The Harper Government's latest Big Lie

Well, it has a bag-load hauled out at those times when it is tactically expedient. This one however, is a slam-dunk.

Remember Jason Kenney telling us all how the rules on foreign workers were going to be tightened up? Well it turns out they were ... and they weren't. Canadians now go to the head of the line for non-union sex-work. For anything else, you wait until the union's busted by flooding the market with slave labour.

Go read Simon.  

Update: Not to be missed, Alison weighs in.

They really didn't mean it

Peter MacKay presents his latest bit of bungling.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay's recent written response to questions tabled in Parliament reveal that 2006 federal Conservative promises for 5 Wing Goose Bay are no longer part of the military’s plans.

Prior to the election that brought the Tories to power, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised to station a new, 650-member rapid reaction army battalion at CFB Goose Bay, plus a new long-range unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) squadron at the base.

Oh yes, the territorial battalion group promised for St. John's? Just kidding. They will be located, according to MacKay, from Vancouver to Halifax, although I wouldn't be setting up bleachers anytime soon for that one either.

Curiously though, MacKay, in attempting to offer yet another excuse for not doing what the Harperites promised to do, (all previous excuses involved Afghanistan and that was the standard excuse for everything that didn't happen CF-wide), shone the light on another program which he has typically covered in mud. JUSTAS.

“As part of the [defence strategy], there will be a surveillance ‘system of systems’ that will be comprised of sensors, unmanned vehicles and satellites that will keep Canada’s maritime approaches safe and secure, including in the Arctic,” MacKay’s response notes.

JUSTAS stands for Joint Unmanned Surveillance Target Acquisition System and just so we're clear here, DND has messed that up nicely. Like every other project the Harper government has gotten their fingers into, it has slid well past the delivery date, has been started and restarted several times and has caused potential suppliers to throw their hands in the air, turning away from the project in frustration.

MacKay feeds us another line of bull

This guy really does beat all.

Last October, MacKay told CBC Radio's The House the Libyan mission had cost taxpayers less than $50 million.
"As of Oct. 13, the figures that I've received have us well below that, somewhere under $50 million," MacKay said.
"And that's the all-up costs of the equipment that we have in the theatre, the transportation to get there, those that have been carrying out this critical mission."

Except that he committed the great sin of omission. He knew the estimates were much higher and he withheld the information - intentionally.

Maj.-Gen. Jon Vance said MacKay did not mislead the public and pointed out senior military leaders referenced the figures publicly during Senate committee hearings.

But he concedes the minister would have known the estimated cost at the time and did not speculate on why MacKay chose to go with the lower figures exclusively.

Allow me to speculate for the general.

MacKay is a serial liar. 

The Frum brat gets his dink stomped

 One of Canada's greatest embarrassments gets his pants pulled down by one of the finest commentators in the U.S.

Mr. "Axis of Evil" is reminded that he is an idiot.

Finally ... they drop the gloves

The Disaffected Lib wants the Governor General to intervene. He links to the latest offerings by Andrew Coyne and Brian Stewart who lay out exhibits which should horrify any Canadian.

Coyne:

This was, until last year's shipbuilding contract, the largest single purchase in the country's history. And yet it was carried out, as we now learn, without proper documentation, without accurate data, and without any of the normal procurement rules being followed. Defence officials simply decided in advance which aircraft they wanted, and that was that. Guidelines were evaded, Parliament was lied to, and in the end the people of Canada were set to purchase planes that may or may not be able to do the job set out for them, years after they were supposed to be delivered, at twice the promised cost.

But of course it's much worse than that. If department officials played two successive ministers of defence, Gordon O'Connor and Peter MacKay, for fools, the evidence shows they did not have to exert themselves much; if they did not offer evidence to back their claims, whether on performance, costs, or risks, it is because ministers did not think to ask for any. Nor was this negligence confined to the Department of National Defence.

And he concludes with ...

So this is also what comes of Parliament's prerogatives, its powers to hold ministers to account, being ignored or overridden. These aren't procedural niceties, of concern only to constitutional law professors — "process issues," as more than one member of the press gallery sneered at the time. They're the vital bulwarks of self-government, the only means we have of ensuring our wishes are obeyed and our money isn't wasted. Parliament having long ago lost control of the public purse, it was only a matter of time before the government did as well.

It's good of Coyne to finally recognize the clear and present danger to this country's parliamentary democracy. We have been filling these pages with warnings of such impending events for years.

