A reader with legal credentials offers the following thoughts on the Shapiro investigation into the appointment of David Emerson to cabinet;
Bernard Shapiro seems to have a limited understanding of how our parliamentary system works. As I understand it, he wants to investigate the appointment of David Emerson to Cabinet apparently on the theory that Emerson may have been induced to support the government by the offer of a Cabinet post.
Under our system, Cabinet is jointly responsible for its decisions. There is no such thing as the House having confidence in some but not all of the members of Cabinet. Her Majesty�s Ministers have the confidence of the House as a group or not at all. Being a member of Cabinet means supporting the government in the House � a Minister who cannot support government policy must resign.
What this means is, if Stephen Harper believes that his Cabinet should include representation from Canada�s larger urban centers and offers a post to David Emerson, the very thing that Emerson is offered implies an obligation to support the government in the House. A cabinet post offered in order to have a particular MP in Cabinet isn�t a quid pro quo, something given in exchange for the MP’s support of the government.
Emerson is asked to become a member of Cabinet because of the segment of Canada he represents, a qualification that no one elected as a Conservative could claim. In this circumstance quid (becoming a member of Cabinet) and quo (undertaking the obligations of a Minister) are one and the same.
Contrast Belinda Stronach. In her particular circumstances, quid and quo are easily distinguishable. Paul Martin needed another vote to withstand a confidence motion and got it by offering a Cabinet post to an MP with no distinguishing qualifications either for Cabinet or for the particular ministry to which she was appointed.
Mr. Shapiro�s decision to investigate the Emerson appointment but not the Stronach appointment shows he just doesn�t get things he needs to get to do his job properly.
Worse, he contributes to a political culture where people can�t tell the difference between a Prime Minister who offers a Cabinet post to someone he wants in Cabinet from a Prime Minister who traffics in Cabinet positions to retain power.
Let’s hope that in regards to Mr. Shapiro the question “quo vadis?” is soon answered with the reply “out on his butt”.
I really hope harper’s claim of executive privilege will haunt him forever. When he says that he gets authority “as the highest democratically elected official in the country” he is saying he knows that cabinet appointments are vested in the Crown.
This Shapiro business is a sideshow. Quid, quo , it’s beside the point. Stronach’s crossing the floor was sleazy, opportunistic and fraudulent. So was Emerson’s. At least Belinda eventually faced her constituents in an election. I doubt Emerson has the balls to do the same.
Hey Osama
George has been looking for you, did you just crawl out from under a rock or from a hole like Sadaam. Give George a call, I think he has something for you.
As for Minister Emmerson, he has promised to face his constituents in the next election several times, Oh I forgot, you haven’t been getting the newspapers in a little while. that’s OK, you’ll keep more up to date here at Kate’s anyway.
Daniel
Isn’t it funny how the “looney left” just can’t accept the fact that, other than optics, there really is nothing wrong in the Emerson appointment. And B.C. and in particular Kingsway, will be much better off for it.
But then that doesn’t get Jack-off another MP, now does it.
Horny Toad
What’s the matter, steve in bc? Po’d that PMSH is using the same tactics as PMPM? And mixing “democratically elected” with “appointment”???? So you like the in-bred lineage of QEII?? Hell. Even the Brits want to throw the leeches out. Oh sorry.Was that against the socialist dogma of Royalist’s??
After 12 long goddam years of watching the Liberals manipulate this country with the sole purpose of retaining power I’m finally feeling some optimism.
I am no great Stephen Harper fan but I am more convinced today than when he took office that he seriously wants to do his best for his country.
This in itself is such a novelty for Canadian politics it’s no wonder the MSM is dazed and confused.
As for Shapiro,it’s such obvious partisan bias that I think the PMO has handled it perfectly.
Ignore him till you can change our system and create a non-partisan position people will respect and trust.
Until then Stephen,I’ll be watching to make sure you’re working hard for your country,not your party.
The protests in BC were all ndippers who never voted for emerson in the first place. When he faces his constituents he will do just fine.
