[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Josephus]

WTF?  French is a stupid language, and those who speak it need reeducation, not advancement.

Crap. I just bought Rosetta Stone for French.

And you still can't sleep?

[Jacob]

Zut alors!

(or, according to iPad auto correct: zit aloes!)

[Tonitrus]

WTF?  French is a stupid language, and those who speak it need reeducation, not advancement.

Crap. I just bought Rosetta Stone for French.

I think you would get a pass, as you need it to converse with the primitives surrounding your fief.

[viper37]

And I can't find a single mention of Alberta separatism in the news, and certainly haven't heard it mentioned for a long time. 

nah, I made it up.  I just read that some Western MPs are disgruntled.  Nothing new.  They can't have absolute power.

[viper37]

And since I have no interest in being an Auditor-General this hardly affects me.

But you could be a Supreme Court Justice.  Justice Barrister Boy, that sounds nice.

[viper37]

Who knows why you do the things you do?  I'm just asking as a hypothetical.

Yeah, I don't blame you for not wanting to be Auditor General.  It seems like a terrible job.

for an accountant, it's a great job.  It pays well, too, for government office.

[Ed Anger]

Zut alors!

(or, according to iPad auto correct: zit aloes!)

[crazy canuck]

It was announced today that the Canadian government spent 8 Billion dollars less than it had budgeted. 

The Public Accounts show Infrastructure Canada had an approved budget of $6.3-billion, yet only used $4.5-billion. As part of that, the Building Canada Fund for Major Infrastructure was approved to spend $1.2-billion that year, yet only used $759.8-million. A Green Infrastructure Fund was approved to spend $390.7-million, yet only $30.3-million was spent. A Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund was approved for $481-million, yet only $188-million went out the door.

The left is up in arms about this

"It speaks to the lack of transparency and really the fundamental lack of accountability with Canadians," said NDP finance critic Peggy Nash.

Accountability is for when they spend tax payors money not fail to spend it.  If they dont spend as much as they thought they might that is a good thing. If they spend more than they said they would that is a bad thing.

At least the government understands this.  One more reason the NDP should never form government.

[Maximus]

Well that depends. If the savings is from efficiency gain that's great. If the "savings" is because infrastructure projects that were supposed to be built weren't, that's not so great. Still better than budget overruns though.

[Jacob]

Yeah... it really depends on why the money wasn't spent.

If it's because they got everything that needed doing done on smaller budgets, that's great. I mean, it's possible that there are some issues with planning and budgeting, or maybe some people just did really well; or maybe things didn't get done as well as they ought to have been done.

If it's because they didn't get everything done in time, and planned stuff got left undone, that's less great. How much less, depends on the reasons they didn't get everything done.

Whether the below budget thing is good or bad depends on the answers to those questions, and if those answers aren't available (and they might be), then that does indicate a lack of transparency and accountability.

Whether saving money is good depends a fair bit on how it was saved.

[crazy canuck]

Well that depends. If the savings is from efficiency gain that's great. If the "savings" is because infrastructure projects that were supposed to be built weren't, that's not so great. Still better than budget overruns though.

I am not sure what you mean buy "supposed to be built".  There is an endless amount of money that can be spent on infrastructure.

If you are asking whether any planned infrastructure projects had their funding pulled the answer is no.  Its just that the government didnt spend everything that was earmarked for stimulus spending which the government could have used at its discretion.

Its that discretionary bit that is the root of my criticism of the NDP.  They seem to think that every penny not spent is a bad penny.

[crazy canuck]

Whether saving money is good depends a fair bit on how it was saved.

No, that is backwards.  Whether spending money is good depends entirely on how it is spent.

[Maximus]

I think both are true.

[Jacob]

Whether saving money is good depends a fair bit on how it was saved.

No, that is backwards.  Whether spending money is good depends entirely on how it is spent.

Both are true.

For example, saving money on dog food by shooting 100+ sled dogs one by one out behind the shed is not a good way to save money.

[crazy canuck]

Whether saving money is good depends a fair bit on how it was saved.

No, that is backwards.  Whether spending money is good depends entirely on how it is spent.

Both are true.

For example, saving money on dog food by shooting 100+ sled dogs one by one out behind the shed is not a good way to save money.

But that example has nothing to do with spending room given to a government in a budget.  You guys are talking about cuts.  Not money the government failed to spend on make work projects.