The cheaper option -

The cheaper option


The difference between what the NDP asked for and what the government’s budget offered in terms of aid for seniors is $400 million.

If the government declines to renegotiate the budget in the next 48 hours, the election that will result from the defeat of that budget will cost approximately $300 million—the last campaign cost an estimated $288.2 million to run.


The cheaper option

  1. Or 200 gun registries.

    Or 4 payments to Tony Clements riding following the G 20

    Or 8 one-time advertising for the stimulus.

  2. Cimon now AW, there are principles at stake here, principles i tell you!

    Sarcasm alarm on…check…check…seems to be working fine.

  3. Going to be even more costly if Harp gets another minority.

  4. I'm not sure it's that simple. I doubt Layton would turn around and support the budget if the government boosted the Guaranteed Income Supplement by $700M instead of $300M.

    Also, any increases to GIS are presumably intended to stay at that level in subsequent years. In other words, Layton is asking for $700M annually going forward ($ 3.5 billion over 5 years, etc.) This means it isn't really comparable to the cost of an election, which is (hopefully) not an annual expenditure.

  5. Or one 15th of a G20 photo-op.

  6. I've got you as my write in vote for PM, OriginalEmily1!

  7. It is simplistic to say this Mr. Wherry. It was simplistic for Coyne to say it on "At Issue"!

    This is Not about the Money, it is about the incredible Contempt of the party that is proposing to spend it. We have No idea about the Real Numbers.

    At 56 billion a year this Dismal Government cost us 460,000,000 every three Days!

    Flaherty does not know Numbers!

  8. How does it stack up with Harper's annual advertising budget and signage monitoring program, should he stay in power?

  9. Oh he knows. He is well remembered for cooking the books in Ontaro.

  10. Well then, would Jack support a budget that contained 700 million for seniors? It seems like a fitting question for a reporter to ask. Perhaps, Aaron, you could ask it, and report back to us.

  11. Puuuuleeeze Aaron, the GIS is a recurring yearly expense whereas the election costs are a one time charge.

    OMG, I hope you have an accountant doing your income taxes, lol!!!

  12. No point, really, as Mr. Flaherty has already said he won't negotiate.

  13. LOL that'll take some doing!

  14. In the simplest of terms, the difference is a $300 million election now vs a $300 million election one year from now. At today's interest rates, not much difference.

    False economics.

  15. Oh that's a complete and utter load of horsehockey, Mr Wherry. I'm sorry (well, not really) but elections are just one of those things we need to pay for. It's like the police and fire department, or an electrical bill or a gas bill or an oil change or a trip to buy groceries. In my HUMBLE opinion (heh heh), NO ONE should have ANY right to gripe about the cost of an election. It's part of the basic cost of living in a liberal democracy.

  16. I was wondering about that. Is that the case it's an annual cost – not a one off? That wouldn't make sense would it?

  17. If the government really didn't want an election, shouldn't they be asking Layton what it would take for him to vote for the budget? But Flaherty slammed the door on any negotiations.

  18. NDP wants money to go to wealthy senior citizens, while budget made sure it went to just those in need. Seems reasonable to me.

  19. Uhhhh, do you know how the GIS works?…

  20. Gawd yes, we're still trying to clean up the mess.

  21. It's a top for seniors with the lowest income. Can't remember what the income ceiling is but it's really low – over that and benefits are clawed back.

  22. Not only does an election save the Canadian taxpayer over $100 million, it beggars the opposition. Onward!

    Cats Oy Vey!

  23. You never know. Maybe all the folks who think this election is "unnecessary" will boycott it and you'll squeak in on the low turnout :-).

  24. We need more women in politics. OriginalEmily1 is that women. She has just the right amount of smugness, condescension and indignation to be a political leader.

  25. LOL

  26. Pssst….your sexism and class envy is showing.

  27. It's for seniors trying to survive on extremely low incomes.

  28. So you were never in favour of helping poor seniors then – this attitude is what is wrong with you Cons.

  29. Given the current government's propensity to spend our money, I expect they'll give in to Layton and spend the money as he asks, still manage to force an election and spend the money on that, plus spend $25 million advertising all of this as part of Canada's Economic Action Plan.

  30. This has nothing to do with the budget. This is about Harper’s contempt for Parliament and democracy. He has got to go.

  31. Jack Layton should stand up in the House and say loudly that he would be willing to forgo an election if the Conservatives would put the 300 million of forgone election cost towards the senior citizen's supplements.

    Jack should be the one to do so. He is the one in position for calling off the election.