Good point Justthinkin. A lot of people who voted conservative are worried that harper will be using the same tactics. Any voter of any party would want to be worried about unconstitutional or delusional assumptions of “executive priviledge”
As an aside, how long can he keep mckay in his job if he has to keep sending him back out the next day to reverse what he said the day before. As long as he wants to do his job for him I guess.
Oh, Sweet Schadenfreude…
The keft doesn’t understand our systen of Constitutional Monarchy.
Shapiro must go. Now.
Does anyone recall how many ‘appointments’ PMPM made on his way out- was it 200, or 2000?
Excellent points Kate!
Your view of the facts are from the true sense of parliamentary discretion.
Shapiro is simply an obvious tool of his liberal master’s design.
Does Mr. Ed have bed-head?
Canadian Press is in crackup mode: Mr. Ed, the socialist crapper, is nearing senility. Time to say goodnight, Mr. Ed. There is a new game in town, Mr. Ed.
Goodnight, Mr. Ed. You are in over your head, Ed. +
Broadben and other experts on parliamentary ethics – including a former senior government insider with working experience of the conflict code – agree with Harper.
“For what it’s worth, Mr. Harper is right in implying that the ethics code doesn’t apply,” said Broadbent.
But it is not for the prime minister to make such a judgment in his own case, he added. Moreover, by refusing to co-operate with the investigation, Harper is breaking an explicit provision of the conflict code.
The boycott, as Broadbent calls it, now makes it very difficult to “revisit the consensus that had been established by all parties.”
The consensus was that Shapiro, a former university administrator and senior public servant at the Ontario government legislature, is in over his head. +
http://www.rapp.org/url/?STWGDZBI
There is the other side to this debate that seems to have been forgotten. Belinda Stronach used David Peterson, a former Ontario premier, as an agent, to negotiate a position in the Federal cabinet, as a condition for her to cross the floor. Now contrast that with SH calling David Emerson and asking him to join his party, because he needs representation from Emersons part of the country. Whom should Shapiro be investigating??
The problem for Harper, the “right”, and the conservatives with the Emerson situation is that they ran a long election campaign on integrity and acountability.
One week after the election! Harper has offered a cabinet post to an MP elected as Liberal from a riding that has not voted conservative since the days of John Deifenbaker.
Even Harper admits the optics are bad to the seething masses of Canadians that are not blindly partisan one way or the other.
For me, I could care less what Shapiro does or whether he gets fired. Every misstep by the government will be remembered, and will stick to them. This alone would not make a difference in the next election, but when enough gets stuck to the new government, they will lose credibility.
Moves like this that look hypocritical stick very tightly. Especially for a government elected on an integrity and acountability platform.
Shapiro’s Liberal bias is so BLATANT it is almost unbelievable! To not look into Stronach/Brison, to not look into Valeri’s land deal because “..paliament is not sitting”, then decide to look into Emerson when “parliament is not sitting”??? Shapiro flip-flops more than a fish out of water. Shapiro’s integrity is the embodiment of the leftist thinking in this country, and I am fed up with it. That and all the politically-correct horsesh*t as well! The author gets it right when they say “… he contributes to a political culture where people can’t tell the difference between a Prime Minister who offers a Cabinet post to someone he wants in Cabinet from a Prime Minister who traffics in Cabinet positions to retain power.”
Well said!!
Mrtin’s myopic parliamentary laundromat is gone and we hope replaced by a person and a new position which demands the non partisan ethic that Bernie Shapiro never had….probably got the appointment because of his partisan bias.
Is it any wonder foreigners like Bono mock the corruption of the fed-lib government.
Shapiro’s just trying to get a few more paycheques before he gets the boot. He knows it’s coming too. It won’t save his ass in the long run, and you can expect him to deliver his ruling sometime in Dec. He’d only lose a year of his appointment then.
Where is Bernie “Blind Eye” Shapiro on Scott Brison tipping off his investment banker buddy on income trusts?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060309.wxbrison09/BNStory/National/home
“Mr. Brison said this week he regretted sending the e-mail, and insisted he had no insider knowledge of Ottawa’s plans. CIBC conducted an internal review when it learned of the correspondence, and took the results to police and regulators as a courtesy, despite finding no evidence of any improper behaviour by either Mr. Nowlan or any other of its employees.”
“Even so, political observers in Ottawa are wondering what would prompt the Nova Scotia MP to discuss this file with any bank official, let alone one of the most active income-trust bankers in the country.”
As Osama said “This Shapiro business is a sideshow. Quid, quo , it’s beside the point. Stronach’s crossing the floor was sleazy, opportunistic and fraudulent. So was Emerson’s.”
Shapiro’s qualifications, bias,and decisions make him rightly vulnerable. But if you follow the course of harper in making Shapiro the problem, you avoid or miss the more important issue of “executive priviledge” and how that makes your vote redundant.
Democracy is tricky. Turns out you gotta read and look at things critically for a democracy to work! You should have read the directions. Reality shows are effective democracy. If a guy’s a idiot, a liar… boom! Voted off.
“Loose lips” Brison leaked/pklltd on your carpet, with his “leaking” blackberry in one hand and his income trust portfolio/blackberry in his other hand. Are you gonna allow “Loose lips” Brison away with this tipping?
Out Brison; get out Brison; out Brison. Take Goodale with you, scumbags. +
Loose lips on the Street came back to bite Brison
Headshot of Andrew Willis
ANDREW WILLIS
Remember the hottest gossip you ever heard back in high school? A story from a party that was so darned juicy that you had to tell someone?
That’s the supercharged world that investment banker-turned-Liberal-cabinet-minister Scott Brison was living in back in late November. The federal government was about to fall. Mr. Brison’s newly adopted party faced fighting an election with many voters furious over the way the Liberals had dealt with income trusts.
The fate of trusts preoccupied the Street. And 24 hours before the Finance Minister gave the finance crowd everything it asked for on this file, Mr. Brison e-mailed a stressed-out buddy in the equity capital markets team at CIBC World Markets: “I think you will be happier very soon . . . this week probably.”
Mr. Brison denies he actually knew what was in store for trusts. Fair enough.
Intelligent people would take one look at that e-mail, and know what was coming. “Happier soon” could only mean a boost to the dividend tax credit, and no new levies on trusts. And that’s exactly what the Liberals eventually unveiled.
This is the way the trust policy “leaked.” The political types were giddy with good news. The Liberals had found a way to make everyone happy, and defuse an unexpected land mine. The impact such a policy might have on capital markets isn’t exactly top of mind with politicians and their staff. They’re focused on winning a country.
Not everyone in Ottawa took this view. +
http://www.rapp.org/url/?AXP15YBM
“As Prime Minister, I will lead by example,” the Conservative Leader promised. He vowed to “strengthen the role of the Ethics Commissioner” and, in particular, to “prevent the Prime Minister from overruling the Ethics Commissioner on whether the Prime Minister, a minister or an official is in violation of the Conflict of Interest Code.”
I always laugh when Liberals say “Harper ran on a platform of ethics and the Emerson appointment shows he has none”. I guess the Liberals are admitting they have no ethics because they couldn’t run on that platform.
The Dippers and Libs are grasping at straws. The MSM is doing its best to help. If this is the biggest criticism facing Harper, then I think he is doing pretty good. The Libs can’t even find a Liberal to run for them. McKenna, Tobin et al are not stupid. They don’t want to be tagged with the label of being the only Liberal leader to not become PM in 100 years.
Of course the bigger story here is how much ground the Tories are gaining in Quebec. That is the foundation for the next Tory majority folks.
Hey steve:
PM Harper hasnt overuled Shapiro.
His office person said he was “loathe” to co-operate”
HE said that he can put whoever he wants in cabinet.
