Email
PrintOptics of Conservative cheque scheme dodgy
It may be nice to reward a friend with a cheque or a job. In the long term, it could cost the Prime Minister his own.
OTTAWA—Cheque mate. Except in this case the king isn't quite cornered yet. With vigorous denials emanating from the Prime Minister last week, Canadians may be forgiven for thinking the decision to replace a government logo with a Conservative one was a devious plot of rogue members run amok.
As evidence mounts, the biggest crosschecked loser is the Prime Minister himself. His early denials leave Canadians with the lingering impression that the Prime Minister can calmly dissemble the truth.
With at least 47 Conservative elected officials involved in 181 cheque presentations, Stephen Harper signed some of them himself.
Just a week ago, the Prime Minister basked in goodwill generated by his National Arts Centre musical performance.
Pundits reviewing the one-year election anniversary were openly speculating about a Conservative majority.
A beleaguered Michael Ignatieff, wounded by infighting, was no match for a relaxed crooner continuing his string of post-summer announcements.
That free ride came crashing to a halt last Wednesday.
Pity PMO spokesman Dimitri Soudas, whose verbal gymnastics were unable to explain how the Conservative logo "accidentally landed on a government cheque."
He had even more trouble defending "prop" cheques signed by the Prime Minister.
While the optics of the Tory cheque scheme are dodgy, the lingering question is what is happening to stimulus money?
Last week's negative news cycle is the beginning of a continuing nightmare for questionable Tory infrastructure spending.
Opposition members claim only 12 per cent of approved projects have resulted in shovels in the ground. The Conservative Party (in the guise of government) has sucked every ounce of political credit out of a Parliamentary-approved spending spree.
A $60-million advertising program launched last summer has saturated the country. Most Canadians have received shiny "Action Plan" envelopes to store their home renovation tax receipts. (To put it in perspective, when I sat on the Cabinet Communications Committee, the total annual horizontal advertising budget was $25-million.)
The Prime Minister has spent months announcing "Action Plan" projects, including some completed years ago by the previous Liberals.
Because the method for infrastructure decisions is so complicated, until last week the government was actually getting away with it. Machiavellian? Yes. But no one ever said that Stephen Harper was a political cherry.
The opposition Liberals have finally climbed down off their professorial stools and started hitting the Tories where it hurts. They know that this issue has real political legs.
People expect governments of all stripes to favour their own. But Canadians believe in fairness, especially in times of international financial turmoil.
The Conservatives had a choice. They could easily have funnelled the recovery money into an existing infrastructure program requiring approval by three levels of government.
The bottom-up process included local leaders green-lighting projects, bureaucrats at the federal and provincial level have more than a decade of experience in infrastructure funding. The existing program would have guaranteed equity in fund distribution between government and opposition-held ridings.
When the recession hit, opposition members proposed the infrastructure fund as a risk-free vehicle to distribute stimulus dollars fairly and quickly across the land. That approach frustrated federal Tories, who wanted to choose their own projects and secure political credit.
In propping up Tory political fortunes, they bypassed the infrastructure fund. But the early Conservative cheque-writing frenzy was bound to boomerang.
Harper will regret his decision to put cheque presentations ahead of good public policy.
Delivering money comes with certain political risks.
Take the $302,620 recreational infrastructure cheque presented by Gerald Keddy. In rural Canada, multiple communities need infrastructure help. Those who are turned down have a much longer memory than those who have already cashed in.
The beauty of the infrastructure program was the guarantee that political blame, along with credit, was borne by municipal politicians.
If Canadians abhor one thing, it is favouritism. Voters will not support an $87.7-million slush fund in Defence Minister Peter MacKay's riding greater than the combined spending in all five Liberal-held ridings in Nova Scotia.
Slipped into the mix last week was a small story about Parliamentary spouses getting government appointments. According to the Liberals, 37 Conservative insiders were given jobs in the past six weeks, including the spouses of Minister Diane Finley, the outgoing PMO communications chief Kory Teneycke, and Member of Parliament Earl Dreeshen.