Be careful, Andrew. Someone will accuse you of being "reactionary" or "hyperbolic". And I might point out that the people who accused the writers here of those things have not returned to call us what we actually were: right all along.

Stewart:

The who-knew-what about the real costs of the F-35 fighter jet Canada wants to purchase is worrisome enough. But at the heart of the fiasco is a far more serious concern about what public honesty means to this government.

It's a sad state that few Canadians appear surprised by the auditor general's findings that Parliament was kept in the dark over the real costs of this program and what looks to be a $10-billion overrun.
Many seem to assume that misleading and denying whenever it suits is a government's normal default position. After all, this government seems to have done it for years on Afghanistan and with its other problems in national defence.

In my own attempts to unravel the F-35's real costs I never once met a single soul outside government and knowledgeable about defence purchases who believed the prime minister's promise that the planes could be delivered for a bargain-rate $75 million each.

I never met anyone inside the Canadian military who thought so either.

I'm sure thousands in the aviation industry who follow these programs, especially in the U.S. and Europe, simply assumed Ottawa was dealing in fairy tales for public consumption, from which it refused to budge.

This is why we need to see if this current mess is part of a pattern of official "misstatements" on defence matters. If so, we've got a serious national problem.

Brian Stewart has been on the beat for longer than I can remember. His article should be read in its entirety because he goes on to describe the obsessive secrecy in which the Harperites surround themselves on all things. But the highlight was the continued attempt to suppress information on the Afghanistan adventure.

Unlike Coyne, Stewart never offered us Harper as a "good thing". He just kept chipping away at things that seemed to exist in the strange shadows of the Harper government.

This trend towards denial makes everything about the misstated F-35 billions a deeply serious affair.

We really need to know how deep the deception went in this case. And we ought to be much more curious about what is being carried out in our names under the cloak of secrecy.

Yes, we do.

And we need to know who knew what when back in May of 2011, when thousands of calls went out misdirecting voters to bogus polling stations. 

Squirming in the F-35's expensive seat

I you'll recall, anyone who questioned the Harperite rock-solid, give-no-ground commitment to purchase 65 F-35 Lightning II fighters, was labeled an unpatriotic, troop-hating, surrender monkey. That's because the Harperites aren't, and they only buy the best for our boys and girls in light blue.

Until the price goes up. (Emphasis mine)

"We have not as yet discounted, the possibility, of course, of backing out of any of the program," Fantino, associate minister of national defence, told the House defence committee Tuesday.

"None of the partners have. We are not. And we’ll just have to think it through further as time goes on, but we are confident that we will not leave Canada or our men and women in uniform in a lurch, but it’s hypothetical to go any further right now."

Fantino also said the government won't decide on the purchase until it knows how much it will cost.

Hey! The music's stopped. Someone's not going to get a chair!

As countries all over the world balk at the skyrocketing cost of the F-35 it took this long for the Rideau Canal tree-house club to figure out that buying the world's most expensive flying weapons platform might just not be a bright idea.

Pass the Oreos and let's see how we get down from here now that someone stole the rope ladder.

"We will be expending the allotted amount, $9 billion, for the acquisition if we are going to go there," he said.

"That decision will be made if and when those factors are known to us and the decision will be made as to whether or not Canada will actually enter into a contract to purchase the F-35."

But, but ...

"One of the things that I know for certain is that Canada remains involved in the joint strike fighter program," Fantino said.

"The decision, the determinate decision, has not as yet been made as to whether or not we are going to actually purchase, buy, acquire, the F-35."

Hey! Just hold it there a minute. The participation in the project was committed to by a previous Liberal government (which you all tried to use a defence of your position) and you kept telling everyone that it was tied to a commitment to purchase. So did Lockheed Martin.

This is starting to look like the big-talk days of Brian Mulroney. You might remember, he produced a Defence White Paper full of grandiose ideas and a plan to totally re-equip the armed forces. Almost none of it happened.

But his biggest idea, the one on which he refused to back down, the one which he said was only going to cost a whopping $10 billion, started its death spiral in much the same way, with similar statements to those of Fantino on the F-35.

Je me souviens des sous-marins nucléaires.

Flush Rob Anders. Keep the plunger handy

Old snoozy?

Veterans advocates say a Conservative MP on the Commons veterans affairs committee slept through their presentation about efforts to help homeless former soldiers.

Jim Lowther, president of Veterans Emergency Transition Services, said he couldn't believe it when Calgary MP Rob Anders slept through the group's presentation at the Commons veterans affairs committee on Tuesday in Halifax.

