TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Tories slammed for court program cut
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

look i'm with you about govt spendings, i'm against them too when its to try interferring with the market.

the thing is NO company will build infrastructures by itself, only the govt can do that.

Anyways, at this exceptionnal rate of 13 billions a year (i don't think Canada will repeat that for many years), it'll take 37 years to pay down everything.

37 years without spending anything where its needed? You who always bitch that Canada is falling behind, well guess what, in 37 years with nothing done, Canada will look like Moldavia (no offence to them).

You always complain that we pay too much for our plane tickets, heck half of the price are taxes to the federal agencies. Why aren't they decreased to encourage travel for example and canadian airlines?

When you have surpluses its time to be imaginatif and come up with needed and usefull things to allocate resources.

About personnal finances, would you pay down your house mortgage first (say 5%) or invest it where you can have returns of (10%)??

Dude, cutting the bullshit and redirecting those funds to decent programmes would do the job just fine while also paying off the debt. Look at the list of things cut. Mostly frill and BS if you ask me. And they should comepletely overhaul just about every overbloated government service. Dont cut the essentials but get rid of the BS waste.

Lets start with the gun registry

Dude, cutting the bullshit and redirecting those funds to decent programmes would do the job just fine while also paying off the debt. Look at the list of things cut. Mostly frill and BS if you ask me. And they should comepletely overhaul just about every overbloated government service. Dont cut the essentials but get rid of the BS waste.

Lets start with the gun registry

is health and education BS programs?

why didn't they allocate some of that money to those sectors?

at least to come back to the levels of funding before Chretien got the axe out (things never returned to the same levels of service).

quote:

Originally posted by malek is health and education BS programs? why didn't they allocate some of that money to those sectors? at least to come back to the levels of funding before Chretien got the axe out (things never returned to the same levels of service).

first we have to reform health care or else its just throwing good money after bad. Our system is a black hole.

As for education, im with you there. So lets cut the frills and the BS and redirect that 1 billion dollars to education. I agree! But lets be frugal about waste and use the surplus to pay the debt while maintaining the services we need.

You see, the problem that fat, the provinces had to cut was really the bones. Were you used to wait 6-8 hours at the emergency pre-93? of course not.

the only way to fix that is to train/hire more doctors/nurses/specialsts which involves alot of money. The same that were forced to retire or move out of the country to continue practicing... not very smart.

universities have trouble balancing their books and keep asking more money from the students, its crazy.

Chretien promised then, when the budgetary deficit will be fixed, he would bring back the transfers to the provinces, he never did that.

If the idea behind the program is to provide equality, why the denial of funds for competing interests like anti-abortion cases? You may not agree with it, but this is a country where "everyone is entitled to their opinion" is supposedly enshrined in our culture. What that really means within the context of the CCP, apparently, is "Everyone is entitled to the left's opinion, conservatives fuck off."

Minority groups can gain funding the same way a poor person trying to sue the tobacco companies can. Lobby the media, fundraise, get in touch with special interest groups, etc. They don't need the government paying for their ability to sue... Well... the government.

The courts are already slanted to the left, why do these people need free cash to fund their cases?

Believe it or not, the government's job is not to grant people every freedom they believe they are entitled to. In the case of abortion, why are the babie's rights ignored, while the woman is given the 'right to choose'? How many Einstein's, Trudeau's, Churchill's, Gretzky's, etc. have been sucked out of women who don't want to take responsibility for their actions? (note: I think that when the woman's life if threatened by the birth, or if it's something like a rape case, that those are extenuating circumstances in this matter) But the CCP says "Who cares? Those women have their 'rights'".

