New syntax for Twitter #ottawaspends

For a while now, I've been 'tweeting' whenever the government issues a press release announcing that it is spending some money. Since the federal election last October, I have counted 544 such announcements of spending totalling about $35 billion.

A reminder/update on this particular Twitter feed/hashtag and an explanation of the new syntax/abbreviations used in this hashtag.

• I'm only putting up the tweet on the day the announcement is actually made. So, for that reason, #ottawaspends will not be a complete list of all spending announcements. If I'm off the job for a day or two, I will not be putting up tweets with day-old or two-day-old announcements. So these will be “Fresh” tweets only.

• I've changed the syntax of the Tweets. Here's the order of information:

  1. Last NAME OF MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR RELEASE. Note that MOORE refers JAMES MOORE, Heritage Minister and should not be confused with ROB MOORE, NB MP and Parl Secy to Justice Minister. Click here for a full list of Ministers and their portfolios
  2. ACRONYM FOR DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR FUNDING The list of acronyms can be found here for major govt institutions and here for smaller agencies and offices. I use the English acronyms. Some are missing and so here they are: (I've made these up)
    • Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: ACOA
    • Canadian Heritage: PCH
    • Canada Economic Development for Quebec Region: CEDQR
    • Citizenship and Immigration: CIC
    • Foreign Affairs and International Trade: DFAIT
    • Sustainable Development Technology Canada: STDC
  3. Last NAME OF MP ANNOUNCING FUNDING (If no local MP makes the announcement, then the minister's name appears here again). Here is a full list of MPs.
  4. DESCRIPTION of initiative receiving funding
  5. MUNICIPALITY where announcement was made, but not necessarily where money will be spent
  6. Two-letter acronoym for the PROVINCE in which announcement was made but not necessarily province where money will be spent. XC means the announcement was made outside Canada.
  7. DOLLAR AMOUNT for funding project – federal portion only
  8. JURISDICTION where money will be spent. It will either be by province or NAT to indicate the money will flow to Canadians in 2 or more provinces or XC if money will be spent outside Canada.
  9. Appropriate hashtags like #ottawaspends

So, one recent tweet is:

Nicholson JUS Paradis Conference for Societe de Criminologie du Quebec. Montreal QC $15,000 QC #ottawaspends

That means that:

On the day of the tweet, MP Christian Paradis on behalf of Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice, announced $15,000 for the Societe de Criminolige du Quebec. The announcement was made or carries a dateline of Montreal, Quebec and it appears from a plain reading of the release that most of the money will actually be spent in the province of Quebec.

Some questions answered about this —

I've had the odd complaint that there are simply too many tweets on this. I hear you but, in the end, that's what you get if sign up to follow a reporter. I report! I've also had more positive than negative feedback about #ottawaspends.

Now, as to the volume — it ramps up whenever the politicians leave Ottawa. They make these spending announcements when they're back in their riding and can be present for the grip-and-grin photos of the cheque being handed out. When the House of Commons is sitting, #ottawaspends will likely be very quiet.

Some asked why do this: Beats me. Twitter is new for all of us but it was my thinking that, as a reporter, I am never going to write a full story about a $5,000 announcement. I'm probably not even going to blog it. But give me 140 characters of space — sure, why not? And, as I and others have noticed, in reporting all the small announcements, some broader more interesting trends in government spending are emerging.

Of course, #ottawaspends belongs to no one. If you've got your own syntax or short forms you want to use, knock yourself out. If you want to let me know your rules, I'll be happy to post 'em here and, perhaps, create a separate Web page with them.

And don't forget, feel free to follow me on Twitter for all my tweets plus the #ottawaspends ones that I generate.

UPDATE – DEC 17/09: I have been adding one more data point to these tweets. I have been trying to determine what riding some of this money will be spent in and when I do, I am now noting that on the end each tweet. So: “#CPC riding Toews” means the funding for the given announcement will be spent almost entirely in a Conservative riding and that riding belongs to the MP who last name is Toews. “#CPC ridings” means the funding will be spent in two or more Conservative ridings. “M” means the funding will be spent in two or more ridings and those ridings are held by two or more parties.

Duelling perspectives on science funding

Gary Goodyear, Minister of State for Science and Technology, was in Waterloo, Ont. this morning to announce that the federal government had invested $50 million in the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo. Here are the 'key messages' from the government's press release on the issue:

“This strategic investment will help make Canada a global leader in the field of quantum technology and attract some of the best and brightest researchers and students from Canada and around the world,” said Goodyear. “With this investment, the IQC will be better positioned to build on existing successes and contribute to Canada's global advantage by helping to create jobs, improve the quality of life for all Canadians and strengthen the economy for future generations.”

