thin dime being repayable.
What does the CTF have to say about that? Not a damn thing.
Phonies and hypocrites the lot of them.
Name it, philboy, name it!
"a certain, not-to-be named, conservative friendly special interest. "
The Luftwaffe? Oh, please say yes...
The Lufwaffe?
Wasn't that the National SOCIALST Party named its air force?
Let's juxtapose a bit more, shall we.
$3.9 billion over 22 years, half of which was repaid
is what? $91 million a year or $2.76 per year per capita. Or a whopping $60.60 per capita since 1987?
To fund the not-to-be named, conservative friendly special interest:
The per capita cost in SK over 22 years is $9000.00.
Per annum $400.00. And that's a "conservative" estimate.
And the CTF focuses on the former and ignores the latter? Can you say bullshit, right-wing propaganda?
I have reviewed lots of projects that this group funded, while the timing of the money can be questioned, a lot of it goes to rather boring small infrastructure project, the last few years the focus has been on water and sewage systems in small towns.
The Latte Left is against those, Colin. Water supply, sewage treatment, roads are not in their play/red book.
Remember, they are "back-to-the-Cave-Dave types.
Question: Why is man the bad one ? He builds treatment plants so his waste is safe for other living things but geese are suppose to be free to crap all over the shore and spread e.coli that kills ?
http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-28653--search.htm
"Wasn't that the National SOCIALST (sic) Party named its air force?"
Pssst...conservatives eschew the interrogative. It's considered, well, gay. It's considered gay. Speak man/penis sentences, featuring periods at the end, should you persist in your charade.
Posted by: Colin at April 29, 2009 1:27 PM
Guess waste and sewage systems for small towns is economic diversification Colin?
It's only a honey pot for the greasy slime of the political class.
Even small town sewage and water systems need not be funded by the state. Why on earth do people continue to believe that this state funding is necessary and desirable?
Everyone who uses the water and/or sewage system can simply pay off the capital cost of the systems via their monthly bill. Naturally, the cost would be much higher than it is now, but what's unfair about making users of a service pay for it?
Once again, the moral impetus for subsidizing water and sewage projects is the belief that it is appropriate for people to get something for nothing at the expense of others.
Heh. Guess water and sewage should be under 'economic diversification', and not say an 'infrastructure fund', no?
Honey Pot Creation:
Step One - Use monies directed for specific use, and spend it on other projects
Step Two - Plead lack of money available for original specific use
Step Three - Dissemble while partisans confuse message
Well done Cons - you've proven yourselves every bit as adept as Libranos for vote buying and dishonesty.
I know that Saskatchewan Independent Living recieved $100,000 for their business program and only one person paid back the last $10,000 they had left.