Especially the last bit:
Two months ago, the Tory government told Canadians that security costs for the two summits would be less than $200-million. In just eight weeks, those projections have nearly quintupled. The Harper government should be shame faced over either the sudden escalation of costs or their initial less-than-forthcoming estimates. And they might want to think twice before criticizing cost overruns by the previous Liberal government, such as the $1-billion gun registry.
Any idea how much these 'ear piercing sonic crowd control guns' cost?
ReplyDeleteIf assets like this are being included as an expense,
that explains quite a bit, eh.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/05/27/g20-toronto-police-buy-ear-piercing-sonic-guns-for-crowd-control/
I gather you have no idea how much these ear piercing sonic crowd control guns cost, wilson.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, such summits are best held in places like Kananaskis, where it's easier to establish a secure perimeter.
My guess...less than a billion. But then, I'm not a gun nut...
ReplyDeleteNext excuse, Shilson?
My, my - everything Harper does is just tickety boo with Wilson.
ReplyDeleteWilson - why comment. We know you'd defend Harper even if he shot your mother in the face.
Unbelievable.
It's going to cost almost half that just to get sergeant Pepper out of retirement.
ReplyDeleteHow much of thast is going to lying commenters on the internet?
ReplyDeletewilson & ridenrain...
ReplyDeleteSince you obviously don't have problems with huge cost overruns and tax dollars being wasted, I can only assume you must be employed by the PMO. Must be nice posting on political blogs with Harper disinformation and getting paid for it.
how do you think ridenrain pays for that much booze?
ReplyDeleteThe hair splitting by Harper supporters is to be expected. The self-contradictions are very funny. If we go back in the time machine, Alan Rock stood up in the House of Commons and justified the gun registry by saying the costs do not matter because he would save at least one person. Of course, the usual suspects have rejected that logic repeatedly about the registry , and criticized using the Montreal shooting as a singular event to justify the increased expenditures.
ReplyDeleteToday, the increased expenditures of the G-20 is needed even if it prevents an incident, and that lone firebombing in Ottawa surely demands the quadrupling of expenditures. History doesn't repeat itself, but it certainly rhymes.
As for the equipment costs, other U.S. summits had the same devices and were able to keep costs well under 100 million, so that is not an adequate. Two things are happening: Either PSFs or PMCs are fleecing the Canadian government, or the security planning for this summit has been done by incompetent drunkards.
Considering every wingnut and loose cannon usually falls under the "progressive" banner, I can see why they might want to gear up for this. There has never has been a protester that was so vile that the stopped the Liberals from courting their vote.
ReplyDeleteAs for the cost.. think of it as another, much beloved, Toronto stimulus hand out.