Feds can't track green spending, says watchdog

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC


CTV.ca | Feds can't track green spending, says watchdog

Billions of dollars in government spending on green programs since 2006 have had little quantifiable effect in improving Canada's air and water, according to a new report from the environment commissioner.

Scott Vaughan, Canada's environmental watchdog, also found that tracking the efficacy of the federal government's most important policies to slash greenhouse gasses is nearly impossible.

"Canadians have high expectations that the government will take action to tackle environmental degradation," Vaughan wrote in his report, released on Thursday. "The government needs to know what works, what doesn't, and why."

In 2006, the Tories created a public transit tax credit in the hopes that an increasing number of Canadians would take the bus or subway to work. But the government doesn't have the ability to measure the policy's "negligible" effects, said Vaughan.

So far, the tax credit has cost $635 million over three years. Initially, the tax credit was to cut 220,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases. But that figure was later reduced to 30,000 tonnes.

"With regard to other air emissions, Environment Canada could not provide any analysis to support the assertion that the tax credit would result in measurable impacts," wrote Vaughan.

The government also claimed that a $1.5-billion trust fund for the provinces would help cut 80-megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions from 2008 to 2012. However, Vaughan said that those estimates may have been flawed.

Plus, the provinces aren't forced to report back to Ottawa on how the money is being spent, meaning little accountability in achieving the stated goals.

"Due to the nature of federal-provincial trust funds, it will be difficult for the government to support its claim that the $1.5 billion it is spending on the Clean Air and Climate Change Trust Fund will actually achieve the target it has set for lowering greenhouse gas emissions," Vaughan wrote.

The trust fund was created by the Tories in 2007 and was unveiled as part of the Turning the Corner initiative to reduce greenhouse gases.

But Vaughan wrote those figures were based on questionable numbers and lax analysis from Environment Canada.

"The little analysis it did undertake is based on flawed assumptions -- for example, that all provinces and territories face identical opportunities, challenges and economic conditions for achieving emission reductions."

"Since the basis for the estimate is flawed, we cannot determine what a reasonable range of expected results should have been."

Vaughan told CTV's Power Play on Thursday afternoon that Environment Canada has been responsive to the recommendations tabled in the report.

"These are things that the department is taking seriously, and we're looking forward to them adjusting," he said in an interview with host Tom Clark.

Vaughan became environment commissioner after his predecessor, Johanne Gelinas, was fired after raising concerns she was taking on too great of an advocacy role.

Environment Minister responds

Conservative Environment Minister Jim Prentice said that the $1.5 billion was allocated to the provinces so they could take action themselves. For instance, Prentice said that the money sent to Ontario is meant to help the province help replace coal with nuclear power by 2014.

"Certainly, we will be going to the provinces, verifying how the dollars were spent, and (checking) the environmental achievements," he said.

Responding to questions surrounding the tax credit for public transport, Prentice said there are "points of disagreement" between the government and certain portions of the auditor's report.

"There were two objectives with the transit pass, one of them was to help hard working Canadians who ride the bus ... so on that basis it was an important thing to do," Prentice told Power Play.

He added that encouraging Canadians to take the bus will help alleviate gridlock and minimize pollution from vehicles.

The report also slammed Environment Canada for failing to clamp down or track rules governing carcinogenic chemicals like benzene, which are released at gas stations across the country.

But Prentice stressed that the report's findings about dangerous chemicals is important and that his ministry will strive to "get to the bottom of this."

Tories sidestepped accountability, say Grits

Meanwhile, Liberal environment critic David McGuinty attacked the government for being reckless with the environment spending.

McGuinty added that the Tories have repeatedly sidestepped accountability questions about their green policies.

"We knew this was coming, we've been asking these questions now for 3 ½ years of the government and we just can't get answers," McGuinty told CTV's Power Play Thursday afternoon.

"That is a really serious matter. We're talking about a billion and a half dollars here," said McGuinty.

"The federal government ought to be able to tell the tax payers of Canada, in the House of Commons, what they're doing with a billion and a half of their tax dollars."

But they can't and won't......

And we all trust the Conservatives with this joke of a budget? Holes were showing through before it even was voted to pass.... then this crap comes out showing just how useless the Conservatives are when it comes to planning these things and keeping it all tracked?

Great.... just simply wonderful.....

