We've heard a bit about the inequity of the distribution of funds in general by this government, but today, Liberal MP Savage party, made an official claim and has asked the auditor General to investigate the Enabling Accessibility Fund.Liberal MP Mike Savage has requested Auditor General Sheila Fraser examine what he called a Tory "slush fund."
He made the request after calculating that 94 per cent of the funding approved so far from the $45-million Enabling Accessibility Fund has gone to Conservative-held ridings.
In particular, only two of 89 applications for major project funding have been approved, both for $15 million and both in Conservative ridings - Calgary Northeast and Flaherty's Whitby-Oshawa in Ontario.
Now, accusations are often made in the House. Some with bearing, others a little more cavalier. To ask the Auditor General for a probe though, that is no frivolous little game.
If what Savage suspects is true, well it's tough to come up with anything lower than funding of this nature being handled in a partisan way.
Savage said disabled organizations have complained that the application criteria for large projects appeared "custom-made" for the centre in Flaherty's riding.
Moreover, he said many non-profit organizations were shut out of the application process for smaller projects because of the strict criteria and one-month time frame they were given for preparing applications
"As a consequence of these concerns, I am asking you to consider conducting a full and complete audit into the EAF to determine whether all applicants received due consideration for approvals and whether all standards of government ethics, regional fairness and transparency were met in the administration of the fund," Savage wrote Fraser.
Savage brought this up in the House and if Diane Finely's answer is any indication of how seriously they consider such matters, she may be pretty busy this summer working on EI and answering to the Auditor General's office.
Mr. Speaker, we're helping the disabled get access to facilities to which they never had access before. That's a noble thing, Mr. Speaker. Something we're very proud of. Mr. Speaker, there are a number of groups that weren't able to get funding because the program was so popular, it was oversubscribed. I would note that one program that was funded was that liberal member's riding. The Ioanna presbyterian church in Dartmouth. Is he saying that's a conservative riding? It should be!
Savage's riding did get some funding.
Savage later acknowledged a church in his riding did get funding - though nowhere near as much as Tory ridings.
"My riding got one project funded ... for $50,000. Jim Flaherty got one project in his riding worth $15 million."
Can you see the difference?
Update - Impolitical has a view too.
27 comments:
Great!
Then lets have look at all the dollars that went to Cretin's riding of Shawnigan during his reign.
Be careful what you wish for....
That's my MP, I put up lawn signs for that guy!
Go Mike Go!
Ohh, yea...I'm shaking because you know, all of that wasn't already looked into.
Good grief. You know, I think that you guys will have finally figured out that you actually held power about 10 years after the fact.
Pathetic, but I predict true.
Hishighness...he's a good guy. He's also on the EI this summer, so watch him.
He's funny as hell too isn't he?
Many from that side of Canada that are a hoot. Cuzner and Easter come to mind....Oh, and Eyking.
They keep bringing up Chretien, but there was no recession or a 50 billion or more deficit, at the time!
I know Cari. They live in a delusional world.
That's not the only thing that should be investigated. The ads for the Economic Action Plan (full pages ads) in all the newspaper have a election type feel to them and don't say much. Actually, Allan Gregg brought it up at the At Issue panel the other night - he's surprised Elections Canada isn't looking at this. Mulcair brought it up in the House and I wonder if they will have it investigated.
And - those 10 percenter flyers. I've received 18 so far this year. There must be a limit. Some people are getting trash Iggy stuff - should taxpayers pay for that?
It's not delusional to bring up the liberals of the 90's KNB.
"They keep bringing up Chretien, but there was no recession or a 50 billion or more deficit, at the time!"
Yea so Cari you mean to tell that me that everything was Yankee doodle and that everyone should just be singing com ba ya.
Why they keep bringing up the liberals of the 90's? Is because they make it sound that,they are better than the Conservatives.
The Liberals do it all the time when it suits them. So when the Conservatives do it when it suits their interest people like yourself and others say they shouldn't be talking about the Liberals of the past. Unless of course its good news than by all means.
ProudCanadian - get your facts straight. During the 90's Canada was losing it's international credit rating and CPP was in crisis. The Liberals straightened that out.
