A spokesman for the Finance Department confirmed to The Hill Times this week that a brief reference to $6-million for advertising in the department’s spending documents for the 2013-14 fiscal year is on top of $3.2-million finance officials recently revealed that was spent by the department over the past 12 months.
The disclosure, which was made by senior departmental officials at a recent meeting of the House of Commons Finance Committee, has been the only glimpse from the government about the program’s cost for the past fiscal year from any of the major departments that are also spending money on the ads, which have ramped up during the National Hockey League Stanley Cup playoffs.
The total spent by the Finance Department and other departments since the ads began after the government’s 2009 recession-fighting stimulus budget of 2009 came to $91.6-million before the recent disclosure of $13.2-million by the Finance Department.
The ads have become a source of controversy because of Liberal Party and NDP claims that the ads—flashy but without details on government job and assistance programs they are purported to promote—are really taxpayer-funded advertisements for the Conservative government.
Even though government spending records for the 2012-13 fiscal year have been in for nearly two months, the government has still not posted the cost of the ads for that period, and, in response to recent questions from The Hill Times, declined to disclose placements and costs of the ads for the final three weeks of April, immediately after Liberal MP Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) won the Liberal leadership.
During that period, as the Conservative Party began placing its first round of attack ads against Mr. Trudeau, which became infamous as the “in over his head” assault that even some Conservative MPs would not support, the government began placing the Economic Action Plain ads during runoff games for the NHL playoffs, and the playoffs themselves, some of the most costly television ad space over the year in Canada.
“Decisions regarding media purchases are the responsibility of the departments and are based on media plans developed by their advertising planning agency,” Annie Duguay, a media branch spokesperson for the Public Works Department, said after The Hill Times asked for cost and placement details for the action plan ads, which include one set that promotes an apprentice job program that is opposed by the Government of Quebec and for which the federal government still requires cooperation from the other nine provinces to launch.
“Media plans are based on factorts, such as campaign objectives, budgets, target audience and availability; the [Agency of Record] executes media purchases on behalf of institutions—as per the media plans,” Ms. Duguay said in an email.
Liberal MP Scott Brison (Kings Valley-Hants, N.S,) and NDP MP Peggy Nash (Parkdale-High Park, Ont.) questioned top Finance Department officials about the action plan ad campaign at a recent meeting of the House Finance Committee, where the officials confirmed the Finance budget for last year and next year and one of the officials defended the ads by saying government surveys have shown public awareness of the Economic Action Plan has risen significantly since the program began four years ago.
But when Mr. Brison pointed out the surveys, which the government published, also found 92 per cent of Canadians said the ads did not affect their behaviour or decisions with regard to government programs, Jean-Michell Catta, assistant deputy minister for the Finance Department’s consultations and communications branch, admitted a claim that the public supports the Economic Action Plan stems from a general question about whether the government should communicate with Canadians.
“Our research has shown that Canadians do want the government to communicate about its priorities, and that’s what the Department of Finance is doing,” Mr. Catta said at the May 2 meeting.
“I don’t have the exact wording with me, it’s more of a generic question as to something like, do you believe that it is important for the government to communicate?” he said.
Mr. Brison asked the officials whether the government had ever asked in a survey for respondents to indicate a spending priority between advertising to promote a government message—such as the action plan ads to—or investment in food safety.
“We haven’t asked that question specifically. Our research focuses specifically on the advertising campaign itself … they are pretty big picture-type of questions.”
Mr. Brison and the Liberal Party on Thursday mounted a one-day campaign against spending on the Economic Action Plan ads—pointing out that the $95,000 cost of one Economic Action Plan ad for a few seconds on television would fund 32 summer jobs for students.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: TIM NAUMETZ
No comments:
Post a Comment