Shelly Glover faces questions over Winnipeg arts fundraiser

OTTAWA – There is a report that a federal cabinet minister has decided not to accept any money from a Winnipeg fundraising event out of concern it could violate conflict of interest rules.

CTV News is reporting that the event in Heritage Minister Shelly Glover’s riding included members of Winnipeg’s arts community, and Glover’s department is responsible for arts and culture.

CTV says it obtained an invitation to the event that indicated those invited were primarily from Winnipeg’s cultural community.

Federal conflict-of-interest rules forbid cabinet ministers from soliciting funds from anyone who has lobbied or is likely to lobby the minister’s department.

CTV says Glover’s office acknowledged some guests at the fundraiser did have dealings with her department so she isn’t going to accept any of the $1,200 dollars raised.

Glover also told CTV her riding association sent the invitations and she didn’t draw up the guest list.

She also told the network that she has contacted the federal ethics commissioner to determine if the fundraiser is an issue.

Liberal MP Ralph Goodale and New Democrat Charlie Angus both told CTV the fundraiser was improper.




Browse

Shelly Glover faces questions over Winnipeg arts fundraiser

  1. Dear Diary,

    Just when I thought I had Justine Trousseau dead to rights it’s messed up. We had a drugged up drama teacher who can’t keep track of his expenses and whose most important issue each morning is how to curl his hair.

    Now one of my prime recent appointments, Shelley Glover, gets busted taking graft? Not so much graft as my earlier appointments, but still. I’m supposed to be getting good photo-ops flying to Israel and more there, but a newly-elected MP, a Minister, a former cop, gets busted? Really? Steal my thunder anyone?

    And then there’s President Obama. What a twit. I’ve already told him I won’t take “No” for an answer but he still won’t say “Yes”. He won’t sign what is obviously a good deal to any good conservative, and instead steals my spotlight by making a highly visible speech about the virtues of protecting citizen’s privacy, la la la. Has he no respect? Is he brain-dead?

    I don’t understand what’s wrong with this world, but hopefully they’ll figure it out soon. I’m about to win another majority government.

    I hope Canada won’t change much before I get home again. More than anything I hope I’m still Prime Minister.

    Steve.

  2. What would we do without CTV? And why do all the best leaks go there?

  3. So she decided NOT to accept the money? Doesn’t that sort of end the matter? Contra Justin Trudeau who accepted 10 g’s a pop from charities for “speaking” while being a sitting MP. Justin’s still sitting on that cash (though maybe he spent it on a lavish ski trip, we know he loves his lavish ski trips…Lord knows he doesn’t need to save it, why with being born into vast wealth and all). Poor boy just couldn’t speak for free to a Charity. Just HAD to further line his pockets, even though his job is to publicly speak. Wonder what kind of help that money could have provided the needy.
    While the media does gymnastic contortions trying to find an angle of impropriety where there is none, the media’s boy gets a pass in a matter of clear moral depravity.

    • Glover scenario according to you:
      Bank robber robs bank
      Bank robber is caught
      Bank robber pays back money
      Bank robber is let go after all he paid it back, no harm no foul.

      Trudeau scenario in reality:
      Ethically cleared.
      Legally carried out.
      Everyone except the knuckle draggers understand this.

      What is it with Wing nuts and joined up thinking?

      • We are all aware Trudeau supporters think its just dandy that Trudeau (one who is independently wealthy and who doesn’t need a further dime) lined his pockets with funds that could have gone to the Charities’ benficiaries (10 gs to a lavish ski trip instead of to sick children?)

        I urge you come election time to proudly shout that from the rooftops.

        • I just understand the distinction between criminal behaviour and legal behaviour and do not seek to excuse criminal behaviour by employing hyperbole to try and equate legal behaviour with it.

          Attempting to do so is not something that I would expect from a supporter of a party that claims to support law and order issues, but then I wouldn’t expect those party people to actually commit crimes in the first place.

          I believe many a millionaire has spoken at fund raisers. Athletes are especially in demand. I look forward to your next comment crticising Wayne Gretzky for what was it you said lining his already “independently wealthy” “pockets with funds that could have gone to the Charities’ benficiaries [sic].”

          There is a reason why none of the charities are complaining about this practice you know? But I wouldn’t expect a partisan hack like you to understand that they make money that they otherwise would not have had because of them.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *