Do you think Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau should be suspended from the Senate? -

Do you think Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau should be suspended from the Senate?


Filed under:

Do you think Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau should be suspended from the Senate?

  1. I was so impressed with Pamela’s passionate speech. Who wouldn’t be passionate if your reputation, livelihood, healthcare and future earnings opportunities were being challenged in such a deceitful and unethical way. With Pamela’s work history and credentials I think it is far better to err on the side of caution. I’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt and let due process play out. What threat does it pose for our parliamentary system to give her a voice in the matter versus the damage that will arise from convicting her without an open hearing?
    If one has already served in the Senate chamber, can one run for a govrnment seat… say…Prime Minister?
    Thanks Debra

    • Yes, you can run for Parliament after serving in the Senate. Several Senators have resigned in recent years to run for Parliament. For one example, Senator Larry Smith (no relation) was appointed to the Senate in 2010, then resigned to run for office in 2011, lost, and was reappointed to the Senate in 2011. Senator Fabian Manning has a similar history.

      Personally, I think there should be no reason to ban an ex-Senator from running for Parliament, but I do think there should be a rule prohibiting them from being re-appointed if they lose.

    • Sounds like someone has a lady crush on Wallin.
      She looks like a pig, and now she’s squealing like one. How gullible can you be to fall for the crocodile tears?
      Of course she’ll say and do anything to try to keep her cash flow lucrative…she can’t really rely on her looks to take her places any more, can she?
      Or didn’t they teach acting at the schools she attended?

      • Looks like a pig? Shame on you for showing such misogyny and bigotry in public.

  2. Oh come on . . Look at these people- self-important elitists.
    They represent the worse of what non-elected officals stand for – greedy self serving opportunists.
    Look at Dugffy & Wallin – they could stand to lose a little weight. And what qualifies a person who read news for a living to actually help make decisions on what affects real people??

    • Does that include Dallaire? the quality of a Senator is a result of the quality of the PMO. you want a better Senate? Reform the appointment process.

      and ya blah blah elect the senate. blahh blahh abolish. w/e

      that just gets you populist pandering party politics at all levels and that works so well in the commons.

      The roll of the senate is to have a body that can call BS without fear. we just dont get that because its the PMO making the appointments.

      Start viewing it like theyre tenured professors whos area of expertise is governance, economics and law and we might get somewhere.

      • I completely agree — take the senators OUT of the caucuses so that PMO (now and future) don’t have power to control them. And, as Justin Trudeau said: pick better senators — I’m with those who say let the pm choose from three selected in the province itself.

  3. That means everyone gets their first chance to cheat. If you do not get caught, you can keep on cheating.

    • Well, that’s the way the world works.

  4. We need due process – perhaps even a Public Inquiry.
    The Senate has no business being judge & jury without a full public inquiry.

    Let the RCMP finish their job.

    • These guys and gals have already cost us enough, I say we get rid of them as soon as possible.

  5. Canada us a democracy, not a dictatorship. Voters should demand due process and an investigation; anything more or less goes against tenets of this country. That is, our justice system upholds an “innocent until proven guilty” perspective and the power to abdicate senators should not rest wholly in the senate or the PM’s office, for that will only encourage future abuses of power.

    • Unfortunately, that line of reasoning only applies when we are willing to look at things BEFORE the damage has already been done…and if there’s one thing about Canadians, it’s that whenever we see something going wrong anywhere else in the world, we IMPORT IT HERE, and tell ourselves “It’s OK…it’ll work here…this is CANADA!” Of course, we’re always completely shocked that–for some strange and completely unknown reason–whatever it was that never worked anywhere else in the world didn’t work here. (It’s OK, though…there’s always new foreign-designed failures to import.)

      That’s why we USED to have gold reserves, a sound, backed currency, and now we’ve got about 800 billion in fraudulent debt we owe to foreign bankers who’ve given us nothing but pieces of paper with “debts” on them.

      Yup…Canada’s full of “post-trauma considerers” alright…

      Note: The last legitimate, near-fully-considered, non-partisan report that was released by the Canadian Senate that I can think of was the 2002 Canadian Senate Report, which COULD have saved us all TWO BILLION A YEAR since that time…but then…that would only benefit “The People of Canada”, and not the international bankers, corporations, and governments…

      PS: “Innocent until proven guilty” is a lie, these days. In court, they KNOW what you did without hearing a word from you…that’s why they “charge” you and set a dollar figure in it well in advance…and whenever the court thinks that it might not get your money that they promised to themselves when they “issued your receipt”, they “rule evidence inadmissible” if it’s in your favour.