Do you realize how bad it is for a "country" to be pretty much bankrupt and not to be able to credit/loans from other countries?
Sandi you've just made my point.Something goes badly under the Liberal governments watch,there is always an excuse for it. It's never their fault. Of course if it happens under the Conservatives than it's their fault evens if they have no control over it.
I could go on about how they the Liberals have balanced their budget in the 90's but it wouldn't make any difference in your thinking."Good day!"
Again, ProudCanadain (and boy are you paranoid) - it happened under Mulroney's watch - DUH. The Liberals had to pick up the pieces.
Someone should get you a violin. You're arguments are really childish.
Mummy, mummy, they're picking on me boo hoo......sigh
"Again, ProudCanadain (and boy are you paranoid) - it happened under Mulroney's watch - DUH. The Liberals had to pick up the pieces.
Someone should get you a violin. You're arguments are really childish.
Mummy, mummy, they're picking on me boo hoo......sigh"
Just keep talking you're showing your immaturity and your Ignorance.
Speaking of Chretien, I was absolutely flabbergasted Thursday night when Andrew Coyne picked JC as Canada's most overrated politician on the 'At Issue Panel'. I mean, wtf? The guy has been out of politics for how long? Utter bullshit. I also noted that when Coyne was about to speak to his choice of Michael Ignatieff as most underrated, you could hear Peter Mansbridge snicker and say, "you mean overrated?" I usually find At Issue spot on with their collective analysis, but that particular panel was chock full of idiocy. I was actually surprised to not see a post from you on the topic, KNB. Anyway, with Newman now gone I am finding my reasons to continue my viewing of CBCs political coverage thin on the ground.
Well, that's quite an answer. I'm not going to argue with you. I, in fact, checked it out.
While reading I found and interesting tidbit - apparently, Chretien never really promised to cancel the GST - he was going to cancel it with a "replacement" plan - harmonized tax. I never knew that.
Sandi:
Two big Reform Party lies.
Chretien promised to cancel the GST and the Gun Registry cost $2 billion.
Stephen Harper was Grasshopper to Preston Manning. Mind you the student has certainly surpassed the master.
sjw, I didn't write about it because I haven't seen it yet. I've read a lot of comments about same but that's it. I'll watch it on line and while not timely, I may have something to say.
FWIW, having met Coyne at convention, he seems to relish the role of contrarian.
ottlib, too true. Their repetition of such nonsense may drive me nuts, but it sticks.
Proud Canadian, it's not what governments inherit as much as it is how they deal with it.
How the Cons deal with everything is through a prism of the past that includes a victimhood.
A contrarian Coyne may well be, but his naming Jean Chretien as his pick for most overrated politician on a current affairs political program is saying something so totally irrelevant that it borders on the senseless.
sjw, you're not wrong there, ;)
My surprise at your not posting on this issue was just that. It was certainly not meant as an indictment on timeliness. I rely greatly on the few political blogs I read and your analysis in particular is something I sometimes impatiently wait for. ;-)
sjw, you're very kind. Thank you. Believe it or not I still haven't seen it. Not true...caught the end today but have to see the whole thing.
I've been watching the Iran situation today and involved in that.
Our media and our pol's are absent, though I've been in touch with a Lib MP and they are trying to get foreign affairs to move. Our Embassy is one that for some reason hasn't opened it's doors to the injured...or not that we can confirm.
Cari said...
"They keep bringing up Chretien, but there was no recession or a 50 billion or more deficit, at the time!"
When the Chretien/Martin Liberals changed the EI rules the unemployment rate was 9.6%, higher than it is today. Add to that their theft of some $54 Billion from the EI fund to falsely balance their budgets and create false surpluses.
You know, Anon's that keep touting the same old lines, not to mention the same old distortions, don't make a whit of difference.
You really don't.
You sound pathetic, not to mention ill informed and really all you do is confirm just how stupid some of the voting public is.
I'm done with these ridiculous dialogues.
Can't handle the truth can you? Just a typical Liberal sheeple.
No, it's stupidity that I can't handle.
Reality and Liberal should never be used in the same sentence.
Post a Comment