Search Agenda Signals
Search for subjects across all topics and axes.
Across Topics (100 results) — filtered
Framing promotes long-term public spending on housing as economically beneficial compared to repeated crisis intervention
Government spending portrayed as rife with waste, fraud, and lack of accountability under Democratic administration
public funds may be misused if consultants perform private work
Public ownership of water framed as a legitimate and necessary alternative
Implied critique of New Zealand’s defence spending as inadequate
public investment in stadiums framed as fiscally irresponsible
Increased infrastructure spending is framed as a necessary and beneficial investment
MP accommodation allowances are framed as illegitimate when used in self-dealing arrangements
Public spending portrayed as being wasted due to erratic decision-making
Royal spending framed as harmful to public finances
public funds perceived as being used to support private royal benefits
royal housing arrangements framed as harmful to public finances
Public funding of transport scheme implicitly questioned due to safety failures
OSAP spending controls portrayed as misdirected
Framing royal housing privileges as harmful misuse of public funds
Increased funding for cyber security implicitly framed as a necessary and positive response
public spending on royal residences framed as potentially corrupt or unjustified
Use of public funds for private services framed as harmful misuse
Implies public finances are at risk despite clarification of private funding
Framed as wasteful and misdirected
Public funds portrayed as at risk due to opaque royal leasing
Public spending framed as being misused due to consultant private practice
Public spending framed as harmful and misdirected toward political favors rather than public good
Royal financial arrangements framed as illegitimate use of public funds
Current public spending priorities framed as failing to meet national security needs
Public spending on private care framed as wasteful and actively harmful
Frames public spending as corrupt through the proposed $1.8 billion compensation fund
Public financial support portrayed as potentially excessive or questionable
Implying potential misuse or controversy around public funds received by a public figure
government fiscal management framed as misleading
public spending on private programs framed as wasteful or harmful
Frames public spending as potentially corrupt due to cost discrepancies and lack of transparency
Public spending on education is implicitly framed as being undermined by wasteful uniform requirements
Framed as inadequately funded and harmful to strategic capability
Public spending on asylum is portrayed as wasteful and mismanaged
public funds portrayed as misused and harmed by party financial practices
Framed as corrupt use of public funds for political patronage
Framing lavish government spending as necessary and justified, especially when tied to presidential priorities
Public spending framed as misused for political patronage
Use of taxpayer funds framed as corrupt and politically motivated
Royal housing arrangements are framed as harmful to public finances, despite no direct taxpayer cost.
Framed as wasteful and politically motivated spending
Taxpayer funding of royal security framed as wasteful or unjustified
major public projects framed as delayed and over budget
Government spending control framed as deteriorating
Workforce overhaul framed as beneficial to fiscal efficiency
Tax revenue from billionaires is framed as potentially beneficial for public programs
EU investment framed as effective, forward-looking public investment in science
Framing public spending as entering a crisis due to rapid cost escalation
portraying taxpayer money as endangered and vulnerable to exploitation
Russia's economic situation framed as under strain despite propaganda efforts
Public spending programs like Medicaid portrayed as vulnerable to abuse and systemic corruption
portrays public spending on superannuation as approaching crisis levels
Portrays public spending as wasteful and morally unjust
The $2.5bn Australia-Nauru deal is framed as financially opaque and potentially corrupt
Wealth and power framed as corrupt, with implication of impunity
Government funding to address the crisis is framed as a necessary and positive intervention
National fiscal health is portrayed as under serious threat from unsustainable debt
Fiscal restraint framed as harmful to national security
Public spending is portrayed as under threat due to unintended tax consequences
Suggests public spending is misaligned with demographic shifts
framed as lacking transparency and accountability in financial decisions
Increased public investment in women’s health research and care is framed as legitimate and urgently needed
Western defense supply efforts framed as insufficient and strained by competing global demands
Public investment in climate resilience is framed as necessary and beneficial
Frames public spending as wasteful and misaligned with priorities
Public spending in police service framed as wasteful and misallocated
LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho attends gala for courage while federal investigation continues
Framing public spending on Carvalho as wasteful and harmful to taxpayers
Public spending on climate resilience is framed as inefficient and poorly targeted, failing to meet original commitments
portrayed as financially destructive and exploitative
Government spending on enforcement is implied to be wasteful or misdirected
nonprofit spending framed as corrupt, self-serving, and mismanaged
E-Rate program spending framed as ineffective or wasteful
Spending framed as wasteful or excessive rather than beneficial
Austerity measures framed as harmful to public resources and rights
spending framed as potentially wasteful or poorly justified
Government spending framed as wasteful and excessive, especially on private jets
Portrays public investment in the Mayan Train as economically inefficient and failing to deliver promised development
portrayed as poorly managed and subject to carryover due to planning inefficiencies
Framed as a corrupt 'slush fund' for allies rather than legitimate policy
Implies government underfunding has caused harm to the education system
Abandonment of the 'anti-weaponisation' fund implies lack of accountability or transparency
Public spending is framed as potentially trustworthy if managed efficiently
Government spending on LNG infrastructure framed as economically inefficient and wasteful
Government funding approach framed as failing to address long-term food insecurity
portrays public spending as potentially corrupt or misused
portrayed as failing to meet the needs of disabled students
LAUSD acting superintendent Andres Chait’s decision on vile sex abuse case that rocked Los Angeles …
public funds portrayed as misused on salaries and settlements rather than student safety
Public spending is portrayed as mismanaged and ineffective due to systemic administrative failures
Program portrayed as failing due to mismanagement and health incidents
U.S. government spending on global health is framed as failing due to bureaucratic delay
Framed as wasteful and misdirected, paying teachers instead of helping children
Canada’s history of infrastructure execution is framed as unreliable and plagued by delays and cancellations
Public spending is portrayed as mismanaged and prioritizing symbolism over systemic needs
framed as costly and potentially wasteful due to shifting plans
Government funding decisions are framed as undermining a cost-effective, life-saving program
Publishers framed as previously excluded from fair compensation, now being included through regulatory action
Cost-driven disposal decisions are harmful to backcountry safety and heritage
Use of public funds is framed as potentially misaligned with public interest due to private billing
Defence divestment framed as a sign of fiscal mismanagement