In the short term, it may be nice to reward a friend with a cheque or a job. In the long term, it could cost the Prime Minister his own.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
- 1
Optics of Conservative cheque scheme dodgy
It may be nice to reward a friend with a cheque or a job. In the long term, it could cost the Prime Minister his own.
OTTAWA—Cheque mate. Except in this case the king isn't quite cornered yet. With vigorous denials emanating from the Prime Minister last week, Canadians may be forgiven for thinking the decision to replace a government logo with a Conservative one was a devious plot of rogue members run amok.
As evidence mounts, the biggest crosschecked loser is the Prime Minister himself. His early denials leave Canadians with the lingering impression that the Prime Minister can calmly dissemble the truth.
With at least 47 Conservative elected officials involved in 181 cheque presentations, Stephen Harper signed some of them himself.
Just a week ago, the Prime Minister basked in goodwill generated by his National Arts Centre musical performance.
Pundits reviewing the one-year election anniversary were openly speculating about a Conservative majority.
A beleaguered Michael Ignatieff, wounded by infighting, was no match for a relaxed crooner continuing his string of post-summer announcements.
That free ride came crashing to a halt last Wednesday.
Pity PMO spokesman Dimitri Soudas, whose verbal gymnastics were unable to explain how the Conservative logo "accidentally landed on a government cheque."
He had even more trouble defending "prop" cheques signed by the Prime Minister.
While the optics of the Tory cheque scheme are dodgy, the lingering question is what is happening to stimulus money?
Last week's negative news cycle is the beginning of a continuing nightmare for questionable Tory infrastructure spending.
Opposition members claim only 12 per cent of approved projects have resulted in shovels in the ground. The Conservative Party (in the guise of government) has sucked every ounce of political credit out of a Parliamentary-approved spending spree.
A $60-million advertising program launched last summer has saturated the country. Most Canadians have received shiny "Action Plan" envelopes to store their home renovation tax receipts. (To put it in perspective, when I sat on the Cabinet Communications Committee, the total annual horizontal advertising budget was $25-million.)
The Prime Minister has spent months announcing "Action Plan" projects, including some completed years ago by the previous Liberals.
Because the method for infrastructure decisions is so complicated, until last week the government was actually getting away with it. Machiavellian? Yes. But no one ever said that Stephen Harper was a political cherry.
The opposition Liberals have finally climbed down off their professorial stools and started hitting the Tories where it hurts. They know that this issue has real political legs.
People expect governments of all stripes to favour their own. But Canadians believe in fairness, especially in times of international financial turmoil.
The Conservatives had a choice. They could easily have funnelled the recovery money into an existing infrastructure program requiring approval by three levels of government.
The bottom-up process included local leaders green-lighting projects, bureaucrats at the federal and provincial level have more than a decade of experience in infrastructure funding. The existing program would have guaranteed equity in fund distribution between government and opposition-held ridings.
When the recession hit, opposition members proposed the infrastructure fund as a risk-free vehicle to distribute stimulus dollars fairly and quickly across the land. That approach frustrated federal Tories, who wanted to choose their own projects and secure political credit.
In propping up Tory political fortunes, they bypassed the infrastructure fund. But the early Conservative cheque-writing frenzy was bound to boomerang.
Harper will regret his decision to put cheque presentations ahead of good public policy.
Delivering money comes with certain political risks.
Take the $302,620 recreational infrastructure cheque presented by Gerald Keddy. In rural Canada, multiple communities need infrastructure help. Those who are turned down have a much longer memory than those who have already cashed in.
The beauty of the infrastructure program was the guarantee that political blame, along with credit, was borne by municipal politicians.
If Canadians abhor one thing, it is favouritism. Voters will not support an $87.7-million slush fund in Defence Minister Peter MacKay's riding greater than the combined spending in all five Liberal-held ridings in Nova Scotia.
Slipped into the mix last week was a small story about Parliamentary spouses getting government appointments. According to the Liberals, 37 Conservative insiders were given jobs in the past six weeks, including the spouses of Minister Diane Finley, the outgoing PMO communications chief Kory Teneycke, and Member of Parliament Earl Dreeshen.
In the short term, it may be nice to reward a friend with a cheque or a job. In the long term, it could cost the Prime Minister his own.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