It was a waste of money, we're talking about 5 million dollars to fund cases that then cost more millions of dollars for the government to defend. That then cost even MORE millions of dollars if the government gets the short end of the stick in the case. And why? Because minorities are 'underpriviledged' and deserve to get free money to fund court cases that I'm not entitled to because I'm a white, christian male? Doesn't sound very 'fair' to me!

quote:

The Canadian Bar Association � which has 36,000 members � said the government has been dishonest in characterizing the program. "They're making it sound like these fringe groups were the only ones accessing it," said Guy Joubert, a vice-president at the association. "That's definitely not the case. . . . What this move has done is silence the voices of marginalized Canadians."

I feel the need to keep pointing that out.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT I feel the need to keep pointing that out.

The Canadian Bar Association? Like, the lawyers? Of COURSE they're going to be against this move. It will result in less work for them, which means less money.

Not to mention that they dont deny that a lot of SIGs use the money. Part of the cut was a $5 million cut to the "status of women". Women make up 51% of the population. Some minority! Im sure if there are legit womens causes out there, someone within that 51% can find a way to privately bankroll that fight.

And if not then its probably not even worth it.

What this does is put a lot of people feeding on the government trough out of a free ride, and allows money to spent more on programs that we all need.

quote:

Originally posted by malek massive debt payments is useless and is the easiest way to shed away those kinds of monies... thus why the lack of vision. say, intrest rates is 5%, if they built a highway/train/whatever to alleviate congestion problem in Toronto, enhance productivity (and GDP), wouldn't that be better? How about we add to the equation, that salaries and materials paid to build these, will remain for the most part in Canada and that the kicker is the taxation money coming back. 1 billion project, doesn't really cost 1 billion, its less. Why don't we spend the money on needed infrastructures instead of having to borrow the money later when we'll have no choice to build them. Its a good time for Canada right now, but it won't last forever. Plus you're saying intrested saved could pay alot of stuff later, you're right! Canada already paid 86 billions on its debt, take away that 13 billion, and you have 73 billion already paid, at 5% intrest rates, those savings account to 3.65B$ a year which is a good chunk of that 13 billion. Why aren't those 3.65B$ spent on necessary things then?? it buys alot of subway stations and highway each year. Finally, most of the intrest saved will be paid to Canadians which are the main debt holders, those intrest revenues are already taxed at 50%......and go back to the govt hehe.

I think you need to learn about compound interest...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r I think you need to learn about compound interest...

left wingers need to learn economics in general

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 left wingers need to learn economics in general

I'd rather trim the fat now.
Sure, deal with the infastructure to keep it running with a few needed projects here and there but use the excess $$ to keep the black finance cloud away before all your left with is that AND no infastructure...

[edit]
Not entirely sure I worded that right...
Left with nothing BUT debt. payments with no money to do to infastructure and whatever else is needed.
There that's better

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r I think you need to learn about compound interest...

I think you need to learn to shut the fuck up sometimes

quote:

left wingers need to learn economics in general

I actually voted for the conservatives


you guys have absolutely nothing to add anymore.


another cut i learned about today, 6 millions from the musueums across the country... yes more BS fat spendings

quote:

Originally posted by Spam The Canadian Bar Association? Like, the lawyers? Of COURSE they're going to be against this move. It will result in less work for them, which means less money.

you're ignoring or evading the point he's making...

money aside (and no lawyer is going to suddenly starve because of this program being cancelled) don't you think the Can. Bar. Assoc. VP is qualified to say who has actually used the program?

Besides, if you're hypothesizing on bias, wouldn't Harper have just as a biased a position as the VP? In scrapping the program, he's saving his gov't money, making it more difficult for people to challenge his gov't and pleasing his right-wing supporters who (incorrectly) think that it just benefits "liberals".

you could be right about his bias...but that doesn't detract from, or insubstantiate, the point he's making.

what I would like to see is some cuts in the federal sector in Ottawa, those hordes of public servants working 20% of their capacity gaining fat salaries...

