News Analysis
OTTAWA—On Parliament Hill, it can be hard to separate the wheat of an issue from the chaff of political positioning.
That certainly seems to be the case in the controversy surrounding a $3 billion expedited stimulus fund the Conservatives have set up to get infrastructure money out the door quickly.
On the one hand, the fund is necessary. With special measures it would be June at the earliest before final approvals would let this kind of spending get into infrastructure projects, and under normal circumstances it could be December.
On the other hand, the Conservatives have billions in approved infrastructure money left over from the current year, raising questions as to the government’s resolve to get such money spent.
While the Prime Minister has said the government is working on projects with other levels of government—implying those funds are in the process of getting spent—the government let $2 billion in infrastructure money lapse in the previous fiscal year.
The Liberals estimate the government has $3.9 billion in infrastructure funding remaining for the current fiscal year.
John Baird, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, told reporters last week that that money has been committed. That means there should be a tidal wave of funding announcements over the coming days given that the fiscal year ends March 31.
Mr. Baird also said that if that money isn’t spent, it doesn’t matter because that money can be carried over into the next fiscal year.
But Treasury Board Secretariat, Alister Smith, told the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates recently that unspent infrastructure money will lapse and return to general revenue rather than rolling over. If it does lapse, it would return to general revenue and lessen the government’s deficit—which the Liberals accuse the government of planning to do.
But whether the government has infrastructure money that will lapse or not is pretty much irrelevant given that everyone agrees that the additional money needs to get out there immediately.
It’s an interesting backdrop to the current controversy surrounding the government’s request for $3 billion in expedited funds. That money could get into the economy as early as April 1, sidestepping procedural delays within the Treasury Board.
The opposition parties are decrying the emergency fund as a “blank cheque.” The NDP has gone as far as calling it a “slush fund.” The budget passed final approval last week but budget estimates also require approval and the Liberals have said they will require a list of projects the $3 billion will be spent on before they grant approval.
It didn’t help matters that the Liberals got vague information from someone in the Treasury Board suggesting the Conservatives could spend the $3 billion on anything they fancied.
That information appears to have prompted the Official Opposition to take a harder line on the fund, demanding the government provide an itemized list of projects those monies could be spent on.
But in addition to contradicting Mr. Baird’s assertion that unspent infrastructure funds could be carried over, Mr. Smith also contradicted opposition suggestions that the expedited fund was unaccountable.
He said all money would pass normally required Treasury Board due diligence, but more importantly, he said the money was limited to Chapter 3 in the recently approved budget, a budget the Liberals supported in hopes of getting stimulus spending into the economy quickly.
Chapter 3 of the budget contains a number of stimulus programs, but actual projects will need to be determined in conjunction with the provinces.
The Liberals had in the past asked for a list of projects, but, perhaps reflecting new information that the emergency fund was limited to the budget, have more recently been asking for a list of programs.
The whole mess raises some challenging questions for Canadians trying to evaluate their elected representatives.
If the Liberals are demanding a list of programs, but those programs are listed in the budget they already approved, do they doubt the Treasury Board’s assertion that the money is limited to Chapter 3 of the budget? Do they not believe the budget they just approved identified those programs adequately?
Or is this all just political posturing with the opposition trying to show Canadians they are holding the government to account?
If the Conservatives need this money urgently, are they not in consultation with the provinces already about various projects it could go towards? Could they not disclose some of those projects, in tandem with the provinces, and resolve the opposition’s concerns? Even if the government can’t list specific projects, can’t it approximate dollar figures for the programs it plans to pump emergency funds into?
At the end of the day, it starts to look like a major difficulty for parliament is basic communication and cooperation. Opposition parties constantly try to embarrass the government and lay every problem in Canada at its feet. Meanwhile the Conservatives often deflect these attacks with vague responses that are as much insult as answer.
The good part of the scenario, as evidenced by the furor surrounding the $3 billion emergency fund, is that it is very difficult for the government to slip anything by without it getting scrutinized by the opposition parties and the media. The bad thing is it can be hard for citizens and political observers to tell which controversies really need investigating and which ones are mostly hot air.
Which means, more often than not, Canadians are taken on a hot air balloon ride by reporters doing their best to catch as much of each controversy as they can before another one erupts tomorrow. Whether or not that ends up serving the country depends on whether the balloon lifts citizens up to a place where they can get a good view, or just carries them away for a directionless trip to nowhere.
