Of Gay Pride And Slush Funds

I have a couple of instant thoughts after hearing about the Harperites' decision to defund the Toronto Gay Pride festivities. First, I wonder how John Baird feels about all this and second, why is no one making the connection between this and the Sponsorship Scandal? As it is reported in the Star:

Industry Minister Tony Clement insisted Friday the decision has nothing to do with anti-gay sentiment among some members of the ruling Conservative caucus.

Rather, he said the government decided to fund fewer events in major cities this year so it can spread the money around more equitably to smaller centres. (emphasis mine)

Everyone with a brain knows that "smaller centres" means Conservative ridings. Why is no one asking why this money is being used as as a Conservative slush fund, much as the Sponsorship Fund was by the Liberals?

Recommend this Post

Did Harper Flunk Math?

Yesterday in the Commons, in response to a question from Jack Layton about the slush-fundy nature of stimulus spending, the PM said:

The fact is even this incomplete list indicates that the largest projects were in opposition ridings and almost half of the projects went into opposition ridings. That is what the list shows.

So, almost half of the projects went into opposition ridings, eh? That's great, but there is just one problem. Opposition seats make up about 54% of the ridings in Canada. In other words, they make up more than half the ridings in the country. Saying that they got "almost half of the projects"(which is only true btw if you consider 34% of the projects is "almost half" of the projects in the RinC fund) is a clear admission by the PM, that opposition ridings got less than their fair share of the projects. In a just world, such an admission would be accompanied by a resignation. Somehow, I doubt this will happen in Harper's Canada.

Recommend this Post