    • So if the 3 aren’t charged by the RCMP, you think they should simply walk away after defrauding Canadian taxpayers without any punishment? That doesn’t seem right to me.

      An audit was done, they were found to have claimed expenses that they shouldn’t have. They deserve to be fired, it’s not rocket science.

      • I am not convinced that the rules are clear enough to make the claim that “they claimed expenses that they shouldn’t have”.

  6. The only victim is Canadian Taxpayers …Time to abolish this corupt entity !!

  7. Let’s avoid a rush to judgment. Police officers under investigation seem to spend years suspended with pay. Surely senators are entitled to the same protection. I also think any investigation would have to look into how two of them were appointed to represent provinces where they hadn’t lived for years.

  8. These three people only represent of the tip of the ice berg concerning financial waste in Ottawa and all those who are employed by our governments.
    For Wallin and Duffy it is payback time for all the mud that they accused others of over the years. Karma is painful, but as it was said by a wise and Holy Man, what you sow you shall also reap. I agree that they desire due process. They should have their day in court as should all the rest of the senators who may be under investigation.

    The other person who is reaping what he has sown over the past years is our Prime Minister S. Harper. His unChristian attitude, arrogance and childish behaviour, demonstrated in many different situations is now finally fully revealed. Yes, as a lawyer he will fudge around trying to prove his innocence as most do in our court system by evaluating the situation as legal or illegal. The correct question to ask is it morally right or wrong. Yes, Mr Prime Minister …….. you can run, you can appoint others to talk for you, you can prorogue parliament, you go over seas to conferences, you can go back to Alberta and sing the party songs……. but you can not hide forever.

    David Shantz

    • PM Harper a lawyer? Really. I’m sure that will be news to him and everyone else who knows him.

    • Harper is not a Lawyer, he is supposedly a economist of some type, who never had a job, if he did it was of insignificant nature. Most of all he is a pail of poison who is a clear cut bully & as bullies go he is also a coward.Harper doesnt give a rats ass that these low life Senators scammed through ineligible expenses , schilled for him in his electoral efforts & charged it back to the taxpayers. Harper wants these Senators thrown out because he is p to his ass in this whole mess & he wants it to go away. Yes the Senators should be thrown out of the Senate, but not without due justice,but Harper is the big Hog in this deal & he has to go also. He has pathetically lied & abused the truth from the start of this issue. The buck stops at him.

      • Why don’t you just type “Harper is evil because I say so”, instead of writing a “paragraph” of rambling nonsense?

        • In regards to your statement that I should have just stated that Harper is evil, thanks for pointing out my omission, judging from your reply I would suspect that you have the other 2 evils covered,”Hear no evil,See no evil” Right???Seems you Harperites cant stand the heat in the kitchen, I know one thing, there are more Canadians agree with my assessment of Harper than your assessment. You wouldnt happen to work for the Toronto Sun would you??If not you probably read it, that would explain your blind faith & your ignoramus reply to my rambling nonsense.

          • I couldn’t agree wt you more Gary…but I think we are all guilty of your aforementioned “evils”. The question I ask is how do we unite as Canadians and voters in order for government to be forced to respond to us…the system is completely broken they are not people for the people any longer, they are carrer politicians that know how to manipulate a flaud system, and it seems even when they are found to be guilty of some crime or wrong doing that there is no reprecusions, for example with wallin, I realize the issue is not over yet but right now it would seem that she was caught stealing money, but now has paid it back so all wrong doing is forgiven and no punishment.

  9. Wallin and Duffy are accused of improperly claiming expenses. Why? Are the rules confusing or vague? Why were the claim problems not caught sooner? I am assuming that someone reviews the expense claims before issuing an expense reimbursement cheque.

    • Yes, they are confusing. They are intentionally so because politicians like wiggle room.

  10. Do Princess Pamela and Lord Mike Duffy et al think that’s how the rest of Canada is treated when they have broken laws, helped themselves to the company’s money and lied about it all–they can have their cake and eat it too? Not likely–no pensions, no medical plans for them! And now they whine–who was it that ruined their reputations? You? I? They did it nicely themselves.

  11. why is harper trying to get rid of these senators before they have an investigation?

    • There was an audit. What more “investigation” does there need to be? They claimed illegitimate expenses for their own personal gain. They should be turfed ASAP. It’s not that hard to figure out.

      • Why in such an ‘urry? They will still be guilty if given due process, and nobody can say they didn’t get a fair and reasonable opportunity to defend themselves. So, again — what’s the hurry?

