In his opening statement the Chief Electoral Officer said an internal review had cleared him and his staff, though when Scott Reid on a point of order required him to table the review he quickly downgraded it to “not truly a report, barely a sheet.”
So Mr. Poilievre asked who conducted the review…
h/t Rose
Related – Canada yawns over in-and-out scandal
Is that a typo? “barely a shit” ?
I suppose this will be the lead story on “The National” tomorrow night.
As the author of the above article implies, the scandal here isn’t inside the CPC, it’s inside Elections Canada. If the CPC manages to win a majority next time around there will be a purging of EC. EC brass knows it, thus they are pulling out all of the stops.
At least with Elections Canada, they *try* to make some pretense that they are unbiased.
Elections Alberta doesn’t even try to hide their shenanigans in favour of the socialist Stelmach government.
Slimy Liberal bureaucrats at EC conducting a witch hunt against the Conservative Government, while being blindly cheered on by the media, all in a vain specious attempt at keeping their jobs as Liberal party bureaucrats. The Liberal party “culture of corruption” has slithered it’s way into EC and it’s rotted the one brain they all share. An investigation into EC corruption is long over do. Where else in the Liberal bureaucracy does the Liberal “culture of corruption” ferment.
For the good of Canada we need a Conservative majority to allow for forensic audits of several areas that feed at the teat of the taxpayer…and the EC is most definitely not the only one that seems of have the festering slime of the Liberals rotting it’s very core.
The Ottawa Citizen again trys to minimize the incredible duplicity of Elections Canada management through a cutesy little comparison with a oldie Perry Mason T.V. show.
Not bold enough to actually try and be a true Federal Civil Servant and be direct misrepresentet of the facts the Ottawa citizen(ry) works on the sidelines to assist the misrepresentation in any manner possible.
Where are highly educated “mandarins of Canada”, the loyal and true keepers of the keys of all civility and honesty which makes this wonderful country great?
These “small little things” the little people need not worry about and the absolute debacle of the Health Care; Immigration; Border Rationalization with our major customer/supplier neighbour nation; are the sign of the inadequacy of their “group think”.
The mess started with P.M. Pearson’s administration stating we have to pay much more money to the Civil Service to get the best people.
What we have ended up with is not the smartest or dedicated people to serve Canada, but the “me first” people. Motivated by privlege and position not Service to civil (uncorrupt) service. Cheers;
‘In his opening statement the Chief Electoral Officer [Marc Mayrand cleared himself and his staff of the leak]’
Being liberal with the truth after a conservative investigation…
This is why we need Sun TV & other outlets.
We need a plugged in Canada of educated voters, not a CBC fairyland of cotton candy lies.
JMO
It’s curious how EC does recounts in the East verses the West.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/009884.html
and http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/524422
259 ballots rejected? Been involved in several elections both Provincial and Federal and never saw that many. 44 of these rejected votes were later found to be valid?
I also remember a local non-mainstream newspaper report that discussed irregularities in the voting procedure. Something about a large number of voters appearing out of nowhere in one Poll.
I can smell the stench of Elections Canada’s pile-up on the CPC from my house, a few hundred miles away.
They’re the scandal: They ignore indiscretions by other parties but nail the CPC. They investigate and exonerate themselves of any wrongdoing and hound the CPC unmercifully.
What the …?
Who’s the watch dog of the watch dog? I guess that’s Kate’s job.
Is this happening in Canada or in Cook county?
Oh, this is GOLD!
And the high and mighty block complain?
The BLOCK are the godfathers of the In & Out…
In the 2000 federal elections the Bloc Québécois organized a system to inflate apparent campaign spending at the riding level, and thereby receive much higher refunds from Elections Canada.[1] The Bloc organized “La Méthode In & Out” prior to the elections, having each candidate agree to certain spending numbers in order to inflate the overall cash flows. In exchange, Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe would sign their nomination papers, a requirement for running in the election.
Large amounts of cash were transferred from the party organization to the individual riding associations that are in charge of running one candidate’s election campaign. The money was then distributed to the volunteers as payments for various expenses. The volunteers then donated that money back to the party.[1] On the surface it appeared that the ridings were spending much larger amounts of money than normal, enough to drain the party war chest. In fact, a considerable portion of the money was being returned directly to the party’s coffers.
Under normal circumstances the money received by the volunteers would be subject to income tax and therefore the scheme would be unattractive to them. But because the money was then spent on political donations, it could be written off. The only cost to the volunteer was time in filling out their tax forms – something they were giving up anyway as a volunteer for the party.
The scheme may have remained unknown if not for an ironic court case against former Bloc MP, Jean-Paul Marchand. Marchand agreed to spend $66,000 as part of the in and out scheme, but spent only $22,276. The Bloc sued Marchand, saying he had broken his contract and owed them $36,362. A Quebec judge agreed with the Bloc, but lowered the amount to $16,362.[1] When the story broke in 2003 as a result of the court case, the ruling Liberal Party immediately started to implement changes to the election law to stop this process. However, these changes were not implemented before the party lost power in 2006.
It appears election’s Canada doesn’t have a governing body that holds them accountable? If we had a civil service code of conduct then we’d have a venue to file formal complaints of biasness etc. Of course MSM isn’t reporting the story nor will they EVER report that he investigated himself and absolved himself of any responsibility.