    The Conservative government, within its presented budget, has come towards Layton and some of his demands. Layton only has so much support by means of seats within the House. He has no right to demand everything. Percentage-wise, the Conservative budget has included NDP demands as much as the votes of the last election had decided upon.

    If Layton feels he has the legitimate voice to ask for more, let him stand up in the House and demand so publically, for everyone to see how much he is for the people of this country.

    Let's stop the charade.

  32. No matter which party would have been in power during the G-20 summit, cost would have incurred.

    The outrage should be about such costs for any of those silly events. The question should be why we need those top level meetings in this day and age when we have so many other means of communication at our disposal.

  33. Very good remark, Crit!

    Question to the politicians: Why can't they manage to explain things to us in simple terms??? Or the msm for that matter………..

  34. And really, most of the election costs are dished out to workers on election day. And so such election expenditures end up in the hands of Canadians anyway.

    So what's the real complaint,. really.

  35. Why are you like this? Why do some people always feel the need to avoid giving a decent answer or remark?

    Why always the negative attitude against the Conservative voter? Do you ever ask yourself that question?

  36. Good Point! Although I suspect that was a surprise to him as well. I am afraid to see the mess that they will leave us. check the URL i left!

  37. You are blinded by loyalty.

  38. Let's flush the crap.

  39. Evidenced by Baird today – railing about the unfairness of the committee having a majority of opposition votes against them. It's the same in the House, John. You are a minority government.

  40. The $50 million was extra gravy to keep the dullard minister of Industry in office, silly.

  41. I regret that I have but two thumbs to up at your post, good sir.

  42. soooooo much wrong with this post.

  43. The difference between what the NDP asked for and what the government's budget offered in terms of aid for seniors is $400 million.

    PER ANNUM. At TODAY'S DEMOGRAPHICS. I am reliably informed that everyone gets one year older every year, and there will be a lot more of this demographic in the coming years.

    But you knew that. Surely you knew that. Didn't you know that? What, you no longer read the comments to your own posts?

  44. I would suggest that informing us of whether 700 million for seniors would be enough for Layton to approve the budget is relevant public information and that informing voters counts as a 'point'.

    Besides, Flaherty may change his mind, specially with Harper's talk today of wanting to avoid an election. If Harper is lying about that, why not call his bluff? If Layton says that the price of avoiding an election is roughly the same as the price of holding an election (300-400 million), Harper would seem pretty stupid to say no to that.

  45. and, as usual, you're incapable of actually putting any of it into words. by your commenting pattern of dismissive one-liners, it is rather clear that you are simple-minded. and there's nothing wrong with that. but it is rather tiresome that, blissfully unaware of your condition, you keep insulting those with the capacity to express actual ideas.

  46. Only an aspiring dictator could describe an election as wasteful. Only a willing subject could believe it.

  47. Ignorance == bliss?

  48. It's probably because she hates the troops. [/sarc]

  49. "Mr. Layton, would you mind publicly stating your negotiating positions?"

    Mr. Layton: "Sure, just as soon as the government publicly states what their crime bills and jets will cost."

  50. interesting take… so Layton shouldnt have to disclose what it takes to pass the budget – well if that's the case, Aarron's suggestion that giving 700 million to seniors is the "cheaper option" or at least substantially similar is complete and utter BS, because that suggestion is clearly based on the idea that Layton would pass the budget if it included 700 million for seniors.

    i guess its understandable that you're bitter considering that your party stinks and you're about to lose another election, but that doesnt mean that the rules of logic are temporarily suspended in your favour.

  51. "so Layton shouldnt have to disclose what it takes to pass the budget"

    As I recall, Mr. Layton already outlined what he wanted to the PM.

    Why would Mr. Layton weaken his negotiating position (if the PM were willing to negotiate, that is) by then saying "but we'll settle for this."

    You don't haggle much, do ya/

  52. And as to your pointless statement
    "i guess its understandable that you're bitter considering that your party stinks and you're about to lose another election"

    My party? You make an assumption here.

    Don't have a party, not since i was 14 and the cute girl at school invited me to a young Liberal meeting. Turned out she just wanted me for my membership fee and a vote to make her a delegate to some party convention. I've been cynical about parties ever since.

    Like most of the population, I don't have a party membership, and don't donate to political parties. The current crop of leaders make my teeth ache. I have a varied voting history. I hope this doesn't make it too hard for you to categorize my opinions. I'm sure you'll think of something.

  53. that's fine, like i said, either Layton is willing to compromise, and avoid an election, or not.

    this post by AW is predicated on the idea that Harper could avoid an election for the cost of holding an election.

    i call major double-BS on that.

    as usual, AW is just shilling for his dear Liberals, and he's as slimy as bullsh1tters come. i dont see why you're defending him.