• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Your the boss now! What stays? What goes?

ArmyRick

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,171
Points
1,010
I have to admit of all the places I chat online with fellow Canadians about politics, I must admit that army.ca is the most sensible crow. I find I agree with some, disagree with others but always people here have reasons that make sense (even if to themselves) as to why they swing their vote one way or another.

Let us move past that. I want to initiate a discussion about HOW our federal government spends money. If you were the PM and had a super supportive majority governing party, what would you cut? What would you reduce? Or were would you spend more? If possible add context. Is there any streamlining that could happen?

Your thoughts?
 
I'll fire in my first thought. I had recently learned of something called an Infrastructure Bank or something to that effect that had 35 BILLION spent on it, and nothing to show for it, chop. Bye bye.

Defence? I would increase spending. Starting with heavy investment on facilities, buildings, barracks, etc. Then move procurement for defence over to DND not allow Public works to ball it up. Before I continue, defence spending is another ball of thread and lets keep it on those post.

I would sniff out any and all spending on arts, music, etc and cut.

Got to feed cattle, more to follow later.
 
I would start with an across the board firing of 50% of all EXs. The remainders would then be wedded to their departments (except in rare cases) to both regain lost expertise on files and be accountable for their decisions. But, I would also decentralize decision making away from PMO/PCO.

I would take the Federal Government back to first principles. Is a department doing something that is actually a federal constitutional mandate? If not- cede the funding/tax credits to the Provinces and ramp down the department.

I would cut cabinet back to about 18 ministers. My 4 most important ministers would be finance, foreign justice and defence. Everyone else is second tier.

I would increase defence spending, but the MND would be totally responsible for defence procurement. Treasury Board would audit program spending, but the spending would be entirely within that Minister’s control. One person to blame, if it goes wrong.

Regional Development agencies would be gone. That is just industrial bribery.

The CBC, I would actually keep, but the entire board and executive would be fired. A new board would hired to put in place programming about Canadians for all Canadians- not just for the 7% uber progressives. Why isn’t Letterkenny or Shoresy a CBC project, for example?

There would be a large clean up of regulations and laws that hamper development.
 
The CBC, I would actually keep, but the entire board and executive would be fired. A new board would hired to put in place programming about Canadians for all Canadians- not just for the 7% uber progressives. Why isn’t Letterkenny or Shoresy a CBC project, for example?
Just an idea. If CBC is kept, what if the government owned portion was split evenly between Federal government and the provinces and terrirtories? As shareholders? That way the "news" from the CBC would kind of forced to be neutral and not leaning one way or another. Plus their may be more pressure to turn a profit.
 
Just an idea. If CBC is kept, what if the government owned portion was split evenly between Federal government and the provinces and terrirtories? As shareholders? That way the "news" from the CBC would kind of forced to be neutral and not leaning one way or another. Plus their may be more pressure to turn a profit.
They would be government funded, but their ability to advertise would be gone. They would not be competing with private media in Canada. They would occupy a niche that the private broadcasters won’t fill in small and remote markets.
 
For those interested, here is the departments and agencies of the Canadian Federal government

 
Good ideas so far. I would set a goal to whittle down the PS. I would set a 10% reduction goal over two years with managers figuring out what/whom to cut and have that people dealing with the public and working directly with coalface issues, be untouched.
I would reduce the requirement for industrial offsets for defense purchases.
 
with managers figuring out what/whom to cut
The perennial problems with this type of exercise is (a) managers/executives protect fiefdoms so any cutting of bodies just makes life for those remaining a living hell. You need somebody - possibly external but not necessarily - to assess the value of the work being done or program and cut the work before you cut the people. A manager will crawl over glass to protect their job but will sell their subordinates to the devil. There's a lot of 'busy work' and oversight-over-oversight.

Eliminate 'performance bonus', particularly for financial matters. Allow somebody to take home a few extra bucks and they will fire their grandmother. If they need to be paid extra for doing their assigned job, the system is broken (which it is).

Why does the federal government financially support 'cultural groups' to perpetuate the identity of the country they came from?
 
The perennial problems with this type of exercise is (a) managers/executives protect fiefdoms so any cutting of bodies just makes life for those remaining a living hell. You need somebody - possibly external but not necessarily - to assess the value of the work being done or program and cut the work before you cut the people. A manager will crawl over glass to protect their job but will sell their subordinates to the devil. There's a lot of 'busy work' and oversight-over-oversight.

Eliminate 'performance bonus', particularly for financial matters. Allow somebody to take home a few extra bucks and they will fire their grandmother. If they need to be paid extra for doing their assigned job, the system is broken (which it is).

Why does the federal government financially support 'cultural groups' to perpetuate the identity of the country they came from?
Cutting work was the plan for WFA back in the Harper era, the expected saving did not materialize because prescriptive regs are cheaper to enforce at the approval stage, rather than relying on enforcement which is actually quite expensive to do properly. During the WFA, all decisions were made at the Ottawa level using graphs and workflow charts, it was a utter mess.
The best way is to start reducing budgets for those managers, they will be forced to comply.
 
Cutting the number of MPs in half would be number 1; as well as number of minions per MP. The House of Commons is ridiculously bloated with a lot of MPs being placeholders vice active participants. Similarly the Senate is probably too big for it's function. And along the WFH mandate, if PS servants have minimum attendance in the office, both Parliament and the Senate should have similar, with salaries getting prorated otherwise. (although I'd honestly kill that mandate and leave it up to supervisors to figure out what make sense with managers/etc having approval for hybrid/fully remote work).

Simplified tax code would also make sense to me; for most people and corporations flat taxes based on income brackets would save a lot of time and costly effort, and also get rid of a lot of loopholes. Then applying money on enforcing tax dodging assclowns.

Smashing the PSPC, DND and ISED procurement folks into a single Ministry while also burning down most of the internal procurement processes would be on the agenda (including TBS, FIN and other departments requirements). DPS? Gone.

In general, requiring plain language contracts as well, while also adjusting all procurement limits for 30 years of inflation would also help make buying things easier, and make bidding easier.

For the CAF, maybe actually enforcing reconstitution (vice bumping the ops tempo), and also simplifying the scope of operations to focus on key capabilities we can support and sustain vice trying to be a single deployable force would probably be better value than what we are currently doing. That would probably require a lot of funding injection to build up training, reinvest in infrastructure and actually shed paper capabilities that don't actually exist, but no point saying we have tanks or warships if they are rusted out, or effective training when the facilities are falling apart. Similarly, building living quarters that are affordable and maintained to at least provincial standards would help.

The infra bit alone in the CAF is probably in the tens of billions, but I think would have real positive operational and QoL impacts, while also spreading out a lot of work across the country for local economic benefits.
 
Cutting the number of MPs in half would be number 1; as well as number of minions per MP. The House of Commons is ridiculously bloated with a lot of MPs being placeholders vice active participants. Similarly the Senate is probably too big for it's function.
I think the number of MPs and Senators is baked into the Constitution. And good luck with making any changes there!
 
I forgot I had another point. Somehow, defang/depower/depoliticize the PMO. 'The Centre' has far too much power; power that rightly belongs in the hands of the caucus and executive (Cabinet). Political staff connected to the Prime Minister can have an office and staff - someplace else.
 
I think the number of MPs and Senators is baked into the Constitution. And good luck with making any changes there!
I don't think so, they regularly add more. I think there is something about representation from each area, they now have 338, they started with 181. Nunavut, NT, and the Yukon only have 1 each, so really more the provinces that have swollen (and some additional provinces added).

I'm sure they could manage with 220-240 and no one would notice in any meanignful way, other than saving hundreds of millions.
 
I don't think so, they regularly add more. I think there is something about representation from each area, they now have 338, they started with 181. Nunavut, NT, and the Yukon only have 1 each, so really more the provinces that have swollen (and some additional provinces added).

I'm sure they could manage with 220-240 and no one would notice in any meanignful way, other than saving hundreds of millions.
You'd be surprised about the amount of retail politics / retail support (so to speak) done out of the average MP's office. Cutting the number of MPs would not cut the number of requests for support with federal (and often provincial) benefits.

It also provides a wider pool to draw from for roles such as cabinet.

The number of seats in both the Senate and the House is spelled out (perhaps not in plain language) in the Constitution Act.

 
I wouldn't be surprised, but there are still plenty of oxygen thieves in different parties.

Given that cabinet seems to be more of an award to the leader's faithful vice competence I'm not sure that really matters. Similarly how many of the electoral candidates are chosen based on potential to be good MPs vice toeing the party line? Across party lines competence and ability seem to be a secondary consideration generally, and in some recent cases seem to actually be a disadvantage.
 
Starting points for me:

Public service should be cut back to 2015 levels as a percentage of population and then adjusted for population gain. But I want to see an immediate cap on FTE's that means that no department can grow without losses in others. Buy out if needed but there will be a two year timeline involved to implement.
-staff with previous performance issues, less than 1 year on the job and those eligible for retirement should plan for new employment.
  • supervisors must supervise at least 4 people and I don't want to see managers until you're supervising 100+.
  • new hiring must be considered on the basis of remote work (very valid for some positions) which then must be advertised Canada wide and at last resort hired in Ottawa.
  • Ottawa should not be the majority of the public service and distributed staff will be the norm.

I want to see investment focused upon gaining Canadian economic efficiency. A public listing should show what the economic return of say...twining the entire Trans-Canda Highway over 10 years vs. economic gains involved.
- When I hear of political announcements being made - municipal/provincial or federal - I want to see what the improvement to the regional/national economy will be and I frankly think of it as cost/employment. If a highway interchange is costing a million dollars a job created I start to question if that is effective use of funds.


Enough with boil water and housing shortages on Reserves. We give away billions annually to other countries and Canadian residents don't have drinking water? Tough to promote wells in Africa if you're not going to do things at home and have any credibility.
  • As part of this I want to see massive small home construction promoted. Go back to the Sears Catalog of the 1950's (800 sqft homes) and ordering a house in flatpack form. Every trade school teaching construction trades can be involved and/or employers hiring new apprentices.
  • I also want to see some smaller scale apartment complexes developed. 12 plexes or equivalent and start building like crazy on DnD bases, First Nation Reserves and if needed remote areas especially in the north.

Taxes...I want to go via the Norway route? Employers must file tax paperwork by end of January. In March each resident gets a copy of their reported income and then either validates its' correct or updates for any missing paperwork. Why is CRA auditing Tax returns for income tax papers that they already have? I want them focused on missing income (multimillion dollar house purchase with no income in Canada), abuse and frankly the fraud.
  • As part of this number companies must show all owners/update directors annually. This speaks the inconsistent housing ownership records and how much money is liquated through real estate.
  • A heavy audit emphasis upon Canadian companies based outside the country.

EI. Ideally it would transition to something more like a 401K in the USA where each Canadian tax payer would get an annual update that would show how much they have contributed to CPP, EI, TFSA, RRSP and RESP.
  • RESP I would expand to age 30 for eligibility.
  • EI will be a consistent threshold for eligibility no mater where in the country you live. EI funds payment can not exceed 2x contributions unless the payment is due to parental/maternity leave. So if you're a young adult and start a family you're okay but if you're expecting to sit around for 8 months every year on the basis of partial payments....time for a new career.

Immigration
  • Temporary Foreign Workers must be paid 125% of local wages for the same jobs. Not eligible to recruit if local unemployment is over 5% regardless of sector
  • All temporary workers must be housed in single rooms. Rent charged can not exceed 40% of wages and must be part of written contract prior to hiring.
  • Immigration numbers will be set based upon provincial capacity to absorb new people and immigration will require a minimum 5 years residency in that province.
  • Non-Nato countries will be capped at no more than 8% per country immigration per year. Exceptions will be made for unexpected situations only through parliamentary bill + endorsement by 50% of provinces (Ukranian refugees for example)
  • Only for select professions will there be no limits (i.e. doctors) based upon at least 50% of provinces declaring shortages.
  • Out of Country post secondary students will not be allowed to work unless it is directly related to their profession (i.e. engineering student working at the university for a professor, Culinary student working for restaurant part time) and not to exceed 20 hours a week. All students must show sufficient income to rent a single bedroom apartment + utilities + food. This is to be published by each school.

CRTC
  • If industry wont fund it I want reliable highspeed internet in every Canadian community + airport + transCAnada highway. That means a minimum of 2 bars of service.
  • I want to see maps showing the actual coverage offered, by owner. Not the theoritical with a booster if you hold your tongue just right coverage. Start with the largest gaps (people wise) in coverage, publish the list, and start the contracts going.

More especially on the DND side I can think of but it's a start...
 
I wouldn't be surprised, but there are still plenty of oxygen thieves in different parties.

Given that cabinet seems to be more of an award to the leader's faithful vice competence I'm not sure that really matters. Similarly how many of the electoral candidates are chosen based on potential to be good MPs vice toeing the party line? Across party lines competence and ability seem to be a secondary consideration generally, and in some recent cases seem to actually be a disadvantage.
Oxygen thieves are everywhere. Not just Parliament and the Civil Service. And I do think you're onto something - competence takes a back seat to a party faithful toeing the line type - Right JWR and AA?
 
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation Canadian Taxpayers Federation and its youtube page Canadian Taxpayers Federation is a whole fountain of wasteful government spending, at ALL levels . Need more insight, check them out.

I was shocked to find out that Canada funded foreign porn writers to write erotica and describe it as "promoting art..." please. That is one example of probably thousands of well hidden wasted dollars.
 
Back
Top