Lowther said Anders came into the meeting 10 minutes late. "He was putting his arms up and rubbing his face," explained Lowther. "Then he started texting and then just slept for the rest.

"He almost smashed his head on the table, he was that out of it."

Too bad he didn't. Most veterans would have looked at the waste of skin and started laughing.

Liberal MP Sean Casey, who is on the committee, said Anders has fallen asleep before at its meetings. "This happens fairly regularly at veterans committee so it wasn't out of the ordinary," he said. "This isn't the first time."

Casey said it is up to Anders to offer an explanation. But he added: "I wouldn't for one minute accuse him of falling asleep because he doesn't care, although I can see why someone would come to that conclusion."

Let's just accept that a majority of veterans and serving personnel have already figured it out for themselves. The Harperites have good words followed by ... their actions.

And Buckdog asks ...

Are The Conservatives Being Devious or Incompetent With Their OAS Cost Overestimations?

Report:

As debate over the sustainability of the country's Old Age Security system continues, new figures show the Conservative government has overestimated the cost of the system by hundreds of millions of dollars in three of the past four years.

While the government says the differences are to be expected and remain well within normal ranges, the opposition is arguing they raise further questions about the government's long-term projections about the OAS system's unsustainability.

A government report tabled in the House of Commons on Tuesday shows that while the government had anticipated paying out $29 billion in OAS during this fiscal year, the actual amount was $410 million less.

 You don't have to pick just one answer.

 

Robbing seniors to pay the well-to-do

Greg nails it. The Harper agenda to carry out "pension reform" because the population of seniors in Canada threaten to undermine the economy is based solely on ideological propaganda and not an analysis of the facts.

For one thing, most of these PMO talking points are propaganda utilizing grade 4 arithmetic (at best):

OAS is funded primarily through taxes on working people and is unsustainable on its current course.

For example:

• The number of Canadians over the age of 65 will increase from 4.7 million to 9.3 million over the next 20 years.
• The OAS program was built when Canadians were not living the longer, healthier lives they are today.
• Consequently, the cost of the OAS program will increase from $36B per year in 2010 to $108B per year in 2030.
• Meanwhile, by 2030, the number of taxpayers for every senior will be 2 - down from 4 in 2010.

If we do nothing, OAS will eventually become too expensive and unsustainable.

Simplistic enough for some, (the group that would buy that line of tripe), but unsubstantiated with any statistical evidence. So, The Jurist engages in a statistical exercise which immediately puts the Harper PMO sputtering to the lie.

The Cons' estimated total cost is about $108 billion. But based on Statistics Canada's medium-case demographic estimates, seniors ages 65 and 66 will make up only 11.5% of the total population aged 65 and up as of 2031.

So if OAS is relatively evenly applied across the age spectrum, the savings from pushing back the retirement age for Canadians in general will amount to 11.5% of $108 billion - or just over $12 billion per year.

And then he takes aim at the real plan. The Harperites promised that, once they've balanced the budget, as long as you have a large enough income, you can increase the amount of money you put into a Tax-Free Savings account from the current $5,000 to $10,000 annually.

At the same time, the Cons plan to push through general income splitting and increases to tax-free savings accounts. And those plans - targeted squarely at large-single-income households and those wealthy enough to have $10,000 to sock away every single year - will cost...just under $12 billion per year. And unlike the Cons' numbers for OAS, that's without taking into account any growth in the size of the tax base in the meantime.  

Just so we're clear here, the cost of the Harper frat-boys' plan to allow income splitting in high-earning-single-income households and to double the amount that those with a spare ten-thousand bucks laying around can shelter from interest and investment income taxes is about the same as would be saved by forcing seniors to delay an old age benefit until they reach aged 67.

The question is, how many wage-earning Canadians have an extra $10,000 laying around to toss into a tax-shelter? Not many, I reckon, so it would be a benefit acquired by a smaller percentage of the population than would be surrendering that same amount of needed survival income.

The truth is, a solid majority of Canadians in their peak earning years do not or cannot afford to make annual contributions to the primary retirement savings instrument (RRSP) and only 12% of those in their 40s make the maximum allowable contribution. Of those in their 50s, only 14% make the maximum contribution.

Is the fog coming off the mirror yet? The Harper plan for "prosperity" is to rob seniors of their past tax payments and give it to the wealthiest portion of the population.

And if you're a Harper Conservative, that's as it should be.

Waiting for the snowball fight in hell

I agree with Cathie.

