17

Mounties launch probe into G8 spending

$50 million spent in Clement’s riding now under RCMP investigation


 

The RCMP has launched an investigation into the federal government’s questionable spending decisions ahead of last year’s G8 summit in Muskoka. The government’s use of $50 million from a border infrastructure fund to sprinkle “beautification projects” around Tony Clement’s riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka was lambasted in a recent report by Canada’s auditor general, which said the decision-making process surrounding the spending lacked transparency. The RCMP’s decision to investigate further was prompted by a complaint from former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings, who was defeated in the May 2 election.

Canadian Press


 
Filed under:

Mounties launch probe into G8 spending

  1. It’s about time.

    Now we’ll find out if Clement et al crossed the line from mere sleazy porkbarrelling to genuine misappropriation.

  2. “A former Liberal MP has sent a letter to the RCMP and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, outlining allegations about the federal government’s spending for last year’s G8 summit in Ontario.Marlene Jennings questioned the government in a letter dated April 15, saying the spending raised questions about a “possible misappropriation of funds.”Jennings was a representative for Notre-Dame-De-Grace-Lachine in Quebec before losing her seat in the May 2 federal election.
    RCMP acknowledged on Tuesday that they had received a “referral.”“The matter is currently with A Division,” said Const. Suzanne said that “Based on the evaluation of the information provided, the RCMP may or may not initiate an investigation, but we cannot talk about the investigation right now.”” or anything else bad it seems
     
    HA HA HA and do you really believe the incompetent and immoral mounties will find anyone guilty and they should investigate themslves here too.. all the mounties can do is give out revenue ngerating traffic tickets and abuse the ordinary persons basucally

  3. The Mounties themselves are far from paragons of virtue. People in glass houses…

    • What the hell does that even mean?

      This is our national police force for christ’s sake.

  4. And this is different from Adscam how?  Oh, this time 2 prominent cabinet ministers are directly involved.

    • no money was stolen. That is a big difference.

      • Nonsense. Hiding behind murky legalities doesn’t change what a thing is.

        They lied to parliament about what the money would be used for. In my books that’s a misappropriation of funds, ie theft.

        Honestly, are you telling me that if the Adscam thieves had found a quasi-legal way to take the money you’d be all good to go?

        BS.

        • “recent report by Canada’s auditor general, which said the decision-making process surrounding the spending lacked transparency.”
          You can make the leap to lying, then to misappropriation of funds, and then to theft. The rest of us don’t.

          Adscam had thieves. The money wasn’t spent on bike racks or gazebos – it was stolen. Can you understand a slight difference there? The money was stolen, gone, not spent on anything that in the slightest way could be shown to be good for the taxpayer. If you can’t see a difference, the problem might lie with you.

          • There’s no real difference from my perspective. The report said in a number of places that they essentially couldn’t prove there were any illegalities because there was no paper trail.

            So the AG’s report is damning for what the auditors have warned us that they cannot tell us.

            Beyond that it is obvious that the government lied to parliament when asking for the funds in the first place.

            If I ask you for $80 to buy groceries and then spend $50 of it on video games, have I really been honest? Come on already, you’re measuring shades of morality and telling me it isn’t bad because it’s not as black.

            Lying to parliament to get money you then spend for your own personal political ends is theft.

            There’s no moral ambiguity here at all in my opinion.

          • The report said no such thing. The report said that there was no paper trail showing how the projects were chosen. It did not say that it couldn’t prove illegalities because of a lack of paper evidence. I would submit that is how you read it. That is not what the report says. Have you only read soundbites, and read into the soundbites what you want to hear? The report says that is can account for every penny that was spent. No theft.

            The AG report tells us all we need to know, and a RCMP investigation would not come up with more.

            It is not obvious that the gov’t lied to parliament. What is obvious is that they spent money that was allocated for one thing, on another.

            Yes, it is shades of morality, and stealing is much worse than spending in one spot what was supposed to be spent in another. I am not saying that it isn’t bad, only that it is not as bad as Adscam. Your example of the $80 was a bad analogy. Spending $50 on furniture for the person would have been a better analogy. This isn’t about honesty, it is about whether or not it is theft.

            Here you are just making things up. There is no proof that anyone lied to anyone. Tony Clements riding was one of the safest in the country. Can’t see how spending there was supposed to help the CP. Again, not theft.

            I am not saying what they did was right, I am just saying that we shouldn’t let our political leanings blow this out of proportion.

            Your opinion is pretty tainted. Facts can cure that.

  5. These are ‘serious allegations’, as Mr. Harper would put it, and Mr. Harper must report himself and Mr. Clement to the RCMP and remove themselves from the cabinet and the Conservative Party and join Ms Guergis in the eternal penalty box.

  6. The AG already did the investigation. No money was missing – it was all accounted for. This was inappropriate, and everyone knows that. Illegal – haven’t heard that much.

    ” The RCMP’s decision to investigate further was prompted by a complaint
    from former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings, who was defeated in the May 2
    election.”

    Does this not just stink of sour grapes. I lost the election, so here is one last swipe. If the investigation moves forward, it will just be another waste of tax money.

    • She actually initiated the request on April 15 – before the election. Unlike the investigation that contributed to Paul Martin’s defeat, the cops elected to wait until after the election to investigate. Not sure if that indicates a lesson learned, or a bias on the part of the RCMP.

      • I actually thought of the date after I had written the comment. It was before the election.
        As far as why the RCMP wouldn’t move, I would submit that they wanted to wait until after the AG report came out (half their work done) and it doesn’t appear that laws were broken. Basically, it might never be investigated by the RCMP. That doesn’t have to show bias, as the situations of both were very different.

  7. So it is supposedly no big deal that $50 Million was appropriated for strictly personal political purposes, seemingly because fooling parliament into rubber stamping the money under the guise of border security is okay?

    Conservatives certainly have a creative way of justifying their form of theft over others.

    Hiding behind dubious “legalities” doesn’t change the fact that this was theft.

  8. modster99: “…It is not obvious that the gov’t lied to parliament. What is obvious is that they spent money that was allocated for one thing, on another…”

    LOL

    In parliament you have to ask for money for specific actions. Our entire system is predicated on ensuring that this is the case, and that money is returned if not officially okayed for other purposes. This is the bulk of the Treasury Board’s work in fact, ensuring that money is spent on what it was allocated for.

    So if you go into to parliament and ask for money to beef up border security and then spend over 60% of it on a single riding hundreds of miles away, not even on security no less, then you have misled parliament and misappropriated the funds, ie you stole the money.

    There’s no justification for this spending at all, and if we start shrugging our shoulders at these types of massive and unaccountable spending sprees with misappropriated funds, where does it end?

    • Giving Tony the Treasury Board post is a clear indication that it won’t end…

Sign in to comment.