It appears election’s Canada doesn’t have a governing body that holds them accountable? ~ Rose
13. (1) There shall be a Chief Electoral Officer
who shall be appointed by resolution of
the House of Commons to hold office during
good behaviour. He or she may be removed for
cause by the Governor General on address of
the Senate and House of Commons. ~ Canada Elections Act
Aint democracy wonderful Rose?
Harper should announce the CPC platform will include an end to government funding of political parties. All parties should be required to raise electioneering funds from their supporters and let the cards fall where they may.
What really pisses me off is that the media always forgets to mention that this “scandal” involves the parties money, not tax payers money. You always hear ‘hundreds of thousands’ or ‘millions in spending’ but no mention that that money was donated to the party, its really an accounting thing.
Ask Canadians if they give a shit about campaign spending limit and see if this is an issue.
Next time the CPC does this they should just funnel money around as a ‘leadership campaign loan’ and get an unlimited number of extensions to pay it back.
And no one is even working up a sweat about the leadership scandal in the LPC. All those loans made for the leadership campaign supposed to be paid back years ago now and none done. Just keep getting extensions on the deadline. Imagine if you will if the CPC were doing the same. Oh the outrage. Oh the scandal….Same old crap, same old lame stream media.
Meanwhile Justice continues to publish Sarah Brady Fioundation propaganda as serious research.
And Enviro Canada plods along using taxpayer funds to publicize Suzuki/Gore BS as solid science.
“Where’s fury on in-and-out ad scheme?”
By DAVID AKIN
Where’s the TRUTH on in-and-out scheme?
David seems to have trouble building wholly true columns; perhaps his shovel isn’t big enough to hold all the facts.
CBC has a poll up at http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2011/03/in-and-out-affair-are-you-following-the-controversy.html that could go very, very wrong.
Of course, since no traction was happening because no taxpayer’s money was involved, CBC has created a new twist to the ‘scandal’.
Dastardly wrote: Harper should announce the CPC platform will include an end to government funding of political parties.
The ah ha moment!
Love it!
Avaaz..nuff said.
Proof of Two Liberals very own In & Out
http://mrdconservative.com/cgi/wp/?p=197
Who’s lying…Maynard or CBC? Article from 2007 where Maynard said NO REFUNDS were given…
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=d015d719-df8e-400e-95d0-2192a7abdf5b&p=2
over to you CBC.
Anyone catch the Power & Politics segment that was just on the CBC? Turtlenecked Manitoba NDP Pat Martin lashed out angrily at Candice Hoeppner for daring to suggest that all three parties used the same funding technique (a fact you can verify on the Elections Canada website). He called her lots and lots of names.
got my CPC contribution 150 dollar tax refund today !
perhaps adding my mite to the cost of the pavilion will tip the scales finally…i’m sanguine…truly….i can hear the howls of the CBC and Elections Canada….and a hundred other lllieberal sinecures already…
2011 is shaping up to be a wonderful year…
Anybody else having this problem?
See, I keep reading the part attributed to him explaining the bit of how he was found to be exonerated of any wrongdoing by himself. But no matter how many times I re-read it, the statement sounds like “I’m entitled to my entitlements”.
That and the sound of liberal heads exploding.
He has examined himself deeply and has come to conclusion that he is as pure as the driven snow.
Who does he think he is? The CBC?
Candice Hophner pointed out where to go to get info on other parties In & Out, that the media smear campaign is covering up.Pat Martin NDP wasn’t happy too say the least. And they want more women in politics? Candice Hophner, a very classy lady having to go down into the liberal NDP pigs pen to show the bias and false info out there by the Coalition aided by taxpayer funded CBC.Her last words after this was…”Shame on you Pat”.
You be the judge…
Check out the website the CPC wants us to check. Candice said its the Elections Canada website. Here is the site….what an attack on a CPC woman . Candice ended by getting in the last words…..Shame on you Pat.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/1244504890/ID=1832658447
Wow! Pat Martin was an utter disgrace on Power and Politics today. As Candice Hoeppner points out, the kind of unparliamentary vitriol and personal attacks on her and the CPC by Pat Martin would seem to indicate that he and his party have something to hide.
I’ve never seen the kind of viciousness that Pat Martin displayed towards a political opponent, like some kind of psychotic episode, certainly a display of derangement and utterly inappropriate behaviour.
I wonder how Mr. Solomon would have reacted to a Conservative MP calling out a Liberal or NDP colleague along similar lines. His talk about Martin’s “tough language” was pretty tepid. He should have called Pat Martin on his shocking display of abusive and insulting language towards another MP.
And we’re still left to wonder why Elections Canada keeps extending the LPC leadership candidates’ repayment of loans from the last election, with seemingly, no penalties. We’re still left to wonder why the CBC hasn’t made a point of looking into that “scandal.”
I guess it’s only a scandal if it’s got the CPC label on it.
Oh no! Looks like the NDP will get all the angry white man vote from now after watching Pat martin bust a vein. He had that “why I oughta pooouuund you” look going on.
duffman at March 7, 2011 11:04 AM: “What really pisses me off is that the media always forgets to mention that this “scandal” involves the parties money, not tax payers money.”
Oh, if it were only so. You forget that the candidates filed for reimbursement based on what the alleged to have spent on their campaign. In fact, some were reimbursed from the taxpayers purse more than they actually spent. One of the largest costs of an election is the Public” (read taxpayers’) reimbursement of candidate expenditures.