I am done with giving the Harper Cons the benefit of the doubt. I'll believe they'll actually amend the residency requirements law only when I see them bring it to the Commons and whip their caucus to support it.

Sarah Palin. Reader. Just ask her Mother.

Palin - no book in sight

Sure. That's why she quit halfway through her term as governor. So she could spend more time reading.

Palin became testy when I asked her about the books I heard she had been reading. "I've been reading since I was a little girl," she snapped. "And my mom is standing 15 feet away from me, and I should put her on the phone with you right now so she can tell you. That's what happens when you grow up in a house full of teachers -- you read; and I always have. Just because -- and," she continued, though in a less blistering tone, "I don't want to come across sounding caustic or annoyed by this issue: because of one roll-of-the-eye answer to a question I gave, I'm still dealing with this," she said, referring to her interview with Katie Couric.

"There's nothing different today than there was in the last 43 years of my life since I first started reading. I continue to read all that I can get my hands on -- and reading biographies of, yes, Thatcher for instance, and of course Reagan and the John Adams letters, and I'm just thinking of a couple that are on my bedside, I go back to C.S. Lewis for inspiration, there's such a variety, because books have always been important in my life." She went on: "I'm reading [the conservative radio host] Mark Levin's book; I'll get ahold of Glenn Beck's new book -- and now because I'm opening up," she finished warily, "I'm afraid I'm going to get reporters saying, Oh, she only reads books by Glenn Beck."

Her infomercial showed her signing books that someone had written for her, but it didn't show much of a library. One wonders how she finds the time between Twittering and Facebooking to actually, you know, read real stuff. (Even if it is right-wing fantasy).

I don't know why those particular conservatives, lacking any sense of intellectual curiosity, feel compelled to invent a reading list to present to their equally lazy fan-base. Let's face it, those attracted to Palin don't care whether she can read anyway.

Hollywood production masquerading as government.

Back in the day, when we had to clean off the rust streaks and the wear from a long ocean passage, we would hurriedly break out the paint, brushes and rollers and slap a fresh coat of paint over unprepared metal, rust and salt spray. It was called a "Hollywood paint job" because we were all aware that, given an inevitable rainfall, the covered rust would bleed through and within days the entire sheet of paint would be laying on the harbour surface. It had served the purpose to make the ship look good as it passed the saluting stand and that was it.

Doug Saunders places the Harper government in the same box. All paint; no prep. No matter how many times they try to cover up the rust, corrosion and corruption, it keeps bleeding through and eventually the whole shiny facade falls off. (Emphasis mine)

But UN members, including influential ones such as Britain and France and the United States, did ask themselves what Canada was actually doing: What was Ottawa contributing to the progress they desired in these areas; what clout could it add to the table?

And here they came up blank. On the Middle East, Mr. Harper’s ministers cut themselves out of the game. They didn’t help the interests of Israel; instead, for short-term political gain, they gave almost lone backing to the partisan views and extreme actions of the coalition government that happened to hold power there at the moment – a coalition containing the most fringe religious fundamentalist parties and opposed by a large majority of Israelis. To satisfy one faction, Canada lost any future role in helping the country or its region.

On aid, our stated principles were solid but our shift of funds out of the eight poorest African states – right in the midst of the Security Council bid – infuriated not just Africa’s 47 states but also Europeans, who are struggling with their own African development goals. The same happened in climate change and financial reform (where we were, remember, the spoilers at the G20 summit): Canada said things, but just wasn’t there.

And right at the lead of Saunders' column he reminds us of this:

“Our engagement internationally is based on the principles that this country holds dear,” Mr. Harper said. “It is not based on popularity.”

Of the hundreds of ways that statement could be torn to shreds, two come immediately to mind:

1. Harper said it right there. His "principles" are not popular. He formed government with less than 22 percent of the eligible vote. He and his "principles" have no real traction among voters in Canada nor among the diplomatic departments of the world's most influential governments. Harper puts on a good party but it leads to nothing.

2. It's a lie. What Harper is peddling as a "principle" is nothing more than a "Hollywood paint job". What he is calling a "principle" is a short-term theatrical production, complete with editing, intended to entertain. With a paltry story and a weak cast he's hoping the expensive art direction and set design will hold up long enough to gather the sufficient "academy votes" to give him a box-office success.

Harper's refugee from the Mike Harris disaster speaks

And he did it in the wrong place. As Impolitical makes clear, the audience, The Canadian Club of Toronto, is there to hear facts. Hell, they're willing to listen to a point of view. But they do not gather to hear the trial run of an election campaign.

