Althia Raj

Canada Budget 2012: Conservatives Criticized For Hiding Details On Coming Cuts

Posted: 03/29/2012 12:13 am Updated: 03/29/2012 12:13 am

Canada Budget 2012 Cuts
Canada's 2012 federal budget will not include many details on coming cuts to the government. (CP/Getty)

OTTAWA — Canadians will be left in the dark about the effects of the upcoming federal budget cuts unless the Conservatives come clean about who will bear the brunt of their austerity budget, the parliamentary budget watchdog warns.

Kevin Page, the parliamentary budget officer, told The Huffington Post Canada this week that members of Parliament won’t be able to do their job unless the Tories are forthcoming about their budget cuts.

“They need to see the details, particularly in the context of an austerity budget. For the government to come out and say, we are going to achieve great things fiscally, we are going to bring you back to balance but I’m not going to show you any details, (that) doesn’t inspire confidence and doesn’t inspire trust,” Page said.

The Conservative government has suggested its budget won’t include many clear details on the upcoming cuts. If that is the case, MPs might be called to vote on the budget before knowing what its effects will be, what services will be cut, who they will affect and where they will take place.

“If you’re a budget watchdog, or more importantly a Member of Parliament, (without details) you’re not sure what you are holding them to account for,” Page said. “That raises the element of risk.”

“We don’t know where the ax is falling, we don’t know where the savings are going to be achieved,” he said.

The Tories were quite good at telling Canadians where and how they spent stimulus money, Page said. But the government hasn’t been quite as successful in noting where cost savings have come from, he said.

The NDP’s finance critic Peter Julian said the apparent lack of transparency suggests the Tories are attempting to hide the cuts they are making.

“Not exposing them in the budget and not even putting them forward and in the plans and priority documents that are coming out after the budget,” Julian said, suggests there are two messages: “One for Canadians that don’t worry, we are going to be responsible — despite their track record. And another internally, for Conservative partisans, where they are saying ‘Yeah, we are going to take on the federal government and slash services for families.’ ”

Last month, Liberal MP and government operations’ critic John McCallum tried to get a Commons committee to note its concern that the federal government was purposefully withholding information on upcoming cuts in documents known as departmental ‘plans and priorities.’ But the Liberals and NDP were overruled by Conservative MPs.

“Canadians should know what the government is doing, partly Canadians who might have services cut to them and partly those who might stand to lose their jobs,” McCallum told HuffPost.

Wednesday, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty told reporters there would be some “modest reductions” in the budget but most of the spending cuts would affect back office operations and not service delivery.

“We are focusing on the internal expenses of the government of Canada,” he said.

Earlier this month, Flaherty said there would be sufficient information provided in the budget for people to understand what the
government was doing and what the result of its ‘Deficit Reduction Action Plan’ would be.

“But then when you get down into the weeds, there are lots of initiatives that will be dealt with and that will be dealt with by the
Ministers and their departments going forward over time,” Flaherty said on March 5.

“This is normal,” he insisted.

McCallum, however, insisted that when he was leading an expenditure reduction review in 2004-2005, the Liberals were very forthcoming about their cuts, tabling them in a separate document with the budget.

Armed with that information parliamentary committees could undertake studies to find out the effects of the federal government’s decisions, McCallum said.

After winning their majority mandate on May 2nd, the Conservatives instructed all government departments, federal agencies and crown corporations to identify cost cutting scenarios for a five percent trim to their budget as well as a 10 per cent reduction.

Meeting behind closed doors, a small committee formed mostly of cabinet ministers then decided what to chop and how deep to go.

The talk was about austerity and finding between $4 billion and $8 billion in savings.

But in recent weeks, the Conservatives have tried to cast their budget as a visionary document about long-term sustainability and economic growth rather than an exercise in austerity.

“This is a jobs and growth budget,” Flaherty told reporters on February 29.

McCallum said he suspects the Tories will try to get everyone focused on the “millions” in spending rather than the “billions in cuts.”

“This is a government that prides itself on accountability and this is extraordinarily unaccountable behaviour,” he said.

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • Top 10 Most Expensive MP Pensions

    Welcome to the $3 million club. The following 10 MPs will each receive an estimated total lifetime pension of more than $3 million if they retire in 2019. All the <a href="" target="_hplink">estimates come from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation</a> and are based on an MP retiring in 2019 and ceasing to receive their pension at age 80. The numbers if the MPs retire in 2015 are also included in the caption to each slide.

  • 10. Michael Chong - $3,124,903

    Conservative MP Michael Chong would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $2,684,816 if he were to retire in 2015.

  • 9. Peter Van Loan - $3,194,114

    Conservative MP Peter Van Loan would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $2,462,029 if he were to retire in 2015. (CP)

  • 8. Rona Ambrose - $3,330,876

    Conservative MP Rona Ambrose would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $2,429,149 if she were to retire in 2015. (CP)

  • 7. Rob Anders - $3,643,873

    Conservative MP Rob Anders would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $3,034,089 if he were to retire in 2015. (Jeff McIntosh/CP)

  • 6. Denis Coderre - $3,701,989

    Liberal MP Denis Coderre would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $3,288,821 if he were to retire in 2015. (Graham Hughes/CP)

  • 5. Scott Brison - $3,723,666

    Liberal MP Scott Brison would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $3,113,881 if he were to retire in 2015.

  • 4. James Moore - $3,795,386

    Conservative MP James Moore would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $2,893,658 if he were to retire in 2015. (Althia Raj)

  • 3. Gerry Byrne - $3,996,498

    Liberal MP Gerry Byrne would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $3,450,711 if he were to retire in 2015.

  • 2. Jason Kenney - $4,318,507

    Conservative MP Jason Kenney would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $3,416,779 if he were to retire in 2015. (CP)

  • 1. Stephen Harper - $5,596,474

    Prime Minister Stephen Harper would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $5,456,109 if he were to retire in 2015. Harper's numbers are based on the PM not buying back into the program for his service as a Reform Party MP between 1993-1997. In order to make a political statement, Harper did not contribute to the pension program during his time as a Reform MP. After returning to Parliament Hill in 2002, Harper could have retroactively contributed to the program for his service from 1993 to 1997. According to the PMO, Harper has not and will not make those contributions. MPs are not obligated to disclose this information. If Harper were to choose to buy back in for those years, his numbers would change. If he were to buy back in and retire in 2019 he would receive an estimated lifetime pension of $6,216,858 and $6,233,568 if he were to retire in 2015. His numbers also include the special allowance he will receive as Prime Minister. An earlier version of this story used the numbers based on Harper buying back in for the 1993 to 1997 period. After being contacted by the PMO with the prime minister's pledge not to do so, the numbers were updated. (CP)