…As a part of its ongoing support for this strategy, the government has pledged over $2.2 billion in new S&T funding. Canada's Economic Action Plan provides more than $5.1 billion toward S&T initiatives. This measure will contribute to the creation of a stronger, more innovative economy and a more prosperous Canada.

Meanwhile in Montreal, Liberal Industry Critic Marc Garneau, the former astronaut and academic, issued a release criticizing the government for cutting the budget of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) which, in turn has cut the budget for the Mont Megantic Astronomical Observatory (which bills itself as the largest such facility in eastern North America) by $140,000 this year and $325,000 for subsequent years, according to Garneau. Here are the key messages for the Liberals:

The observatory may no longer be able to provide higher education opportunities to hundreds of high-level scientists as it has done for decades, Mr. Garneau added.

“The communities surrounding the observatory have demonstrated they care about this institution, mobilizing to create the International Dark Sky Reserve, a remarkable initiative,” added Mr Garneau. “Moreover, the observatory is an important tourist draw that welcomes many amateur astronomers every year.”

Mr. Garneau is asking the Harper government to reconsider what it is doing to the future of Canada’s scientific community.

“This is just one example of how this visionless government simply does not grasp how science, research and innovation are the foundations of a strong economy and the jobs of tomorrow. They have cut federal funding for research in universities and granting agencies, and Canada’s overall public-private investment in research has failed to keep pace with the world.

I also note this morning that my alma mater, the University of Guelph, has taken a full-page in the back of the front section of the Ottawa edition of The Globe and Mail to beg for money..

Conservatives feuding in eastern Alberta?

Conservatives MPs are apparently feuding in caucus over Brian Mulroney; Conservatives in one Calgary riding are fighting for the right to hold a nomination meeting to replace incumbent Conservative MP Rob Anders; and now, another long-running feud in eastern Alberta is heating up again.

The newly elected board of Conservative riding association in Vegreville-Wainwright — a board that the incumbent MP Leon Benoit didn't want elected — and the national council of the Conservative Party are at odds over the rights to hold a nomination meeting.

  Leon Benoit (left) has survived other challenges from within his own riding association. Benoit, who grew wheat and canola on his own farm while acting as a farm economist with Alberta Agriculture before going into politics, is among the “Class of 1993”, one of the MPs who rolled into Ottawa on the first Reform wave led by Preston Manning. That group included such rock-ribbed Reformers as recently retired Bob Mills (Red Deer), Myron Thompson (Wild Rose), and Art Hanger, (Calgary Northeast), as well as folks like Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat) and current Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl (Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon).

So what's with Benoit? Unlike Anders — whose parliamentary career has not exactly been filled with a lot of highlights — the Conservative leadership has had enough confidence in Benoit that it made him a committee chairman in the current Parliament and the last two. Committee chairs are not handed out lightly and can often be testing grounds for future cabinet material.

Now, that said, while some committee chairs — I'm thinking here of people like Edmonton's James Rajotte — earn the respect of their opposition colleagues and do a reasonable job of producing good work without excessive partisan rancour, Benoit may not be one of those. In the last Parliament, while he chaired the committee on International Trade, he so frustrated NDP MP Peter Julian that Julian once filibustered a committee meeting and then was set, along the with the Liberals, to try to unseat him. Benoit eventually adjourned the committee permanently. (An opposition vice-chair reconvened the committee). Benoit never went back, moving on instead to chair the natural resources committee, where he continues in the current Parliament.

Benoit's riding association president Danny Hozack told the local paper, he wants a nomination meeting not so that Vegreville voters can pass judgement on Benoit “but a referendum on fair elections. “We just want to make sure everyone gets out and votes.”

The Conservative national council recently ruled that MPs won't have to worry about facing nomination battles. In other words, incumbents are safe. (Edmonton MP Mike Lake faced down a nasty challenge from Tim Uppal during the last Parliament and Lake complained that he was forced to leave Ottawa to sell memberships and beat back Uppal's challenge. Uppal would later find another seat in Edmonton when John Williams Ken Epp retired and Uppal was elected in 2008.)

“At a time like this when we are focusing so much and working hard with a serious financial crisis, it’s hardly time to take our attention away to fight nominations,” Benoit told the Lloydminster Meridian Booster . “I know the Prime Minister was very concerned that MPs (would) have their focus taken away from the business at hand.”

Now, Hozack might be talking a good game about the right to fair election but his history with Benoit suggests he very much wants a referendum on Benoit. The last time there was a nomination battle in Vegreville, Hozack backed a guy named Len Landry against Benoit.

Now, at this point, I'm relying on what I can dig up in the Meridian Booster, The Wainwright Review, and some other local papers but there appears to be a bit of a personal beef between Benoit and Hozack. As always, I look forward to your comments below or e-mail messages to flesh this out a bit.

Hozack, during the 2006 election, suggested publicly that Benoit was “losing ground”, a comment Benoit wasn't exactly thrilled about seeing in print. Much internal riding association politicking later, the riding association members gathered in January to elect their 30-person executive. Well, it looks like it was a helluva fight. According to the Wainwright Review, 53 people stood for that election. Benoit got up and argued that Conservatives ought to back all of the incumbents. A lot — 28! — of those Benoit-friendly incumbents lost. Benoit's son, running for the board, lost.

Hozack's people won. Hozack and Landry, who once lost the nomination battle to unseat Benoit, are now heavyweights on the board of Benoit's riding association.

“One wonders where this frustration is coming from. After all Leon did better in the last election than ever before,” wrote columnist Roger Holmes in the Wainwright Edge after the January board elections. “Perhaps the conservatives in this area are mad about the Harper government flip flops. Perhaps they are mad about being lied to regarding fixed election dates. Perhaps they mad about this government's broken promise never to run a deficit. Perhaps they mad about the government decision to cut and run in Afghanistan in 2011. Perhaps they mad about an MP who is on record in the beginning that MP's should have limited terms wanting to keep on having his term extended.”

The riding association fights in Anders riding in Calgary and in Benoit's riding on the Saskatchewan border are not inconsequential fights. The winner of these squabble becomes an MP. Benoit won the last election with 77 per cent of votes cast. He thinks it was because voters there like him. Others — other Conservatives — think it was because voters in Vegreville-Wainwright just like to vote for the blue team, not matter who is carrying the banner.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Senate agrees to 'Berry and Laptop use

The Parliamentary Press Gallery has successfully convinced the powers that be in the Senate to allow reporters to use their BlackBerrys and laptop computers in the Red Chamber.

Senate Speaker Noel Kinsella confirmed the news late last week to press gallery president Hélène Buzzetti.

Reporters have long been able to use their 'Berrys and laptops in the House of Commons but until recently, the use of those gadgets was seen as a distraction by many senators which meant that reporters attending debates there could rely only on paper and pen.

Now that we can blog, tweet, and otherwise communicate direct from the Red Chamber, I suspect you'll be seeing a lot more Senate news!! I know I can't wait for the day my parliamentary schedule includes Senate QP at 1330 and House of Commons QP at 1415!

Calling all G4 Cube owners — who's upgraded their processor?

200904051922

I've been a Mac guy for a very long time (I can remember what a big deal it was when I moved our university paper's network to System 7!) and one of my favourite pieces of Apple hardware is the G4 Cube (left). My Cube is the slow one — the 450 Mhz “Trinity” with the 20 GB (!) hard drive.

The drive, after years of silent service, has finally given up the ghost.

I'm thinking that, while I've got the Cube on the computer shop hoist to replace the drive, I might as well upgrade the processor.

Now, over the years I've heard bits and pieces about the advisability/difficulty of this procedure. So, before I shell out the dough and crack open the case, anyone out there — and only 150,000 Cubes were made before Apple discontinued them — got any experience with this or can point me to some reputable bulletin boards on this subject?

My usual computer vendor for this stuff is Other World Computing, now MacSales.com, and they have three processor upgrades they can sell me: All three are from PowerLogix. I can choose to move up to a 1 Ghz processor, a 1.5 Ghz processor or a dual 1.5 Ghz processor. I'm leaning to the 1.5 Ghz processor – as this machine is used at this point for not much more than e-mail, Web surfing and light word pro duties. I want to be be able to install Leopard on it (which requires at least a G4 running at 1 Ghz).

So what's your advice?

Technorati Tags:

Shea gets grilled on anti-Liberal press releases

A month or so ago, Liberal Senator Mac Harb introduced a private members' bill in the Senate that would have effectively ended the seal hunt in Atlantic Canada. Not a single Senator, Liberal or Conservative, would second that bill and, as a result, it died.

Conservative Fisheries Minister Gail Shea and Conservative Senator Fabian Manning issued press releases on government letterhead and at government expense denouncing Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and his “hidden agenda” on the seal hunt.

Shea's officials would subsequently concede that these press releases were issued in error.

Earlier this week, Minister Shea made her first appearance in front of the Senate's Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Liberal Senator Bill Rompkey is the chair of that committee. Here is an excerpt of an exchange between Shea, who represents a PEI riding, and Senator James Cowan of Nova Scotia (left).

James CowanSenator Cowan: Welcome, minister. I was pleased to hear your comments during your opening statement on the seal hunt and the government's support for a sustainable and humane seal hunt. As you know, that is also the position of the Liberal Party of Canada. I do not know about other parties, but there is a common support for that seal harvest or hunt between the two major parties in the country.

I wanted to give you an opportunity to clarify a few things with respect to that. This is obviously a highly controversial issue amongst some people, and we all agree that there are people who are less interested in the seals than they are perhaps in promoting their own fundraising efforts for other purposes. You are aware as well that Senator Harb introduced a bill in the Senate and could not find a single senator anywhere in the place to support him in any way. I think that says something about the judgment of the rest of the Senate. I am troubled because on March 3, your department published and distributed a statement by my colleague Senator Manning, which said amongst other things that sealers need to know that the Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party want to ban the seal hunt. That is clearly wrong and inaccurate, but most importantly for the purposes of my question this morning, your department subsequently acknowledged that it was inappropriate to have published the statement of a private parliamentarian on a government website and to distribute that at government expense.

first question is, were you advised by anybody in your department that it was inappropriate to have posted and distributed that? If so, why did you go ahead and do it? If not, why not? Also, was an invoice issued to the Conservative Party of Canada, as you indicated it would be? How much was that invoice, and has the invoice been paid? ..

On that same day, you issued a statement alleging that there was a hidden agenda on the part of the Liberal Party, and in that statement, you said what is more telling are the actions of Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, and that his approval of such appalling legislation, referring to the Harb bill, has exposed the hidden agenda of the Liberal Party to put an end to Canada's sealing industry. What evidence did you have then and do you have now that would support that statement?

Ms. Shea: I guess it would be a lack of evidence, starting with your last question, because if the Liberal Party of Canada supported the seal hunt, then I would expect that there would be a statement to that effect from the leader, which I do not believe we have seen. I will say that even the introduction of legislation without a seconder, when that type of stuff hits the airwaves in Europe, undermines many things that we have been trying to do in Europe to promote the seal hunt.

With respect to the press release, it was not the department. It was an administrative error and should never have happened. I am not sure if the bill for the press release has gone to the Conservative Party of Canada, because I do not have that information, but that is who the bill was to go to.

Senator Cowan: On the last point, will you find out? Perhaps you would be good enough to table the invoice here and, as well, indicate whether it was paid.

Ms. Shea: Certainly.

Senator Cowan: With respect to the bill, you will agree with me that private members in either the House of Commons or in the Senate are entitled to introduce bills into their respective legislative chambers, and those bills are not necessarily supported by the party of whom that individual member or senator is a member. Is that correct?

Ms. Shea: I do not know what your experience has been, but normally bills, in my experience . . .

Senator Cowan: I am speaking of private member's bills.

Ms. Shea: … Even private member's bills, if a member of your party is bringing forward a bill, I would expect that members of your party would be aware of it.

Senator Cowan: As an example, the recent [Conservative MP Garry] Breitkreuz bill, is introduced by a private member, a Conservative member. Is that a bill supported by the Conservative government? Ms. Shea: We will have to wait and see. Senator Cowan: I believe it is not, and I believe the government has already distanced itself. That is my point. I suggest to you that it is unfair to allege that an individual bill which you know received no support from any member of the Senate has the support of the leader and the party of which that person is a member. I suggest that is unfair, and I would ask you to acknowledge that.

The Chair: I think the time has passed and I would like to go on to other questioners. We are trying to monitor the time carefully, and I think we are being as accurate as we can.

How tough was Netanyahu's talk on Iran?

Jeffrey Goldberg is an American, an award-winning journalist, and volunteered once with the IDF, serving as a prison guard. He scored an interview with Benjamin Netanyahu shortly before Netanyahu was sworn in as Israeli prime minister. The resulting piece was published by The Atlantic with the following headline and tease:

The message from Israel's new prime minister is stark: if the Obama administration doesn't prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, Israel may be forced to attack.

An Atlantic exclusive
by Jeffrey Goldberg

Netanyahu to Obama: Stop Iran—Or I Will

The Atlantic and Goldberg were subsequently criticized because, in the opinion of one commentator, the promise of the headline was not fulfilled in the article. In other words, the headline writer torqued the piece — and, in this particular subject area, torque can be a dangerous thing. Or at least that's what Gary Rosenblatt of The Jewish Week concluded (after saying many nice things about Goldberg):

Nowhere in the Goldberg piece does Netanyahu say that Israel plans to attack Iran, nor does it even hint that the new Israeli leader will offer an ultimatum to Obama.

What it does say, as Netanyahu has been saying now for several years, is that Israel must convince the U.S. and the rest of the world that a nuclear Iran is a threat not only to Israel but to the U.S. and everyone else.

Goldberg, on his blog, replies to this criticism and defends the headline:

I'll give you two quotes that I neglected to include in the first piece. The first one is from one of Netanyahu's defense advisers, speaking on background: “We have to make sure our friends in Washington know that we can't wait forever. There will come a point soon when it will be too late to do anything about this program. We're going carefully, but if we have to act, we will act, even if America won't.”

The second is from Netanyahu: “Iran has threatened to annihilate a state or to have a state wiped off the map of the world. In historical terms, this is an astounding thing. It's a monumental outrage that goes effectively unchallenged in the court of public opinion. Sure, there are perfunctory condemnations, but there's no j'accuse – there's no shock and there's a resigned acceptance that this is acceptable practice. Bad things tend to get worse if they're not challenged early. Iranian leaders talk about Israel's destruction or disappearance while simultaneously creating weapons to ensure its disappearance.”

As a journalist, what I find odd is: The stuff Goldberg put in his blog absolutely makes the headline work. Why didn't he put that in the original piece?

DND's unprofitable land flip deal

The Department of National Defence, of course, is not in the real estate business. Still, its latest transaction is a little unfortunate.

In 2002 — just at the end of decades of neglect by Liberal and Progressive Conservative governments — DND decided it could live without 373 hectares of land at CFB Shearwater in Nova Scotia. So it sold the chunk of land for $1.5 million to the Canada Lands Company, the federal Crown corporation which “optimizes the financial and community value of strategic Government of Canada properties.” Well, CLC optimized all right.

Turns out that, now that Liberal and Conservative governments are giving DND some cash again, the air force has decided it needs that 373 hectares back again.

And so today it announced that it had bought that land back from CLC. Total purchase price: $7.9 million.

The good news is that both DND and the CLC have the same shareholder: The Canadian taxpayer.

More money for magazines: This time it's snowmobilers

200904031630.jpg

Last week, I noted in this space that Heritage Minister James Moore had announced a grant to REPORT magazine, an unabashedly conservative magazine and, quite possibly, a haven for separatists (albeit of the Western kind). Many thought I was off my rocker for failing to note that the government funds all sorts of magazines. That, though, was not the point. The government funds all sorts of things but when it issues a press release it, presumably, wants us to pay particular attention to that particularly funding announcement (which, as it turns out, may also be new therefore qualifying it as, what we call in my business, “News”). But I digress …

Last week's press release about funding for REPORT was, so far as I can tell, the first announcement in a year about dispursements from the magazine fund.

This afternoon, I am happy to draw your attention to the second such announcement I am aware of:

On behalf of the Honourable James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, Patrick Brown, Member of Parliament (Barrie), (standing in the middle in the photo above) today announced [$23,666 in] funding to support the creation of Canadian editorial content in Snow Goer Canada, an important magazine for Canadian snowmobile fans.

Liberals to Conservatives: Been there, done that

Liberal infrastructure critic Gerard Kennedy tells Infrastructure Minister John Baird that a couple of announcements from Baird's office today look awfully familiar:

Mr. Kennedy was referring to two announcements made by Mr. Baird this morning. At the first on Parliament Hill, [Baird] re-announced doubling federal gas tax funding for municipalities from $1 billion to $2 billion per year, as originally announced by the previous Liberal government when the gas tax method was introduced.

[Baird] then re-announced funds from the Building Canada Fund first announced by the Prime Minister in February at the same location – a GO Transit maintenance garage in Toronto.