We have this position in our government sucking copious dollars out of taxpayers pockets. What real need does Canada have of this role? Here is what has been said recently about the cost of flying this person and her family around the world on both "business" AND personal trips. What a complete crock. Time to do away with this role. The sooner the better...

The governor general's official spokeswoman, Marthe Blouin, said the trips were the only chance Jean had to enjoy time off away from her official duties and that it was the RCMP's "preference" she travel by government plane.

The governor general, according to Blouin, does not have to get approval to use the Challenger jets because she is commander-in-chief of the Canadian Forces and her office comes with the privilege.

The spending was also defended by Robert Finch, chairman of the Monarchist League of Canada, who said the costs aren't over the top for a head of state.

"It's not something I would lose sleep over," Finch said. "It's not unreasonable for the governor general to have access to jets to get her from place to place ... even on holidays."

You bet yea this is is one position that should be way scaled back and given a set budget . The unlimited use of the Challenger should stop now especially for family , pay your own way to her husband. Why should the taxpayer pay for Jean and the one before to jet off to France .
If they are on holidays they can take regular flight or pay some if not all the cost. This is a hang on to our colonial past and the position could be cut or really scaled back.
There is not only her travel there is the other associated cost the house the cars the guards the meals and some of those are pretty big .
Then the cost of the queen to come over every few years or one of the family we pay big time for this too.

We also have a Queen's rep in every province....

We're talking some very serious coin here.

I'm going to send a proposal to Harper. I'll cover all the provinces and Ottawa for a cost of 50% of what they're paying currently, and I'll include all clothes.

What is the matter with you people? Stop criticising! She is a fantastic representative for "friendly Canada"!
the previous GG did a fantastic job for Canada!

Besides she is a hot babe from Quebec, one of the very few hot babe's from Quebec! Most of the others are Madamme Plouffe's!

grumpy old man wrote:We have this position in our government sucking copious dollars out of taxpayers pockets. What real need does Canada have of this role? Here is what has been said recently about the cost of flying this person and her family around the world on both "business" AND personal trips. What a complete crock. Time to do away with this role. The sooner the better...

We have plans for this new white elephant called the Human Rights Museum which will be sucking copius dollars out of current and future generations of tax payers.

No one has been able to show Canada needs this new building.

Board members, who are among Canada's wealthiest families, will be flying around the world on "fact-finding" missions, all at tax payers expense. What makes this incestuous is that the committee that recommended these perks and the roles of the board members, was made up of people who applied for and ended up on Board of directors.

What a crock.

With a recession around the corner, it's time to cancel this project and put the money towards projects that everyone will benefit from, such as infrastructure renewal.

True conservatives are against the expansion of the Public Service (federal gov't jobs), and this museum will create government jobs. I say it's better to buy materials and services from the private sector to maintain our infrastructure than it is to do the same for the museum with the residual being the creation of costly federal gov't jobs.

Just sayin' is all.

How does wasting money on the Human rights museum got anything to do with wasting money on a hot skinny babe from Quebec?

The governments are elected to waste their money on projects that they seem fit to OK!

besides this Museum is the 1st Museum ever to be approvd to be built outside of Ottawa!

At least this expense will generate a lot of benefits for local workers and an ongoing income for Winnipeg with the visitors spending money on rooms and gifts and restaurants!

How many aboriginals, criminals, school children, will be flown , driven in from their northern jails, ghetto's, to see this?

This is a good thing and it costs us nothing! This is money coming from Ottawa! This is not our money! And Ottawa is spending all of their own money to keep it running!!

Remember if we build a stupid stadium or a rapid transit system to get part way out of downtown, Winnipeg has to spend some of its money, that Winnipeg does not have!!

The spending was also defended by Robert Finch, chairman of the Monarchist League of Canada, who said the costs aren't over the top for a head of state.

"It's not something I would lose sleep over," Finch said. "It's not unreasonable for the governor general to have access to jets to get her from place to place ... even on holidays."

If it's nothing to lose sleep over, then Finch and the MLC should have no problem covering her expenses.

heh heh...touche. Sounds reasonable to me.

Wonder if she will be there for the opening of the museum.

As far as I'm concerned, we do not need a GG or a LG. As much as I would like to continue on with our traditional image of having a monarchy, I think its high time to get rid of the money sink called the monarchy and move on to a leaner meaner government.

LD..you smell like poop

Goth_chic wrote:LD..you smell like poop

thanks for noticing.

Leaner and meaner is a very good idea! Might as well get rid of all the old fart senators, as that is a major cost and the benfit is probably rated at about 0% in my cost/benefit analysis!

Yes absolutely right the senate should go it is nothing but a retirement house for the privileged of this land . Mira Spivak come on , Sharron Carstairs , these are just two who should go as Mira needs this like a hole in the wall .

The Queen was 10 km from my place this week.
Build the museum where the arena once stood.
That'll bring in a good profit, and it won't empty local wallets from sneaky commercial stores wanting that area.
How can they play Nickelback during a football game???????

I say get rid of all figure heads that are draining thee taxpayer. I've had enough! I would rather see that money spent on infrastructure, education, health care and lower taxes.

Apart from the legal, technical, constitutional aspect of eliminating the "Crown" in Canada, there is a place for a ceremonial head of state. But does she have to spend so much money???

Also, the GG is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and RC has a point. The troops serving overseas are entitled to receive a visit from a "hot chick from Quebec", and I'm not referrring to Jeane Sauve!!

so... does everyone understand why we need a GG now?

Yup...

Nope. Please explain your position in detail with references and quotes.









Just kiddn'....

Another reason to lose this role?

Work on governor general's home costs $8.2M

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/2010/09/16/15367776.html

Work on the home cost taxpayers $8.2 million in 2009-2010 - nearly double what was spent the previous year.

12 mil over the last two years??? One would think that they could build new for that kind of cash?

rosencrentz wrote:Leaner and meaner is a very good idea! Might as well get rid of all the old fart senators, as that is a major cost and the benfit is probably rated at about 0% in my cost/benefit analysis!

Sorry for the lateness of my reply, Since someone necroposted. I shall add to this.

Not only should we get rid of the Crown, GG and LG's. We should also legislate an end to Unionized Government Employee's. No person who is paid by funds collected by the government in the form of Taxes should be unionized. PERIOD.

Leaner and Meaner! Time our government worked for us and not the other way around.

WTF? Why shouldn't they be allowed to unionize? Give me a break. What does being a government emloyee have to do with it? I know you HATE unions with a passion but why single out government employees? Should they be at the total mercy of the government of the day when it comes to working environment while other workers have opportunities they don't? How is that fair?

You idea is brilliant...except it would lead to a general strike. Enjoy watching society crumble.

grumpyrom wrote:WTF? Why shouldn't they be allowed to unionize? Give me a break. What does being a government emloyee have to do with it? I know you HATE unions with a passion but why single out government employees? Should they be at the total mercy of the government of the day when it comes to working environment while other workers have opportunities they don't? How is that fair?

You idea is brilliant...except it would lead to a general strike. Enjoy watching society crumble.

If there was no union, how could they strike? Wouldn't those who refused to work just get fired?