The Harper government’s quest to find $4 billion worth of ‘inefficiencies’

An integral part of Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's budget was his government's commitment to shave 5 per cent - or $4 billion annually - from direct program spending.

The details of the cuts have not been released and are expected to be announced after a government-wide operating review.

Flaherty doesn't think it will be too difficult to find $4 billion in savings.

"Overall, it's relatively modest," he told a throng of reporters on Monday.

Still, most of the post-budget chatter seems to be about where this money is going to come from.

John Ivison of the National Post wrote "it should probably come as no surprise that the government can find $4-billion, as if it were loose change that slipped down the back of the couch."

The Globe and Mail editorial board was a little more suspicious: "Wait for the 'Strategic and Operating Review' of government, the Conservatives promise. But surely they had the opportunity to identify cuts during their minority years, which could have been implemented once they got their majority,"

John Gordon, the national president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, told CBC News that reducing the $56-billion deficit would come at the expense of federal jobs and essential services.

"The Harper Conservatives have decided to transfer $4 billion from vital public services to corporate bank accounts, with no strings attached," Gordon charged.

Gordon added that the federal public service unions have already started to mobilize members, asking them to talk to their MPs and demanding consultations about where the cuts will come from.

During the campaign, Harper consistently pledged to find the $4 billion in savings without cutting funding for essential programs.

"Anybody who says you can't find money in Ottawa without cutting vital services to people simply is living in a fantasy world," Harper said while on the campaign trail. "That's not how government works. There are inefficiencies and it is your job to constantly find them"

One could ask, however, if there are such inefficiencies, why it took five years to do anything about it.