The act says that cabinet positions and the benefits that supposedly flow from those positions are not considered inducements.
So my question is:
what the hell is Shapiro investigating?
Yeah, this is a red herring in the extreme… I know it’s bad optics, but I’ve a feeling that the moment Harper finds someone who’s moral character, Liberal, Con, NDP or whatever, Shapiro will get the boot and the new guy will be asked to assume the investigation if that asswipe isn’t done yet.
I actually think that, despite Shapiro thinking he’s a crafty bugger, Harper will do this in the next couple of weeks.
Better to get it out of the way and let the Dippers and Libs have a bird now, then later on in his mandate. There’s only so much whining they can do anyway, especially if Harper picks an new commish with impeccable references…
He’s busy having a love in with Quebec right now, so my guess is Judge Gomery is about to get the nod since Broadbent turned it down.
The irony of all this mess is that Harper has not technically broken any House rules. So, according to Ed Broadbent, an investigation would show Harper to be innocent of violating any ethics rules.
The problem is Harpers stonewalling. Harper recently WON AN ELECTION ON A HIGH ETHICS PLATFORM. He wanted to give the ethics commissioner MORE power so all members,even the Prime Minister, would not be able to ignore him.
So what does he do at the first hint of ethics trouble? He morphs into Jean Cretien!!! Tell your children, being stubborn in the face of overwhelming common sense and practicality can take down Presidents AND Prime Ministers.
Shapiro wants to investigate Emerson on what grounds again; that he was induced. Harper could have saved himself all kinds of grief if he didn’t bother to have Montreal and Vancouver presence in his cabinet. So why did he do it? Because he wanted these cities inside the circle not outside. Contrast that with naked opportunism of Stronach. (Oh I forgot, as long as you stay in your riding for, say, 3 months, duplicitous betrayal is fine. By the way what cases didn’t Shapiro (or any other Liberal appointed “ethics” czar) investigate:
– Scott Brison’s communication with CIBC re income trust decision
– Jack Layton bought off by Paul Martin (oops, it was an “NDP budget!”
– Tony Valeri
– Abotech
– Income Trust scandal period
– Shawinigate
– BDC debacle
– Ujal Dosanj (not whitewash he did)
– Keith Martin
– HRDC boondogle
– Gun Registry misrepresentations to Parliament
– Sending troops to Afghanistan without proper parliamentary debate
– relationship between Bombadier and Chretien, Martin et al
– Martin’s involvement in offshore taxation rules
and on and on and on
That’s why he should be fired. Period.
Steve’s,
Moral outrage at something as simple as this is sort of the pot calling the kettle black. If your hoping for a lot of milage out of it on this site, you’ve not cottoned on to the political sentiment of the site.
You need a better arguement buddy.
Even if Stephan is straying from his ethics position, which I’m not say he is mind you, he is still miles and miles ahead of the race in comparison to Martin, or Chretien.
Especially since Shapiro didn’t investigate Stronach, who was much more clearly induced with a cabinet post, and on the eve of a confidence vote, which is an ethics issue.
The Tories didn’t go after it because it was a waste of time to bother. This is strictly a political milage thing, and it won’t bother any PC voters one way or the other if Harper gives him the finger, and then the boot.
Most Tories don’t like him anyway. Shapiro has proven himself reproachable repeatedly, to the point of being held in contempt of commons once before.
Try a different tactic… convince me.
William Macdonell
I don’t go to a conservative sight to expect cheers i go to get(hopefully) challenged. I like my ideas being questioned it helps me grow a little I think.
Harper may be miles behind his Liberal counterparts BUT they didn’t run on an Ethics platform. It is not good enough to say you have good ethics and claim high ethical standards you have to be seen to be observing them.
Shapiro didn’t investigate Stronach because he said no one asked him to.
It may be that most Tories don’t like him but he was duly elected by ALL PARTIES. He was apparently the best man available at the time.