Oh yeah, trust the conservatives, everything is just fine.... vote for them, they know what they're doing..... ffs :angry3:
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Here's some more smelly crap to chuck onto the fire for all to inhale:

Stimulus benefits may be overstated
Stimulus benefits may be overstated

Canada's parliamentary budget watchdog will raise questions about the scale of the Harper government's economic-stimulus package in testimony before the House of Commons finance committee today, Canwest News Service has learned.

The government has projected that the federal budget will inject $40-billion in stimulus into the economy over the next two years, creating or saving 189,000 jobs by the end of 2010.

But Kevin Page, the parliamentary budget officer, is expected to caution that the impact of the budget on the economy might not be as large as the government has predicted.

The analysis by Mr. Page, a non-partisan officer of Parliament, could have significant political ramifications for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who has staked the survival of his government, and possibly his own reputation, on the success of the economic-recovery package.

The opposition Liberals made their support of the budget contingent on its ability to save and create jobs and have vowed to topple the government if the budget does not meet expectations.

Mr. Page, a former Finance Department official appointed to his post last March, is expected to note stimulus projections are based on an aggressive plan to cut departmental spending and sell such government assets as real estate and Crown corporations. The government has forecast that the plan, outlined in the fall economic update, will save $10.1-billion over five years.

However, the government does not appear to have taken those cuts into account in calculating the size of the stimulus, said a source familiar with the analysis done by Mr. Page's office. Cuts to government spending could reduce the flow of public funds into the economy, dampening the effect of the stimulus.

On the other hand, if the government does not succeed in finding enough programs to cut or assets to sell, the size of the federal deficit could turn out to be higher than expected, said the source. The government has forecast a deficit of $34-billion in 2009-10.

Some private-sector economists have also questioned the impact of the government's stimulus plan. Dale Orr, of IHS Global Insight Canada, has said the government might have overestimated the stimulus by more than a third, because of assumptions about the ability of provinces to fund infrastructure projects.

Yesterday, New Democrat MP Paul Dewar challenged the government to account for $8.7-billion in spending cuts or asset sales implied in the budget.

The November economic statement projected the government would save $10.1-billion over the next five years through cuts or asset sales, including $4.3-billion in the coming fiscal year. However, the budget has only identified $1.4-billion in savings through an ongoing review of departmental expenditures, leaving what Mr. Dewar calls an "$8.7-billion hole."

"Can the government tell taxpayers where the money will come from to fill it: a fire sale of assets, layoffs, program cuts or higher deficits?" Mr. Dewar said in the House of Commons.

Since announcing its plan to sell assets in the fall, the government has not provided a list of the properties or Crown corporations it is considering putting on the block.

Of course not.... here's the gist of our plan, we have no way of providing the details for you, nor do we even want to, but trust us.... we know what we're doing. :roll:

The thing that urks me the most, is no matter how much you explain how they're going to screw us over, no matter how much evidence you shove in front of everybody's face, they keep getting away with it, and people keep taking it up the wazoo and asking for more..... then when it's too late to do anything about it.... people just shrug their shoulders and wait until the next time they get their wazoo polished from the inside.
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
The "feds" only track patronage and the level of the trough if it gets too low (very frequently lately) and needs to be refilled.

The "watchdog" has our sympathy if it is looking for transparency and accountablity from the Conswerveatives under Harpo
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
Good topic. It's very important to the country, yet there are very few responses. Just a gimmick the Conservatives did as a sop to the environment. Conservatives must live in a unique "political" environment no doubt.

Aren't the Tories supposed to be the fiscally responsible party? Well, they did help gut UI-EI so when the economy sags, it's tough to get decent benefits. So the gov't saves money there and people suffer.
 

elevennevele

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2006
787
11
18
Canada
Who says the Conservatives are bad at tracking monies? The Conservatives have the best method to track monies. That being donations to their party and who to seek out for those monies. They have put in a lot of time, effort, and resources to developed the best system to track monies for their coffers. Haven't you heard about the amazing detailed database they created on the families of this country to track monies? They can without a doubt, track monies.

As for Canada? What about it?
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Who says the Conservatives are bad at tracking monies? The Conservatives have the best method to track monies. That being donations to their party and who to seek out for those monies. They have put in a lot of time, effort, and resources to developed the best system to track monies for their coffers. Haven't you heard about the amazing detailed database they created on the families of this country to track monies? They can without a doubt, track monies.

As for Canada? What about it?

Indeed... they're only in the government to keep their own party and the west covered... who cares about anything else? Isn't that what the government's for? :angry3: