Now, this is why you always have to read the original for yourself. Over here, self-proclaimed rhetorician and Blogging Tory Jesse Gritter presumes to give us all a quick lesson in logical analysis:
"The conservatives are cutting funding in ineffective climate change programs ..."
Well, good for them. I'm all for that. If they've identified and publicized obviously ineffective parts of Canada's climate change strategy, then they have my full and unqualified ... hang on ... what's this? If we follow the link to read the actual story (emphasis added):
Though Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn has said a number of climate change initiatives had been deemed ineffective, he didn't say which ones or what the consequences will be.
OK, then. Bad rhetorician. No biscuit.
QUELLE SURPRISE: As The Jurist points out over here at The Globe:
The documents said that while the Tories are trying to save money by cutting the programs designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, they won't cut government staff positions, so most of the money earmarked for climate change will be going to salaries for bureaucrats.
"Only $375-million was approved for climate spending, with most of the dollars covering staff salaries until the new government determines next steps.
"What is clear is that staff will have little to do and that they will have no budgets to spend over the next year and that more cuts are coming."
I'm already starting to feel outrage fatigue.
4 comments:
Apparently Lunn has a rather different definition of efficiency than, say, the Treasury Board, as the programs on the chopping block include many which were specifically identified as "cost effective". Meanwhile, the Cons will continue to fund the existing bureaucracy, even though the program cuts will leave the department with little to do. It's the kind of government efficiency that only Grover Norquist could love.
Link
A beaurocracy with nothing to do is the perfect management tool for the policy of staying in Kyoto without actually trying to reach the targets.
It's good to see a politician keep his promises.
CC wrote: "... self-proclaimed rhetorician and Blogging Tory Jesse Gritter presumes ..."
Can you please find where I proclaimed myself to be a rhetorician?
Also, you missed the point of my post. It was to demonstrate the fallaciousness of believing that the Conservative government doesn't care about the environment.
jesse gritter responnds, "It was to demonstrate the fallaciousness of believing that the Conservative government doesn't care about the environment."
so, suspending all of the programs, working, effective or otherwise, while maintaining a hamstrung bureaucracy, equals caring for the environment. well perhaps those millions of dollars in salary will keep those civil servants off the streets, where they might litter. hey jesse, poop is the same colour as chocolate, but we ain't eating it.
Post a Comment