Thursday, February 05, 2009

Video: 78% of infrastructure $ going to Conservative ridings

Michael Ignatieff and Gerard Kennedy tag-teamed the Conservatives in question period today on the over-distribution of infrastructure funding to Conservative-held ridings, an admitted and unabashed Conservative practice.

* 78 per cent of Building Canada Fund announcements made in Conservative ridings

* Tories bulking up own ridings with infrastructure funds: Liberals
* Feds rewarding Tory ridings, say Liberals
* Taking care of their own

Other Blogs:
* 78% of Building Canada Fund projects in Conservative ridings: Kennedy
* Conservative Pork Barrelling of Canada continues
* There should not be Conservative infrastructure, it is Canadian infrastructure
* Vote Conservative or else...
* Ignatieff Gets Harper To Nibble, Kennedy Sets The Hook
* Con Ridings get 78% of Infrastructure Funding

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers


Tiny Perfect Blog said...

All true, what a shame these guys are still in government. If only we had a way to boot them out and replace them with something else.

Steve V said...

Pretty clever to have Ignatieff set up Harper, by reaffirming all regions and ridings, then Kennedy rises to reveal the record.

One stylistic point, get Kennedy OFF the back bench, I don't care how long he's been an MP :)

Mark said...


For what it's worth, that was the first word I said to describe th budget when it came out. The only stimulus here is the stimulation of Tory hopes on a calculated riding by riding basis.

Just watch when their monthly progress reports come in the form of householders and ten percenters with photos of ribbons being cut and sods being turned.

Jeff said...

It's not the position of the seat, it's how you use it Steve...

Steve V said...

The yellow backdrop isn't a good color for Gerard ;) I suppose another way of looking at it, it shows bench strength.

MrvnMouse said...

I said this on Tribe's blog, but I think it bears repeating: This seems like a blatant violation of “probation.”

I wonder if Iggy is going to do anything about it?

susansmith said...

So, liberals supported this budget. didn't they read the fine print? It's all show anyways. Yawn. It's the liberal budget too now, so I guess Liberals like that all the stim infrastructure money is going to con ridings, cause that's what you voted for. So it really shows how not clever Liberals are by half.

Jeff said...

Maybe you should read the fine print, Jan. The budget hasn't been proclaimed yet, so none of these projects are in that budget, these are 2007-08 projects. So what's your point?

As for the Liberal decision to let the budget pass with amendments, you mean the Liberal decision supported by 72 per cent of Canadians, including 68 per cent of New Democrats? Maybe it's time to listen to what they're saying at the kitchen table: try to make this parliament work, we don't want an election.

Steve V said...

"didn't they read the fine print?"

As opposed to the NDP, who didn't read anything before their principled decision. LOL, what a riot.

ADHR said...

The opinion polls are irrelevant, first because there is no measure that I've seen of how informed (and whether informed) these views actually are; and, second, because "making this parliament work" is not equivalent to "letting Harper have any budget he likes". Persuasive.

The NDP-bashing is just sad. This seems to be the last refuge of Liberal desperation. Its increasing frequency in recent days and weeks makes an obvious point.

There is one sensible point here -- that these are 2007-8 projects. That would mean they were in either the 2007 or the 2008 budget. The 2007 budget was supported by the BQ and opposed by the NDP and the Liberals. So, yes, it's not fair to blame the Liberals for these projects if they were approved in this budget. (Although, one can blame the Liberals for not sticking to the coalition agreement which would have guaranteed the BQ would not prop up the Conservatives for 18 months.)

If they were in the 2008 budget, though, then they are still the Liberals' fault. The Liberals abstained from that budget vote rather than demanding amendments or voting against it. The NDP and the BQ both voted against the 2008 budget.

So, whichever budget it was, the Liberals bear a certain amount of blame here. If the 2008 budget, then they didn't do anything to oppose these projects. If the 2007 budget, then they have successfully blown an opportunity to keep the BQ from doing it again.

As I've said already, I suspect the Liberal strategy is to inflict as much suffering on Canadians as possible in order to ensure that they are swept back into power in the next election. I have yet to see a reason not to believe this.

ADHR said...

And, thinking about it further, as the Jurist points out here, if the Liberals knew that the Cons couldn't be trusted to handle public money in a non-pork-barreling way, why did they just give them billions more? Sorry, folks, but the Libs can't get off the hook here.

The Rat said...

2008 Election results map

Not a lot of red on that map. Are you saying we should build infrastructure based on how many ridings you win? 'Cause I think it's rather obvious that infrastructure is more about geography than politics and the fact is the Conservatives represent most of the map outside of Quebec. The NDP are very popular in the wilderness but I can't see much infrastructure going in to the NWT, Skeena, or Northern Ontario. So 70% seems about right to me based on a simple look at a map.

Jeff said...

Maybe considering the opinion of Canadians sounds crazy to a party that decided to vote against things before they even know what they're voting against, but to some people, politicians actually listening to people is a pretty sensible idea.

And NDP bashing? Seriously, sit on it. Incessant and, frankly, pathetic attacks on the Liberals are always fair and meaningful debate, but raise one less than glowing point about the NDP and the cry is NDP Bashing, wah! Frankly, this victimization complex is pathetic and juvenile. And it's getting rather old.

Jeff said...

There's one obvious whole in your analysis, Rat. I'll give you a hint. It rhymes with shmpopulation.

The Rat said...

Ummm, population? So how many bridges CAN you build in Toronto? I mean it's a lot easier to build a road where there isn't one already and downtown Toronto is pretty road-ified if you ask me. Again Jeff, it's about geography nor population. If it was you'd probably have rapid transit right to your bedroom in Toronto and there would be no roads across the prairies.