|
|
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 30, 2008, at 2:50 pm |
Exhibit 1: Liberals Question Bernier Timeline:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s claim that he was in the dark until Monday about Maxime Bernier’s missing classified documents is under attack following the revelation that the sensitive papers were returned to the government some 24 hours earlier…Government House leader Peter Van Loan surprised many yesterday when he said the Prime Minister learned of the return of the documents on Sunday. “The Prime Minister said that he became aware of it on Sunday afternoon and that is when action was taken,” he said. That immediately drew “oh, oh” from opposition benches. Van Loan quickly backtracked and insisted that Harper was only told [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 29, 2008, at 12:16 pm |
Seriously, this Conservative government has so many of them going on right now, which one do you focus on if you’re the opposition? Or do you try to focus on them all, hoping that the Canadian public doesn’t care about the specifics of each scandal, but grasps that whatever the details, the Conservatives aren’t a very clean bunch while in power.
That all said, here are two things I’ve seen today that I like. First, the Canadian public seems to regard the Bernier-Couillard affair as something that needs investigation, if you believe this poll:
Canadians, according to the latest Angus Reid poll, are taking it seriously, with a majority [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 27, 2008, at 7:58 am |
Your Maxime Bernier resignation timeline yesterday, and the way the Conservatives handled it:
- Around the middle of the day, when being questioned about these new reports that Maxime’s ex-girlfriend was involved with security at airports, PM Harper utters what may become a famous phrase:
“I don’t take this subject seriously.”
- In QP yesterday afternoon, in response to Michael Ignatieff’s questions, this is what Peter Van Loan said:
“Mr. Speaker,” the House leader began, “our Foreign Affairs Minister and our Prime Minister have been showing considerable leadership on the world stage”
- At about 5 pm on CBC and Don Newman’s Politics show, Conservative MP Deepak Obhrai [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 18, 2008, at 1:23 pm |
You’ve seen many Conservatives and a couple of others claiming online that since the RCMP could find no evidence of any wrongdoing with what they did in trying to persuade Cadman to vote for them Conservatives, that should be the end of the matter, or that it will put the affair on the back burner.
I’m in the camp of those who say it’s far from over (and also in the camp of those who fully expected the RCMP to come out and say what they did, but that’s another story).
As Danielle points out, the RCMP also didn’t find any evidence to charge former PM Brian Mulroney with [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 5, 2008, at 8:25 am |
There is an op-ed in the Toronto Star today penned by Nelson Wiseman, politicial science professor at the University of Toronto which asks a very good question: “What kind of country has a ruling party that mounts an assault on its election watchdog?”
A question that is difficult to answer. Even in Zimbabwe, where the tyrannical Robert Mugabe and his party rule with an iron fist, the country’s electoral commission wasn’t attacked when it finally released results showing Mugabe had lost his parliamentary majority. Canada and its governing Conservatives are in very isolated and dubious company indeed.
More importantly is the observation by the professor that such things as [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 3, 2008, at 5:05 pm |
It very well might be if the Winnipeg Free Press’s investigation and NDP MP Pat Martin’s complaint to Elections Canada proves to be valid:
A Free Press review of Conservative expense claims turned up 50 Tory candidates who sent a total of $854,000 to the national Conservative campaign under the category of “Election surveys or other surveys and research.” In all but two of the campaigns, the amounts transferred were either $15,000 or $20,000. Sixteen campaigns saw “in-and-out” transactions, where money was paid to the central campaign, and then returned to the local campaign or where the central campaign paid money to the local campaigns and then it was [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on May 2, 2008, at 1:53 pm |
So, Christian Conservative is valiantly trying to go with the notion that somehow Elections Canada is picking on the poor Conservatives and is biased/full of Liberal moles/hates free speech, etc etc. etc.
The impression I get from his blogpiece is that apparently Pierre Poilievre under the cover of parliamentary immunity quoted out of Hansard is an authoritative source for that theory.
Let me help you out Christian Con; Pierre P. is NOT a credible source. He’s been the point man on this for the Cons. since this scandal started, and neither do the media believe him outside of the National Post editors, nor do the overwhelming majority of Canadians [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on April 30, 2008, at 2:13 pm |
Both Marc Mayrand and his predecessor Jean-Pierre Kingsley have incurred difficulty with Stephen Harper.
Both of them have had disputes with the current Conservative Party.
And most importantly, both of them were appointed during Conservative governments – Maynard by the current government, and Jean-Pierre Kingsley in 1990 while Brian Mulroney was Prime Minister.
So, neither Conservative Kool-Aid drinkers nor Harper nor his parrots like Pierre Poilivere can be painting these two as “Liberal appointees” out to get them. Maybe, just maybe, they’re objective when it comes to upholding Canada’s election laws and know when a party is doing something in contravention of the Elections Act, regardless of who it [...]
Posted by Scott Tribe on April 30, 2008, at 11:07 am |
An anonymous commentator over at CalgaryGrit responded to Dan’s feeling that if the current governing Cons. has no confidence in Elections Canada, then officials will either resign or get fired (Linda Keen’ed was his apt description). That commentator made some excellent points why this wouldn’t happen, and they bear repeating here:
Under s. 13 of the Canada Elections Act, the House of Commons appoints the Chief Electoral Officer by resolution. The CEO may only be removed for cause by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons. In other words, the Governor in Council has no power to remove the CEO, for cause or otherwise. Only the Governor General, on the advice of Parliament, has that power. The Commissioner is appointed by the CEO pursuant to s. 509 of the Canada Elections Act. As it is the role of the Commissioner to ensure the Act is enforced, I doubt anyone other than the CEO could remove the Commissioner, and then only for cause. So, it is irrelevant insofar as the CEO or Commissioner’s security of tenure is concerned that the government has voted no confidence. What is important is that the CEO retains the confidence of Parliament, which he has.
That commentator then makes an interesting follow-up - what really matters is what happens next:
Continue reading Interesting facts about Elections Canada
Posted by Scott Tribe on April 29, 2008, at 5:53 pm |
With regards to the Bloc Quebecois Motion that stated more or less roughly in translation asking “That this House express its complete confidence in Elections Canada and the Federal Elections Commissioner”, the motion passed as expected, but the Conservatives apparently don’t share the sentiment, as they unbelievably voted against this. The final vote was 152 – 117, for those keeping track.
So I guess the question that needs to be asked is will the Conservatives boycott the next election? I mean, they obviously think Elections Canada and its commissioner (the Conservative – appointed commissioner I might add) is unfair and biased against them, with the “in and out” ruling [...]
|
|