He has a five year appointment ending in 2009. If Harper continues to ignore Shapiro then you can expect the other parties to complain to the Commissioner every time Harper comes within shouting range of breaking an ethics rule. When the next election comes along you can take a wild guess as to what the other parties are going to do with Mr. Ethics. He won’t have a leg to stand on.
It seems to me that the firing of Bernard Shapiro was probably something that the Conservatives had in mind before Emerson ever switched parties. Shapiro has continuosly displayed outright biased toward the party that appointed him, and it would seem in his latest move that he is trying to undermind the party in power, to the benifit of the Liberals. Why would the Conservatives ever consider leaving someone like him at such an important position.
Obviously the Ethics Commisioner is not supposed to be in the pocket of the party in power, but he’s not supposed to be in the pocket of the opposition either.
So far the CBC coverage of this issue has not stressed adiquately enough, 4 important facts regarding Shapiro:
1. that Shapiro did not feel the need to hold an iquiry into the Stronach floor crossing (a far more dubious one at that, to the benifit of the Paul Martin gov’t
2. that he hired a Liberal friendly law firm to examine the Judy Sgro immigration incident, a firm that donated $165,000 to the Liberal party between 2000 & 2003, and had 3 partners representing the Liberals before the Gomery Commission.
3. the fact that the NDP who once accused Shapiro of being biased and demanded his resignation; now stand behind his decision to investigate the PM.
4. the fact that Democracy Watch a well known and often cited independant watch dog group has repeatedly called for his resignation, and has refered to him as “biased and incompetant” a number of times.
So the question that must first be answered before the ethics commission can determine whether PM Harper acted un-ethically is this: What do you do when your Ethics Commisioner has repeatedly shown himself to be biased, un-ethical and incompetant?
The answer: you fire him at the nearest opportunity!
http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdApr2505.html
http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsSep2905.html
http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsJun2105.html
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=bec6229d-3e66-46a9-b616-267577d3bc81&k=16351
Lawsuit $5,000,000,000.00 against Shapiro. Delve into the black world of the Liberals, aka Librano$. +
Date Posted: 11:45:01 03/09/06 Thu
Amidst hand-wringing reports of Bernard Shapiro�s imminent termination at the hands of an autocratic and imperious prime minister, it was surprising to see a newspaper actually complete Shapiro�s biography with the report that he is currently facing a five million dollar lawsuit from MP Deepak Obhrai. The lawsuit stems from a question of privilege that Obhrai raised in the House before the government last fell:
�In my telephone conversation on September 13 with the Ethics Commissioner, following his letter of August 23, 2005, where he for the first time indicated what sections of the ethics code I had violated and requested that we have a telephone conversation, I said I would provide all documenting evidence to indicate that all his allegations made against me were false. We agreed to meet the following week.
However, the next day, on September 14, I received an e-mail from my office saying that Jack Aubry of the Ottawa Citizen would like to get my comments on the Ethics Commissioner�s investigation against me. I called Jack Aubry and he said he wanted my comments on the investigation. I asked how he found out and he said he was interviewing Mr. Shapiro who then told him that he was investigating me. He also said that Mr. Shapiro told him that he had material that suggested something inappropriate was happening.
The next day, on September 15, articles appeared in major newspapers across the country. The articles in question are being tabled before the House. In these articles, Dr. Shapiro is quoted as saying, �I have some material that suggests something inappropriate was happening�, and saying that I was under investigation. These damaging articles were carried in major newspapers across the nation.�
Keep reading and you can delve into the black world of Liberal partisanship, where Shapiro is involved in efforts by a most aggressive Liberal cabinet minister to attack Obhrai by becoming involved in the matrimonial dispute of Obhrai�s sister. Charming stuff, to be sure. + … more
http://www.voy.com/178771/3460.html
more at:
http://www.thepolitic.com
steve d said: “… but he [Shapiro] was duly elected by ALL PARTIES.”
Is “steve d” a cunning linguist/a liar/a troll/ a Liberal disseminator of prevarications, half-truths, & outright lies? You decide.
There was one & only one nomination for the post: Shapiro. Nominated by the Martin regime, Shapiro was the person “duly elected by ALL PARTIES” [steve d].
Your words are laughable, contemptible, & show an attempt at dissembling worthy of takiya.
The Government of Canada proposes; the Government of Canada disposes.
Shapiro is dead meat, carrion from the Librano$.
Jacques Saada had this to say: +
May 19, 2004
Mr. Greg Levine
London, Ontario
greg.levine@bmts.com
Dear Mr. Levine:
Thank you for your email of April 24, 2004 concerning the appointment of Dr. Shapiro as the Ethics Commissioner.
In selecting a candidate for the position of Ethics Commissioner, the government of Canada first consulted experts. A list of credible candidates was compiled based on these consultations. These candidates were then contacted to determine their interest in the position of Ethics Commissioner and were provided with background material pertinent to the position. Several candidates were interviewed. Based on these interviews, Dr. Bernard Shapiro was selected as the government’s proposed appointment for the position of Ethics Commissioner.
As you know, under the Parliament of Canada Act the appointment of the Ethics Commissioner requires consultation with opposition leaders in the House of Commons on the nomination, and a resolution of each respective Chamber to approve the appointment. This provision is similar to the process used for other officers of Parliament, such as the Access to Information and the Privacy Commissioners.
Following consultations with the opposition parties, I tabled Dr. Shapiro’s nomination as Ethics Commissioner in the House of Commons on April 21, 2004. Dr. Shapiro’s nomination was then referred to the all-party Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. Dr. Shapiro appeared before the Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 26, 2004, and the Committee recommended to the House of Commons that Dr. Shapiro’s appointment be approved. On April 29, 2004, the House of Commons passed a resolution approving the appointment of Dr. Shapiro as the Ethics Commissioner.
Thank you again for sharing your views with me on this matter.
Yours sincerely,
The Honourable Jacques Saada +
http://www3.telus.net/GovtEthicsLaw/EthCommLetterfromGovt.htm
You don’t get it do you Steve D.
When compared to the billions lost, stolen, or given away stupidly. The outright disdain, largess, pandering to special interest groups, broken promises, and outright lies to the people of Canada by the Liberal government of the time. Harper can do damn near whatever he wants up to, but not including murdering babies at a press gathering, and it won’t equal 12 years of corruption and mismanagement.
You think he’ll pay for not talking to Shapiro???
Lets take this one step at a time, so you don’t fall behind.
1) Shapiro will never even get his investigation off the ground. Harper will fire him in the next two weeks… MARK MY WORDS ON THIS, the next two weeks.
The ethics commissioner appointed will be someone it’s virtually impossible for any party to call to question on ethics, or morality, or anything, the person will be that squeaky clean and popular. My guess is Gomery.
Why will Harper do this, because the Liberals are fucked, fucked three ways to Sunday, and they can’t afford an election. They have no leader, no money, no prospect for a leader, and the nearest date of a leadership convention will be early 2007. On top of that, were they stupid enough to pull the plug on Harper before picking a leader, they will die a miserable death in the polls, and hand Stephan a majority before the end of Spring.
They’ll scream, they’ll bitch, they’ll whine to the heavens and beg God to open the gates of hell to punish Harper, and in the end, they will bend over, take it straight up the ass and do whatever he tells them to do. Not only will they do it, they’ll ask Harper to fuck them harder if he wants to.
He has a blank cheque and there is nothing, NOTHING, that the liberals can do about it, without completely screwing themselves in the process.
2.) If your going to piss people off as a Prime Minister, and if your going to fuck other people over as Prime Minister, you do it early in your term, so that when it finally does come time to go to the polls, the voters don’t remember that you did what you did. That’s Politics 101 bud.
3) Harper has never, NEVER, stated that he would not co-operate with the office of the Ethics Commissioner. He also never said he would not submit to questioning by the Ethics Commissioner, he said he would be loath to cooperate with THIS ethics commissioner… Which is a pretty good indication that this particular Ethics Commissionar won’t be around long enough to interview the Prime Minister.