Canadian Club veterans muttered about the bad manners shown in using their meeting as a venue for an assault on the opposition parties, noting with disapproval that Mr. Flaherty had urged his opponents to “rise above petty politics” before putting the boots to them.

What do you expect from a two-bit ambulance chaser; a Mike Harris refugee? This is not a principled individual who would respect the platform he had been offered. This is a Harper puppet. He will abuse anything, everything and everyone to achieve whatever it is he wants to achieve. The one business that he does not consider relevant is the truth. Ever.

Flaherty sirened on about how the Liberal, the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois are somehow already aligned in a coalition ready to govern with all the policies of each party becoming a national policy package.

Except there is no coalition. It is as imaginary as the porn the frat boys in Harper's office consume.

Flaherty however, knows a different reality. His government is a coalition. It exists from bill to bill. The Harper conservatives have survived by garnering the support of the "socialists" on any given bill. They have welcomed the "separatists" to support a budget bill. They are themselves a coalition of real Tories, religious nut-cases, Alberta oil-patch reformers and political refugees from the vandalism foisted on Ontario by Mike Harris.

When Flaherty yaps on about how a coalition would raise taxes we have to look no further than his own actions. Against all advice he lowered the GST and cancelled income tax reductions. That left you seriously out of pocket and increased disposable income to the wealthy. You would pay less on items you cannot afford but Stevie and Jim still get a huge chunk of what you earn before you can spend it anyway.

The man is socially and politically deficient. He tells us that an election would hurt any economic recovery.

How?

He has handed us the largest fiscal deficit this country has ever recorded. At the same time these goofs run off and spend money on mega-conferences like there is no tomorrow. Do they demonstrate austerity? No ... they go the other way!

What Flaherty did is to tell The Canadian Club that democracy is a bad thing. It interferes with his agenda. The one that is propped up by a socialist, separatist, reform, religious and tory coalition.

And if there is any hint that the coalition will fail, he and Harper just run to their bought and paid-for Governor General and have the doors of Parliament barred.

Imagine how this little tyrant would behave if the roadblocks were removed.

So, can we toss any illusion of a Private Member's Bill ...

Onto the building pack of Harper lies where it now belongs? This activity is the stuff of "agenda". Either that or Harper and his hillbillies don't have one and just wait for the next windmill to appear on their horizon.

Propaganda knows no budget

I always love listening to some bleating Harper follower tell us how well they manage the country's tax dollars. I particularly enjoy it when they're standing there in front of me because I get to watch their eyes do everything but connect with mine. Mostly they shift their gaze down and to the left.

The latest example of abuse of your tax dollars and the Harper obsession with propagandizing is really no surprise. It is, after all, Harper.

Civil servants across Canada were ordered by the Harper government to document every single sign posted anywhere promoting the federal economic stimulus plan, The Canadian Press has learned.

They've spent countless hours tracking every one of more than 8,500 signs posted since last summer, when the urgent, weekly exercise was ordered by the Privy Council Office, the bureaucratic support arm of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office.

It continues to this day.

Of course, the Harperites will attempt to trivialize this or, worse, justify this enormous waste. They always do. Any complaint these "fiscal conservatives" ever had about the spending of previous governments sinks under the weight of the Harper government which knows no financial limit when it comes to Harper-promoting propaganda.

Steve V does a great take down of the Harper government fiscal behaviour.

And, while I can be certain that Harper's supporters will continue to bleat on about how Harper and his slimy little Harris-government refugee of a finance minister have performed some economic miracle we can continue to remind everyone that Harper and Flaherty have managed to run up the largest fiscal deficit of any Canadian federal government - ever.

Further, they were firmly on that route before any so-called economic action plan was hurriedly slapped together. Spending on the part of Harper and Flaherty was so out of control by 2008 that the federal government was well on its way to a fiscal deficit. Their "stimulus" package came at a timely moment and provided camouflage for an already executed mindless spending spree.

While Harper's office has the civil service wasting its time counting signs, you might want to be aware that every one of them represents only a percentage of the cost of the project it obscures from sight. Provincial governments, municipal governments and agencies were required to contribute a combined larger proportion of total funding than the federal government's input.

Does any sign say that? No.

The Harperites bullied their way onto construction projects by requiring exclusive signage - lest they deny funding altogether.

Harper propaganda.

The only thing missing was his picture and I am reasonably confident that when the design layout was happening, that idea didn't go by without some discussion.