March 4, 2006

Am I Dreaming?

Maybe it’s the 14 hours of sleep I get these days while I fight off mono, but Stephen Harper is now saying he will not co-operate with an Ethics Probe into his own office. Let’s see how bad this is for public relations.

OK, so Shapiro was appointed by Liberals, we also appointed 7 justices of the Supreme Court, do you not trust those guys either? Most of the top civil servants are former Liberal appointees; almost ¾ of the Senate are Liberal-appointed, including Hughie Segal. Let’s not trust them either.

Slippery Slope indeed Mr. Harper!

If you’re David Emerson, do you co-operate with this guy, I mean you co-operated with him when you were in the other government, did he lose his legitimacy January 23rd? Emerson also said he would resign if the Ethics Commissioner said he did anything wrong? Was there a secret “I don’t trust this guy” clause in that statement that we missed?

Here is my favorite Emerson quote
"If you're equating the Grewal situation with mine, I take great offence,"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

They are not the same, cuz Grewal didn’t get the job, you did!

In fact, Bernie Shapiro, or as we Concordians call him B-Shap, stated if a benefit is offered, it is a breach of Parliamentary ethics. Now this whole thing could have went down one of two ways

Emerson calls Harper and says “Yo Stevie, I’m a small-c Liberal but I would look much sexier as a small-c Conservative. My measurements are…My qualifications are… He passes an interview in fishnets and high heels. Stevie-H says I can’t turn you down baby. They make out! (I know this is overtly sexist, forgive me it’s funny, just picture it, no sexism intended. I will need Denise’s approval for this one!)

or

Harper calls Emerson and says “I am impressed with what you did in the last Parliament, why don’t you become my Trade Minister, I need representation from Vancouver.” Emerson says yes.

Actually John Reynolds made that call. He offered the bribe, a la Tim Murphy, at the behest of Harper. (why is it different? cuz Grewal wasn't actually offered anything on the tapes, in fact, Grewal was the one asking for stuff)

Stevie-H was so proud of what he did, he bragged about it to reporters.

So much for wanting a government that isn’t constantly under investigation.

Harpocrisy!

Still proud Stevie?

16 Commentaires:

Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

As soon as the investigation in regards to Stronach's crossing and the Valeri land deal have finished, nay, when they have STARTED, then I will feel free to discuss this non-issue.

Of course Harper should question the timing of this. This is nothing but a Liberal appointed flunky still having his strongs pulled by his Liberal masters and trying desperatley to justify his job.

3/04/2006 8:05 a.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

I'm sorry, not co-operating with the ethics commissioners' office is serious.

Valeri's land deal will never get investigated since he is no longer an MP, we'll leave that one to the cops.

As for Stronach, nobody submitted a request for an investigation, which was the case for Grewal. Besides, there wasnt any statement indicating belinda was gonna get into Cabinet.

None so blatantly obvious as I needed representation in Vancouver that Cabinet minister impressed me. He should have just smiled and said How do you like them apples?

3/04/2006 10:59 a.m.  
Anonymous maxwellshammer a dit...

In fact, instead of requesting Bernie to investigate, didn't JoRey (johnny two-tone reynolds, to us folks out west) actually ask the Ont att. general to look into things? the answer he got was pretty cool apparently. So cool that JoRey and Stephen Flintstone thought they could improve on it. Cut out the middleman and make the deal themselves. Admitting to it on camera may not have been the brightest move in Bedrock, boys. Let's let the 'anonymous so-cons' kvetch a little longer while their king Harpo-crit tries to fix this one...

3/04/2006 2:38 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Antonio,

You called Emerson a "genius" previously, do you still stand by that statement?

3/04/2006 5:56 p.m.  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

can you say when?

Just out of curiosity, I totally forgot.

3/04/2006 6:50 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

More importantly, people wanna know if Belinda gave you the mono

PROPLE WANNA KNOW!!!!!

3/04/2006 7:27 p.m.  
Anonymous Jason Townsend a dit...

You know, I've been saying all along that Harper can get away with a lot of stupid gaffes early on because of the nigh-impossibility of toppling him at the moment.

But man, he's really been taking that advice to heart. At this point I'm waiting for him to get caught beating up homeless people or something. "I'm loathe to cooperate with the Ottawa police..."

3/04/2006 9:31 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

YES ANTONIO

did belinda give you mono?

PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW!

3/04/2006 9:42 p.m.  
Anonymous williebee a dit...

read Dan's report where you will learn that Shapiro in a previous life was a Tory appointment. Interesting article.

3/05/2006 3:09 a.m.  
Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat a dit...

Who shall guard the guards?

Clearly something stinks in Denmark (on the Rideau), and the stench emanates from both the former governing party and the current one. The average citizen reads or hears about the shenanigans and shakes his or her head, disbelievingly.

There are two issues: (1) Whether we need an ethics commissioner to keep Parliamentarians on the straight and narrow and if so what kind of commissioner with what kind of powers. (2) Should the Emerson-Harper deal be investigated and should Harper cooperate with the ethics commissioner.

In my view the answer in both cases is Yes.

Yes to a properly constituted Ethics Commissioner, appointed as a member of the civil service, with a legislated independent mandate, and an a mandate to be impartial.

Yes to Harper and Emerson cooperating with the Ethics Commissioner.

Stephen Harper campaigned on a platform of ethics, as Mr Clean, bringing a new broom to the capital city. He won a narrow victory. Now it is time for him to govern in a clean and ethical manner. By doing these two things – passing legislation for an independent ethics commissioner, and cooperating re the Emerson walkabout – he will be acting in accordance with promises made before the election.