4) Harper has been PM for roughly two months, and hasn’t even had a chance to present any legislative reforms to the commons yet, yet you assume he going back on everything he’s said. I would bet good money that when the house sits under the new Government, the Ethics legislation will be first up to bat, and the improved legislation for the Ethics Commission will actually turn the office into something useful, instead of a backdoor job like it was under the Liberals.
5) Robert Shapiro was endorsed by all parties because there was no other option anyway. He was appointed by the PMO, and nobody in their right mind was under any illusions that it was a non-partisan appointment. If they’d said no, Martin could have appointed him anyway, or just trundled another Liberal bumboy out for them to endorse. It would amount to the same thing no matter what.
Your problem, which is the same for all the Liberal crybabies out there, is that your used to being spoonfed daily junk, and you haven’t the capacity to take a longer view.
Harper will make you eat your words shortly… just stay tuned to your misinformed media.
There is NO ethics issue in Harper appointing Emerson. NONE.
The libs, ndpers and press all WANT it to be, but it is NOT.
It is the WAY things have been done, as was pointed out by no less than Craig Oliver, of all people, going all the way back to Winston Churchill, who, Oliver said, would NOT have become PM and spearhead the fight with the Nazi’s had he NOT crossed the floor.
In Canada, this is the way things have been done since the beginning. So, NOW that libs , who have done this as often as they thought worthwhile, and under very suspicious circumstances, were given a free ride by everybody including the ‘ethics’ commissioner.
Who, it appears obvious, is ‘ethically’ challenged himself.
Please.. this was over the minute Emerson crossed the floor for EVERYONE except the NDP the libs and the press who cannot get over Harper is out to govern in the best way possible for CANADIANS, not them.
Quite refreshing actually.
I am not interested in their opinions that are self serving at best and downright misleading most often. If Emerson had crossed to the NDP you would not see Layton and Davies open their mouths, but since it is the Conservatives, they can be relied upon to heap on the lather and blather for the 24 hour news cycle.
We need to shut them off.
Easter & Martin: Blowing bubbles as airy as lead balloons. +
“If he won’t comply with the ethics commissioner’s inquiry, I’d be prepared to table a motion to see the prime minister in contempt,” New Democrat MP Pat Martin said Thursday.” +
via cnews
Hey McDonnell:
If like you say, the liberals are fucked now, it won’t take them long to get back in the game. You know why? Because your man Steve is giving them so many openings it aint even funny.
He has a chance right now to establish his party as not whacko extreme right wing nuts. (Of course you folks here on SDA don’t help him much in this respect). But people don’t need MSM biased or not to see hypocracy when it rears its head.
He ran on a platform of ethics and accountability. The ethics commissioner squeaked about investingating the almighty PM. Harper says – FIRE HIS ASS. – No questions asked. This is an example of ethics and accountability?
Your man better stop hanging out on SDA all day and listening to right wing circle jerk. Its time to go out into the big world now!
Maz2, I was watching CPAC that day that Deepak Obhrai presented his case to The Speaker. His resolve to have the matter *properly* dealt with was absolutely palpable.
I have included the link to Obhrai’s petitioning of The House and Speaker that day.
For anyone interested, it is well worth the read *in full*, to get a view of Shapiro’s part…from The Hansard:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/125_2005-09-26/han125_1540-E.htm
“There is NO ethics issue in Harper appointing Emerson. NONE.”
I guess that settles that. Except it’s coming from someone who calls themself snowbunnie.
harper blew it. his inexperience, bad advice or stupidity shows:
“72.01 The Governor in Council shall, by commission under the Great Seal, appoint an Ethics Commissioner after consultation with the leader of every recognized party in the House of Commons and after approval of the appointment by resolution of that House.”
I guess he could just pay the guy off
This is what comes from doing Mackay’s job for him everyday.