      • An investigation found Del Mastro committed fraud. Was isn’t he being removed from parliament?

        • That should be “Why isn’t he….”

  12. FIRST: Make the rules easy to understand without the grey areas.
    SECOND: Have a system in place (and I think there is one of sorts) that will approve expenses that may be questionable.
    THIRD: Then judge by the rules.
    FOURTH: When an infraction is established the penalty should be the same as those used when you are charged with late payments of income taxes
    FIFTH: quit making accounting firms rich auditing grey area rules.

  13. What happened to Liberal Senator Marc Harb?

    • He did the right thing an resigned. Something these clowns could take a page from.

      • Right thing? He did the safe thing for himself if he wanted to make sure to keep his pension.

      • Did the right thing? He fought tooth and nail to not have to repay any of the money he defrauded Canadians of. He only resigned in a last ditch effort to save his pension and hopefully avoid jail time. (

        In Duffy and Wallin’s cases there’s at least a possibility that their claims may have been due to ignorance. In Harb’s case it’s pretty clear he went to great lengths to intentionally defraud the Canadian taxpayer.

        But sure, keep telling yourself he did the “right thing”.

    • He resigned so he could keep his full pension even if the RCMP find him guilty of something criminal. The others haven’t been in long enough to qualify for a pension so they do not want to resign.

  14. There are so many subliminal issues in this Senate affair. That several senators are now speaking up about “due process” as compared to tradition determined suspension and other established standards for abusing the rules suggests to me that some senators fear this becoming an open revolt to the senate, with a full review of all senators expenses (and we know what we will find there!) on one end of the spectrum, while the other end is to just dump those who have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar (of good living, of course) and move on.
    The senate will benefit from this mess if the public becomes so disenchanted that they force the current politicians to remake the senate, likely to the publicly based, and non-politically positioned revised senate, made to represent the people of our Canadian regions and social and cultural standards. And, not to remain a end-of-political-run for political hacks who have helped major politicians achieve their success.
    I hope that the public writes politicians and the media about this recommended change.
    And, by the way, if the three senators are cast off, but later get through an RCMP analysis without charges, what happens then? I suspect that we will end up paying a fortune to apologize for their “bending” the rules, but seemingly working within what is common practice by all those who achieve this lofty, and likely untouchable, political position.
    Ah, such is the life living in Canada!

  15. I think that Mike Duffy has done nothing other than try to line his own pockets since he became a member of the senate.

    As far as Pam goes, I see her as a ditzy blond that can’t understand an expense report. I don’t think she even understood the news she was reading off the teleprompters years ago.

    • You are selling Pamela Wallin short. She is likely a lot smarter than Mike Duffy. Her problem is that she is controlling, entitled and very, very ambitious. Read Anne Kingston’s article in Macleans.

  16. Anyone else would have been sacked on the spot for fraudulent behaviour.
    And as for not having the money to repay, what did they do with all the money they had earned so far? Guess ‘saving’ is not a word used in their milieu.

  17. The PM seems to be doing anything to shut down due process and the RCMP investigation. Why? I don’t think we’ve heard but the tip of the iceburg regarding this mess and the PM’s involvement. By the way. Wasn’t Wallin and perhaps the others too, cleared of any wrong doing by the original Deloit audit, So Sen LeBreton led the charge to change the rules for expenses then have Deloit to audit them under the new rules retroactively, guaranteeing they would be found at fault.

    Why does this pass the sniff test for some many of the taxpayers?

  18. I think Harper is a mean-spirited hypocrite. He told Duffy “Damn right you should pay”. And now that both Duffy and Wallin have paid, he is pushing to suspend them from the Senate without pay. But the amount of money they spent is insignificant compared to what Harper spends within his PMO. He has there more than 100 “assistants” each costing about $200,000 to the taxpayers. This is the real waste of our money. These arrogant bunch of short pants now want to run the senate in addition to running the Conservative members of the house. What we need is to suspend Harper without pay.

    • Ya, who cares if the PM is democratically elected. Democracy is for suckers.

      • None of the highly paid people that he appointed at PMO are elected. And they actually run our country without any accountability.

  19. IS this a trick question.? It does ask “should they be SUSPENDED” rather than ‘should they be FIRED from’ the senate. In light of actual established facts, suspensions until or unless cleared by courts is not at all harsh. After all, the senate is a chamber for SOBER SECOND THOUGHT, little of which has been demonstrated at this point.

