Haven't the Conservatives been trying to spin their financial cuts to Arts groups as simple re-allocation and management decisions?
Well, the guy who holds purse strings begs to differ. In fact, for once in his public life, it seems he actually spoke the truth.
Mr. Flaherty yesterday described the cuts as cost-containment measures, but he noted politics played a part in the decision-making process.
"We are a Conservative government and the ministers who sit on the Treasury Board have that hat on as well," he told the National Post editorial board. "This is not a bureaucratic process. The decision is made by the ministers who sit on the Treasury Board and they have views on certain programs."
This decision was not prudent financial management. It was a conscious, ideologically based decision and I would add a vindictive move, full stop. This is yet another example of who this government is really comprised of.
Is the picture getting clearer yet?
You know, I listened to Graham Richardson ask Dion some questions today at his scrum. Richardson kept harping on the fact that Dion compares Harper to Bush and suggested that Canadians just don't believe that. He, Richardson, should perhaps tell us why that is. Could it be because the media has been telling us that since he took office?
While this particular example is of Flaherty admitting why the cuts were made is really only a small example of what they are able to do in a minority government, does anyone really think that there would be funding for the Arts at all if they had a majority?
What Dion is trying to point out is the 'let the free market handle it' mentality that the two men share. I'd like people like Richardson, (whom I generally respected before this tour it should be noted), to disabuse me of that fact.