IMO, after a dozen or so years of corrupt Liberal rule, a good deal of the elite civil service, including the likes of Mr. Shapiro really ought to be getting their resumes in order. Too many of them are entrenched Liberal bootlickers, and should be replaced if the new government is to have any chance of implementing its policies and programs, without undue balking and sabotage by the old Liberal guard.
Good luck to Mr. Harper and others in the new government in sorting out the mess the Lieberals have left us with.
William MacDonell..The political sentiment of this site could not be more obvious. The woman squeezes out a few odious little right-wing turds and the yahoos and sycophants come out of the woodwork to exclaim how sweet they smell. They fancy themselves conservatives but, bereft of any philosophical underpinnings, they reveal themselves as deep as a birdbath partisans, inhabiting a simplistic, black and white world in which the Conservative party, the Sask. party and the Republicans can do no wrong. If all else fails, blame it on the evil, all powerful MSM, and the vast socialist conspiracy. It’s all rather amusing, in a pathetic sort of way. osama
To all those sore-loser liberals out there!
I have yet in my lifetime to vote
for a sitting party.All my votes have been to replace the arrogance that comes naturally to ANY party in power for an extended period.
Mulroney,Chretien,Martin,it didn’t matter.
However,we now have a completely new party(that’s
right,or did you forget all the work that went into that)and a completely different type of leader.
Since the rest of us gave Martin a fair chance(again you’ll remember many conservatives had high hopes for him)you would think you could give Harper more than a couple weeks before you try to shred him to pieces.
Can you honestly tell me you cannot be magnanamous enough to even give him a chance?
Or is the thrill of this blood-sport more important to you than your country?
ha… is that the best you liberal boobs can come up with. You know why Generals are never Liberals, because they can’t think up strategy worth a shit.
You guys are sitting back, picking away at 7 weeks worth of office time by Harper, a guy who has to basically rebuild a Government, and you expect him to dance like Martinette to the media and some shlep of a guy who thinks it’s appropriate to investigate him for the Emerson conversion.
Man, you guys are going to have to do way better than that if you ever hope to see a Liberal PM in the next decade.
Criticize Emerson appointment all you want, but the fact of the matter is that Canadians didn’t boot the Liberals over this type of appointment. They are gone because they stole taxpayers’ money, misspent countless $billions and didn’t tell the truth v.v. surpluses. Mr Harper was asked a direct question in the last election about forcing defectors to sit as independents, which he said he did not support. I love the “nobody asked Shapiro to investigate Stronach.” Give me a break; I guess the Tories could argue that, since, parliament is not in session, there can be no parliament to report to; thus no investigation possible. In other words, a technicality. The press double standard is once again breathtaking. Remember when Stronach defected, days after telling everyone Martin must go, to prop him up and given something she was not qualified for and did not earn (nothing new here for her), a senior Cabinet post. What did the press report? They fixated on charges of sexism against poor little Belinda. They didn’t raise a fuss then, and are hypocrites therefore this time. As far as whether this or that is ethical or not, it seems that one’s ethics are determined by their party affiliation and their stand on an issue. Ethics can never be about that. I recommend Harper fire Shapiro for cause immediately, and promise the first act of the next (real) ethics commissioner will be to look into the Emerson affair and come up with recommendations to parliament for rules regarding floor crossing. Meanwhile the public yawns and the press yearns.
And now Belinda’s conversion is going to be requested by the NDP to be scrutinized by the misplaced ethics commission… hah, what’s good for the goose eh Liberals.
I knew it was only a matter of time before BS got called on the carpet. Anything to derail her leadership ambition. This might save her the ultimate humiliation of losing the leadership race, or winning it and beating Kims record of taking a party down to nowhere. Remember, she had supper with Peter, and then met Martin in a secret meeting in a hotel room. Next day she is a cabinet minister. What did she do in that room to get that post.
Shapiro’s LIEBERAL bias shines like a beacon.
Pure as a driven turd. Unqualified certainly comes closest to describing the pompous arse.