"Harper Government" found in contempt of parliament for third time in one year

[SebC]

Originally Posted by TylerSVT

Id love a Conservative Majority... Minorities are such a piss off. Harper has done a damn good job during the recession of keeping Canada going strong.

You realize that the Harper Government's Economic Action Plan that uses Conservative colours for it's advertising is the result of the opposition parties telling the Conservatives they'd topple the government if they weren't going to do anything about the economy, right?

Originally Posted by peter12

Anyway, no one answered my primary assertion that this was an institutional problem exacerbated by a minority government. You guys...

That's odd, I thought I did and you ignored it.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Slava

You know how this goes. There are Harper apologists everywhere here, and they will always put that last line of defence that "The Liberals did this first" or when times are really tough "The NEP..." rather than admit that the CPC has shown disdain for parliament and its processes through the last five years.

Have they done some good things? Absolutely. Have they made some excellent decisions? Clearly? But have they been accountable and transparent? Absolutely not. In fact they are probably the least transparent and accountable of any government in decades.

Good post, but... uhhh...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal

[Devils'Advocate]

Conservative supporters hold the Sponsorship Scandal up as some kind of holy grail.

Issue:
Harper refusing media access to government
Conservative supporter response:
Sponsorship scandal

Issue:
Toothless Government Integrity Commissioner
Conservative supporter response:
Sponsorship scandal

Issue:
Conservatives misuse taxpayer funds for partisan ads
Conservative supporter response:
Sponsorship scandal

The odd thing is that the $100M that was siphoned to friends of the Liberals in Quebec, is tiny compared to past scandals of the Mulroney era and others within the Chretien era. Paul Martin was an absolute idiot. Political animals like Chretien and Harper knew how to sweep these things under the rug. Paul Martin aired his dirty laundry in the Gomery commission thinking that it would clear him of any wrong doing. Which it certainly did. But the daily barage of coverage tainted his party so that we are almost a decade later and people are still repeating the mantra of "Sponsorship Scandal".

[Slava]

Originally Posted by peter12

Good post, but... uhhh...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal

Ya, obvious scams being the exception (and lets not kid ourselves the CPC has one of their own with the "in and out" where senior members have been charged). I don't care which party that kind of thing happens with, there is no justification for outright deceit and theft.

I guess I'm thinking of pure transparency accountability though. Basically whenever Harper et al are challenged on something they either ignore it or simply hide the facts. Latest case in point is the cost of the new jets which are estimated to be closer to $30billion where the government says they are only about 1/2 that. Rather than talk about the cost estimates though they are just saying that they thnk they're right....which is clearly just ridiculous and neither accountable nor transparent!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Slava

Ya, obvious scams being the exception (and lets not kid ourselves the CPC has one of their own with the "in and out" where senior members have been charged). I don't care which party that kind of thing happens with, there is no justification for outright deceit and theft.

I guess I'm thinking of pure transparency accountability though. Basically whenever Harper et al are challenged on something they either ignore it or simply hide the facts. Latest case in point is the cost of the new jets which are estimated to be closer to $30billion where the government says they are only about 1/2 that. Rather than talk about the cost estimates though they are just saying that they thnk they're right....which is clearly just ridiculous and neither accountable nor transparent!

I totally agree for the most part. They have largely been a massive disappointment.

My biggest beef with this incarnation of the CPC is the complete lack of vision. They certainly do not have Manning's vision of limited government and constitutional equality.

Compared to past minority governments, like Trudeau's or Pearson's, they have done absolutely nothing.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Ya, obvious scams being the exception (and lets not kid ourselves the CPC has one of their own with the "in and out" where senior members have been charged). I don't care which party that kind of thing happens with, there is no justification for outright deceit and theft.

I guess I'm thinking of pure transparency accountability though. Basically whenever Harper et al are challenged on something they either ignore it or simply hide the facts. Latest case in point is the cost of the new jets which are estimated to be closer to $30billion where the government says they are only about 1/2 that. Rather than talk about the cost estimates though they are just saying that they thnk they're right....which is clearly just ridiculous and neither accountable nor transparent!

I really question the figures on the jets that they're coming back with, but thats based on scatterings of information in the news.

First and foremost when the parlimentary budget officer released these numbers they added an extra decade onto the 20 year contract that the conservatives have suppossedly signed, trying to I think base it around the life time of the hornet.

Second from my understanding of this, they phoned our allies and the pentagon to dig for numbers based around the purchases that were being made by allies. From what I understand the numbers that are being presented are not being based on the Canadian understanding of purchase, but on allies purchasing the same jets under different numbers.

I think before we take this $30 billion as gospel we need to understand how that number was arrived at. I think that the Conservatives have to release the terms of the understanding of purchase.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I think that the Conservatives have to release the terms of the understanding of purchase.

But that's just the thing - that would be the transparent/accountable thing to do. Do you think the Conservatives will release this information any time soon?

[NBC]

Originally Posted by peter12

Compared to past minority governments, like Trudeau's or Pearson's, they have done absolutely nothing.

I don't recall Parliament being as adversarial and acrimonious during either of those times. But I could be wrong.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

But that's just the thing - that would be the transparent/accountable thing to do. Do you think the Conservatives will release this information any time soon?

I think that these numbers will eventually come out, but my gut tells me that it will be just before the budget.

I'm not saying that I'm right or wrong about the numbers, but I look at the information being released and how it was arrived at and I have problems with it.

But then again in terms of military procurement, I always expect overages.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by NBC

I don't recall Parliament being as adversarial and acrimonious during either of those times. But I could be wrong.