  20. The senators, bah. Stephen Harper should be suspended from the prime ministership. He hired ’em, we all know he colluded with them to claim fake expenses as reward for campaigning for him on the government dime, and to hide it all he conspired, authorized bribes and lied to us about the whole thing.

    • we all know he colluded with them to claim fake expenses

      Yes, just like we all know that Stephen Harper eats live babies for breakfast, hates Canada, worships Satan, wants armed soldiers on our streets to kill innocent Canadians and never ate that communion wafer that one time.

      • You just keep telling yourself that. But you might want to consider:
        Which is more important to you? The image of Stephen Harper as a man with some shreds of integrity (which hardly anyone outside the Conservative core believed anyway)? Or the image of Stephen Harper as the smart, competent politician, smartest guy in the room, playing three dimensional chess while the opposition play tic-tac-toe? Because if he’s a dude who has no idea what’s going on in the Prime Minister’s Office while his own lawyer conspires with his senators and his chief of staff behind his back . . . he kind of looks like the dumbest, most gullible guy in the room.
        So. Crook or total moron. It’s up to you, but you can’t escape one of them. And really, Harper isn’t that dumb, so it’s obvious what an unbiased observer is going to pick. That’s why “we all know”.

    • It’s tiresome to see such a PM who cares nothing about the truth. He’s clearly skating in circles on a smaller and smaller ice surface. But the public will forget in 2015 when they tell us how good the economy is doing wen it’s stagnant.

  21. They should not be without an investigation. It’s unfair to take away their rights before there is evidence of their guilt, although personally I am against those three.

  22. I don’t think it wise or fair to decide their fates before figuring out how it all unfolded. Sounds like (some) of them tried to follow some misguided advice…some rules changed and were applied retro-actively. I am not defending them, but b4 we sweep them all out the door, let’s un pack all the evidence. I wouldn’t expect any less for any other Canadian citizen.

  23. PM Harper should step up to his manifestation of his pre-election comments of senate reform. Clean it up – you have the power

  24. Now the Duffy/Wallin show are playing the health care/extended medical benefits and how they won’t be able to pay for their much needed meds. Well, welcome to the REAL world guys! Many, many of us have to make decisions about what meds we can afford. I am so disgusted with all of them. I have seen hogs at the trough w/better manners.

  25. Being turfed might be the best thing for Mike Duffy’s morbidly obese self. When he’s spending his own money he might think twice about what he puts in his mouth.

  26. What about Jean Chretien?

  27. watch harper flub this one, too.

  28. Did Duffy and Wallin actually think that public opinion would swing in his favour after their speeches? I can’t believe the level of arrogance of these Senators. What they did was wrong and anyone else in the private sector would have been fired for it…no question. True that Harper has some culpability but he did not teach these Senators to rip off the taxpayers. This is a view of entitlement that is innate. Suspend without pay right away and let’s get on with running the country.

  29. Did those 3 do a thorough investigation to if they should or Not take Canadians Money???? I think not. Boot them out!!!

  30. The problem we seem to be having is lies. If everyone would start their day by being honest and up front about their affairs (maybe the wrong term for a politician) we could believe what each party is saying. As it is we cant believe a damn thing either Harper or the senators say because we don’t trust them, all because of the lies. We all have to assume, which makes asses out of, well you know the slogan.

  31. Well if they have wasted tax dollars without taking any responsibility then they shouldn’t have any open policy to spend whatever they see fit. Obviously they can’t seem to control themselves when it comes to money just as some children behave at times. So treat them as you would a child, remove allowances without them first seeking approval. We all know the rules it’s been news for a decade of people in positions taking advantage of tax/employee pensions. Whining and blaming others for their spending habits has nothing to do with Harper. “Oh whoa is me”

  32. Since when has “innocent until proven guilty” been a bad thing …

  33. Aren’t expenses re-imbursed? Which means you submit the expense with receipts and then they are processed followed by a cheque issued back to you later. This means someone else takes the time to look over and review each expense as it is submitted. Personally, I have always found expense guidelines to have a little leeway in certain situations and not in others so it gets confusing as to what is legitimate or not. Therefore I have always submitted everything that might be re-reimbursable and I let them decide if it is or if it isn’t. Just because an expense has been submitted it does not mean it has to be paid back. Isn’t it the processing person’s responsibility to let someone know if their expense is legitimate or not? So they learn what can go in and what can’t. And isn’t it that same person’s responsibility to re-imburse ONLY the expenses that are within the allowances of the expenses guidelines? Why aren’t the people (accountants I presume) who allowed all these illegitimate expenses also on the hot seat here?

  34. Why do we have a senate in the first place?