By not doing these two things, he will be breaking promises made to the voters.

It is as simple as that, and no contortions of logic can obscure this moral simplicity.

3/05/2006 12:01 p.m.  
Blogger Marc a dit...

Speaking about ethics...

.
Brigitte Legault is a damn shame to all Quebec federalists; we all know that bilingualism is a great symbol for Canadian unity. This party’s leader is not any leader, this party’s leader is a Libéral leader, the leader of the party of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the party of the charter of rights and freedom, the party of the two official languages of this great country, I cannot imagine a an ex-conservative like Belinda Stronach as leader of this party and even less a PLC leader who can’t communicate in French. What the hell are you doing in politics if you can’t even speak the second official language of your own damn country?
Stronach would just kill what we Liberals stand for and I am ashamed of your president.

3/06/2006 1:27 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

The Prime Minister can offer a cabinet post to any member of parliament. That's an absolute right. The unethical behaviour would be if he asked for or needed something in return, other than that service as a minister. Something like, say, a confidence saving vote?

Get rid of the Liberal lap-dog and get someone all parties can trust, then, maybe, we'll see change and openness.

3/06/2006 4:45 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Here are the Emerson and Grewal stories in a nutshell:

Emerson is white, rich, and part of the business establishment (THEREFORE SOMEHOW HE IS "NEEDED" in the Conservative government), and demanded a cabinet post (very specifically in the areas he cared about most -- international trade and the Olympics) in return for crossing the floor. The Tories were happy to oblige, since they approached him. Emerson did not have any ideological reasons for crossing the floor. He only wanted power. Harper refuses to participate in ethics investigation.

Grewal is brown, not so rich, and not part of any establishment, and demanded a cabinet post (not wswo choosy) and an ambassadorship or Senate seat for his wife. The Liberals were not happy to oblige, but were willing to talk to him because they were desparate. Even in their desparate state, they did not promise anything. Grewal wanted to be a Liberal, not for any ideological reasons. He just wanted power. Harper/Reynolds demand ethics investigation, and law society investigation. Tim Murphy and Ujjal Dosanjh cooperate.

is there much of a difference?

The only difference is that Grewal and Emerson are the same, but Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are not. Paul Martin and his team actually acted properly.

3/07/2006 1:07 a.m.  
Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat a dit...

A pox on both their houses, say I.

There are two issues which interest me here.

We need to clean up Parliament so that corruption and breach of faith exacts a penalty on the MP who commits those deeds and if needs be the party represented by that MP. If having an Ethics Commissioner with an independent mandate, a clearly defined mandate, and powers to enforce his or her rulings, is an effective way to guard the guards, then good, go ahead and form one.

(By the way, I would like the Ethics Commissioner to have the power to bench an offending MP for less serious misdeeds, so that the MP cannot vote for a defined period).

The second issues is a political one, and is Harper’s call. His refusal to cooperate with the current Ethics Commissioner, despite having won power by proclaiming himself Mr Clean fighting Mr Corrupt, sends out loud signals to many: does this man have a double standard? Does he regard himself as above the rules and laws?

We have seen how the imperial presidency is busily dragging America back into the dark ages. Are we in for an imperial prime ministership under Mr Clean?

One way to show that he believes he is not above the law is for Harper to cooperate with the Ethics Commissioner on the Emerson walkabout.

3/07/2006 9:02 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

so getting back to the mono....did belinda give it to you? if yes, antonio....high five!

3/08/2006 10:27 a.m.  
Anonymous CuriositykilledTheCat a dit...

Harper, southern oil money, and ethics: some more sticky things for Harper's New Tories to come clean on?

Let's listen to David Orchard of Politics Canada (08/03/2006)(my capitalization):

"The masters of spin around Harper knew that right-wing leaders don’t win federal elections in Canada. And voilà, virtually overnight he ceased to be one -- and the media appeared to swallow it all. Any attempt to point out Mr. Harper’s amply documented past was derisively dismissed as “negative.”

It remained for a former U.S. vice-president, Al Gore, to blow the whistle for Canadians. In an explosive interview from Park City, Utah, strikingly under reported in Canada, Mr. Gore said, “The election in Canada was partly about the tar sands projects in Alberta. And the financial interests behind the tar sands project poured a lot of money and support behind an ultra conservative leader in order to win the election and to protect its interests.”

Mr. Gore pointed out that one of the things the oil industry wants is Canada’s pullout from Kyoto.

As Brian Mulroney’s entourage emerges from the shadows into key cabinet and government positions, as the stunning and deafening silence grows regarding Mr. Mulroney’s receipt of large payments of cash from Karl-Heinz Schreiber despite his sworn testimony in court that he had “no dealings whatsoever” with Mr. Schreiber, the country waits for Mr. Harper’s next move and for Mr. Layton’s explanation of why his party opened the door for the Harper-Bloc alliance.

We wait also for the RCMP investigation into Mr. Gore’s allegations of foreign funds going to a Canadian political party, and into Mr. Schreiber’s statements which, if true, point to a prima facie case of perjury against Mr. Mulroney. Mr. Harper and his justice minister, Vic Toews, promised to “clean up” Canadian politics and “get tough on crime.” Here’s the perfect place to start."

Rather interesting, not so? Wonder when the Justice Minister will tell citizens about these two issues. Ethics is as ethics does.

The country is waiting, Mr Harper.

3/16/2006 2:42 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home