"Minister Bucks Wildlife Fund Critics"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

...how much more transparency does the report have to provide for this particular program to make people happy ?

---

all depends on how much you trust them...
given their track record, a bit of mistrust is justified. pretty easy to gain it back or at least silence the squeaky wheel (those guys who feel they haven't received much back for their 900k), if you are willing to show the numbers (which they have).

delay in being fully transparent given previous scandals are the issue IMO

Your kidding right? Would you as the business owner except that amateurish attempt at a balance sheet referencing a public funded department?

It should be a year end report with a more detailed categorization and breakdown of funds v expenditures per category or a line item of each expenditure and to whom.

I wouldn't except the quoted part in blue above, as a consumer, as a detailed bill describing what I just spent 74 million on.

Its not unreasonable to even see councilmen, aldermen, etc. with a break down on cell phone charges, transportation charges broken down to rental cars, county car usage, fuel costs or costs for dinners and hotel rooms when conducting business.

They may be truly above board but how could you tell? Their lieing past doesn't lend credibility to their case.

Why would they say the SPA started in 2005?

McGarry's response is correct but a bit weird - the Province spends $100 Million on the MNR, but only about roughly 2/3rds of that is funded through licencing, service fees, and fines (the SPA). The Consolidated Revenue Fund (CFR) that is funded from general Provincial coffers only supplies around $30 million and is designated for capital projects. So, no, the SPA does not cover the 'Ministry's costs', but it does cover the operating costs of the whole fish and wildlife program.

ha ha...I line item expense report for $100 million....to what end ?

I'm sure a vast amount of people...probably close to 99% ...don't read the budget reports now, they sure the heck don't care how much was spent on windshield washer fluid... LOL...

Mike
Can I come manage your financial affairs....pretty please.

What good is it?
Well I "don't know".
Like they didn't know how the health ministry was spending money at Orange and when asked directly "I don't know"
Like we didn't know Unions have been getting "kick backs" for 10 years totally 80,000,000
Where have they spent 300billion in additional debt?

and obviously there are those who do care. Like this group that filed the FoI, odd that your making fun of it/them for it. And why should the obvious have to be stated.

Long story short.
Most "us" have for years, griped about the lack of funding from the province, our fees, diminishing returns, the lack of COs, the lack of enforcement, the lack of SO MUCH and that the public that doesn't pony up near enough and on and on. In essence, the same stuff this group is griping about...............................So what if it took being refused a measly $10,000 to break the camels back for them.....



"penny for your thoughts"
Not sure why your being obstinate/difficult on it. This group is saying/doing nothing the vast majority of us haven't done the past 15-20years.

The lions share of the financial cost is borne by the SPA, and as such,especially in this day with the plight the province is in, theres less and less going into the things they should be doing. When they cut the MNRs budget by 1% or 5% as they have been for years.......what does that mean for the SPA and ultimately our resources.

Thats

The bottom line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

I guess if your the anal type and don't accept simply that the wife spent $100 on groceries and demand to see the receipt so you can itemize what she bought for the $100... it might make sense to demand great transparency. Most folks are happy to concede that in order to eat..it costs $100.

My issue is that they publicly threw out individual items without context; like the cost to relocate an MNR employee, aimed only to sensationalize their case. Especially when such things are common place in any dept. and they themselves have probably benefited from similar employee perks.

---

I think you're missing their point... They chose those items within the context of their needs, which was/is 10 000$. The reason they want itemization is because they aren't trying to trip up the entirety of the MNR they're simply trying to show that 10grand could have been found for their legitimate program by cutting some small non-essentials.

if their cause was so noble they could have all chipped in 10 bucks and raised 14000 lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hunteronwheels

if their cause was so noble they could have all chipped in 10 bucks and raised 14000 lol

---

'So they don't deserve help because it would cost too little? there's some logic.

Thanks all who contributed to this thread.
The gov should be accountable to the last screw they buy, otherwise they will steal and lie.
We as 'the people' are responsible for their actions. We put them in charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vom Dufenshmirtz

Thanks all who contributed to this thread.
The gov should be accountable to the last screw they buy, otherwise they will steal and lie.
We as 'the people' are responsible for their actions. We put them in charge.

---

Damn straight. We put the idiots in there,now,it's up to us to kick 'em to hel* out. Seeing as how someone went to the trouble to repost this retro thread,I thought it was time to give it a reboot.