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Not to mention that they dont deny that a lot of SIGs use the money. Part of the cut was a $5 million cut to the "status of women". Women make up 51% of the population. Some minority! Im sure if there are legit womens causes out there, someone within that 51% can find a way to privately bankroll that fight. And if not then its probably not even worth it. What this does is put a lot of people feeding on the government trough out of a free ride, and allows money to spent more on programs that we all need.

Right. so if some big lobby group doesn't get on board, it's "probably not worth it".

nice attitude.

btw...this is about the cut to the CCP program, not the cut to women's programs that were previously announced. two issues.

the CCP program is 5.6 million over TWO years...it's hardly going to prevent the gov't, who has a massive surplus, from funding other programs.

but fuck those seniors fighting for EI benefits...let them help themselves! nice

btw...keep in mind that if the gov't wouldn't have denied whatever is being fought for in the first place, there wouldn't be a CCP funded case at all, would there?

quote:

Originally posted by malek what I would like to see is some cuts in the federal sector in Ottawa, those hordes of public servants working 20% of their capacity gaining fat salaries...

Who'd argue with that?

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT you're ignoring or evading the point he's making... money aside (and no lawyer is going to suddenly starve because of this program being cancelled) don't you think the Can. Bar. Assoc. VP is qualified to say who has actually used the program? Besides, if you're hypothesizing on bias, wouldn't Harper have just as a biased a position as the VP? In scrapping the program, he's saving his gov't money, making it more difficult for people to challenge his gov't and pleasing his right-wing supporters who (incorrectly) think that it just benefits "liberals". you could be right about his bias...but that doesn't detract from, or insubstantiate, the point he's making.

I'm not completely ignoring his point. But that doesn't change the fact that his opinion will be biased and one-sided, which I don't feel leads to wise advice or opinion. I don't feel that the government should be funding, with our tax dollars, a program that allows people to sue the government, for MORE of our tax dollars. I have no problem with them bringing their cases to the court. I do have a problem with the fact that my money is being used to fund the case. These people can raise the money the same way OTHER people, not entitled to the CCP monies, are forced to.

I especially find the program suspect since the program picks and chooses what type of cases to fund. If a group feels that a right is being ignored (I used that example of the anti-abortionists case against the pro-abortionists case as an example, because the article did) the program was designed to take care of it, wasn't it? Either fund both sides, or better yet, don't fund either.

For Spam and Jayx

I think something that's being missed here, is the fact that the CCP actually saves the government money. Let me break it down:

If a group uses their own means to fight the government on a charter issue, the government knows that if they stall long enough, ask for continuances, request reports, royal commissions, etc. etc. etc., they can run ANY organization out of money. It's simply a matter of time. Now in that time, the lawyers (on both sides) are still getting paid, along with the research staff (I was one of them), judges and administrators.

With the CCP footing the bill, the government loses the incentive to stall. Let's face it, as long as they're footing the bill, stalling means losing your own money. Current research on the matter indicates that Charter cases get to court 50% faster with the CCP than through private litigation. That's 50% less money spent on government challenges.

The simple fact is, conservative groups are tired of not being able to tap into the CCP. Why can't they tap in? As I explained in my previous post, they're not challenging anything in the charter. The CCP is strictly for Charter test cases. It's a useful public service because it is a means to tweak legislation and define less than clear provisions in the Charter. In theory, there should be no need to fund groups who uphold current Charter definitions because no action is required to uphold the status quo.

The reality, is that defending Charter definitions requires as much research and administration as challenging them. Even on the Liberal side of the fence, I know that the CCP does need change, and should fund opposing groups at least to some extent.

One final point I'd like to make, is that most of the groups who slam the CCP tend to cry poor more often than challenge lobby groups. Darryl Reid from Focus on the Family whined about this to the Commons justice committee only six months ago. It's total nonsense when you consider that this organization receives a huge amount of money from its parent organization in the US.

The issue isn't about whether organizations have the money to raise challenges, it's about preventing partisan governments from running organizations out of money so that they don't have to do anything.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.