The idea that politics is not adversarial and acrimonious is completely ridiculous. That's the point of civilized politics: civil war without the killing. The big problem is the lack of mutual respect and civility inside and outside the house. Many political scientists in the United States have noticed that the partisanship hasn't really changed, what has changed is the friendships and relationships decreasing between parties.

You can disagree with, insult, and slander the other guy, but you shouldn't hate his guts.

[CaptainCrunch]

There has never ever been civility in democratic politics where all sides get together decide on the best course of action and execute it.

Even during peace time you're fighting a war.

Even between elections you're fighting the next election.

The only time that you see so called civility in politics is during a majority government because you need to curry to the majority government to get any of your motions passed.

In a minority government you're always going to see what you are seeing now.

The government in power is angling for a majority, the opposition government showing that they're an effective opposition and fighting everything good bad and ugly.

If you want civility in government give the prime minister a gun and the abiltiy to arrest dissentors.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I really question the figures on the jets that they're coming back with, but thats based on scatterings of information in the news.

First and foremost when the parlimentary budget officer released these numbers they added an extra decade onto the 20 year contract that the conservatives have suppossedly signed, trying to I think base it around the life time of the hornet.

Second from my understanding of this, they phoned our allies and the pentagon to dig for numbers based around the purchases that were being made by allies. From what I understand the numbers that are being presented are not being based on the Canadian understanding of purchase, but on allies purchasing the same jets under different numbers.

I think before we take this $30 billion as gospel we need to understand how that number was arrived at. I think that the Conservatives have to release the terms of the understanding of purchase.

Well I'm far from an expert on this and kind of have no idea of what I'm talking about. That being said the government claims the jets are $75million each and the US is thinking they are $130 million each.

The parliamentary officer is independent and his work was peer reviewed....so when I see that the government gives no rationale as to why the jets are going to cost them $75mm and the US $130mm I just think that they are being ignorant, or not wanting to explain how they're estimates are off by nearly double. So much for fiscal conservatism and being stewards of the budget I guess.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well I'm far from an expert on this and kind of have no idea of what I'm talking about. That being said the government claims the jets are $75million each and the US is thinking they are $130 million each.

The parliamentary officer is independent and his work was peer reviewed....so when I see that the government gives no rationale as to why the jets are going to cost them $75mm and the US $130mm I just think that they are being ignorant, or not wanting to explain how they're estimates are off by nearly double. So much for fiscal conservatism and being stewards of the budget I guess.

However from what I've read and seen the work is based on conversations that don't involve the actual Canadian contract. They involve discussions with other nations that are buying the jets, and also with the pentagon but outside of the actual Canadian Contract.

It would be equivalent for me making a deal for a car with the dealer ship for $15,000.00 and you phoning him and asking them for the price on the same car and they give you list at $28,000.00

Also my understanding is that he added an extra decade of estimated costs which would also inflate the jet costs even though from what I understand the contracts are based around 20 years and not 30 years.

From my understanding as well the parlimentary review doesn't take into account benefits to the Canadian aerospace industry and the cost reduction for contributing to the program.


So I have doubts about the numbers that are being flung around.

[CaptainCrunch]

As an aside when the CF-18 was purchased in 78 ( I think) it was built for a cost of $35 million per copy in 1978 dollars when the Canadian dollar was probably lower then the American dollar, we also bought 120 of them. So the initial purchase of just the air craft without the maintenance contracts etc was about $4.20 billion in 1978 dollars.

Even if the jets that we get do cost the estimated 75 million and we purchase 65 as schedules it comes to $4,8 billion dollars in todays dollars.

not including maintenance contracts and training.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well I'm far from an expert on this and kind of have no idea of what I'm talking about. That being said the government claims the jets are $75million each and the US is thinking they are $130 million each.

The parliamentary officer is independent and his work was peer reviewed....so when I see that the government gives no rationale as to why the jets are going to cost them $75mm and the US $130mm I just think that they are being ignorant, or not wanting to explain how they're estimates are off by nearly double. So much for fiscal conservatism and being stewards of the budget I guess.

Sure, because these numbers are easy to generate. You go to the military jet catalog, run your finger down to the make and model you want, and then call the 1-800 number. Budgeting is more art than science, and government beurocracy can barely doodle a stick man. I don't care what political party is in charge and the amount of political will there is behind these things.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by zuluking

Sure, because these numbers are easy to generate. You go to the military jet catalog, run your finger down to the make and model you want, and then call the 1-800 number. Budgeting is more art than science, and government beurocracy can barely doodle a stick man. I don't care what political party is in charge and the amount of political will there is behind these things.

Thanks for pointing out that I don't know what I'm talking about here....which is exactly what I said in my post.

Can you now enlighten me with the exact cost that we can expect here? TIA

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Slava

Thanks for pointing out that I don't know what I'm talking about here....which is exactly what I said in my post.

Can you now enlighten me with the exact cost that we can expect here? TIA

My point had nothing to do with your knowledge or lack thereof. Nor does it have anything to do with any specific knowledge of "exact costs." I'm suggesting that your assumption that the only reasons that more detailed information isn't immediately forthcoming must be ignorance or obstruction is invalid. And thus, to infer that fiscal conservatism and budgetary stewardship are thereby unfortunate victims is conjecture.

[CaptainCrunch]

One of the things that makes me question the figures as well is that the parlimentary auditor took into account Britains purchase of the F-35 to formulate their per plane cost, however the Brits were going to originally purchase th F-35B which is the short take off vertical landing model which is far more expensive and also the C which is the naval varient which again is more expensive.

The Canadian airforce is buying the f-35A which is the conventional model and much cheaper then the above 2.

[John Doe]

Not to derail the discussion, but I was under the impression that no contract had been signed yet on purchasing these jets.

[CaptainCrunch]

Not as much of a contract as a intent to purchase and participate in the development program for the F-35.