Trudeau promise to repay speaking fees from charities doesn't quell controversy - Macleans.ca
 

Trudeau promise to repay speaking fees from charities doesn’t quell controversy


 

OTTAWA – Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau remains under fire for taking hefty speaking fees from charitable groups after becoming an MP, despite promising to compensate any organization that was dissatisfied.

The Conservatives say Trudeau should never have accepted any money from any charity — before or after becoming an MP.

And they’ve expanded the definition of charity to include all non-profit groups, universities, municipalities and other public sector organizations.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair won’t go that far.

But Mulcair says Trudeau should return the fees paid by all charitable and non-profit groups since he was elected in 2008 — not just those who ask for their money back.

So far, only one charity has asked Trudeau to give back his fee, claiming it lost money on a fundraising event for a New Brunswick seniors’ home last year.


 
Filed under:

Trudeau promise to repay speaking fees from charities doesn’t quell controversy

  1. Shiny Pony stepped in it again!

    • Hoof in mouth disease.

  2. why would anyone assume the CPC would stop bleeting their stupid crap instead of just replacing it with even stupider crap?

    Justin, they aren’t honest. Stop treating them with respect and courtesy. Canadians know they don’t deserve it.

    • GFMD, stupider than most.

      • Billy Bob the proper name for these people is “Liberal Toady”

        • As opposed to “CPC hack” for you & Billy Bob?

    • As if any Trudeau has ever treated the West with respect

      • those who are always worried about how much respect they get probably don’t deserve as much as they think they do.

  3. It’s good to see that the NDP leader has some morals, if not for only taking a shot at his weak minded political rival, the Lieberals on the other hand are morally bankrupt.

    It is no wonder that Gomery said of the LPoC that “they are criminally organized.”

  4. More Con crap is all.

    40% of MPs have jobs outside the HOC

    • So what my MP is a farmer and draws an income from the farm did you forget to mention that having a second job is common to MPs in all parties

      • ?? I just said that. Wake up grandad.

        • How is the fact that some MPs have second jobs Con crap

          • It’s Con crap to attack Justin for what the rest of them do

          • What Conservative is out there taking money off government supported charities while he is being paid to be in parliament but is not there?

          • You don’t know much about parliament do ya…..LOL

          • You don’t know much about anything do you

          • Didn’t I say Ciao to you long time ago?

          • If you can show he skipped off parliamentary duties specifically to give a sppech, you have an argument. If he was in the city on government business but then also gave a speech on his own time, then that’s his business. Got any evidence?

            As to the “charities” thing, isn’t that just a bit of a red herring? Charities hire all kinds of people to help them fundraise; what makes Justin different from the rest? Other than his being Justin?

            He was offered a fee to speak. He didn’t go in and hold them up. If they didn’t raise as much as they’d hoped to from the speech, that would be the fault of the promoters & planners – not the hired help. If they rented a hall, should they ask for a refund from the hall owner?

          • In your world should all MPS bow to Justin the Chosen One

          • Forgotten again eh ?

        • Difference is Conservatives are not blatantly ripping time off taxpayers taking money off government supported charities.
          BIG DIFFERENCE.

          • They sell tickets dude…..the audience pays the fee.

          • In almost all instances they made money from his appearances; how is that “ripping off taxpayers”? If anything, thanks to the money raised, the charities would have been less dependent on taxpayer support as a result.

            I’m guessing math isn’t your strong suit…

    • Maybe Conservatives work outside parliament but at real things BUT NOT partisan speaking engagements for large fees; Taking money off tax payer supported charities. While skipping his parliament job we pay him to do.

      • Ahhh there’s the difference….’real things’…like digging in the dirt.

        Not ideas….like the environment and education which is the kind of thing Justin talks about

        They are fund-raisers dude

        Sorry they don’t involve digging in dirt…..but I can see why Cons would be drawn to that

        • Intellectual property is what you are speaking of Emily.

          Turns out Trudeau doesn’t really have any.

          Real INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY does not have borders Emily.

          I value intellectual property for a living Emily (both sides of the border) and I see Trudeau’s intellectual property limited by partisan left wing audiences who put value on his family mystique and famous left wing father.

          Not much Value In the Real World Outside Politics.

          No daddy with name;Never would have heard of this guy.

          • AHAHAHAHA….no it’s not.

            You guys doing auditions tonight or what?

            Cuz you might as well hang up yer mouse right now. FAIL

          • If his name was Justin Smith , NOBODY

      • Justin works tirelessly fundraising for a very important charity. His.

  5. Trudeau was never a qualified speaker; JUST A LIBERAL HACK. That poor organization in New Brunswick didn’t know that you had to be inside the Liberal fold; then you could hire the liberal hack and the partisans would show up to support. More properly speaking the partisan Liberals would come to make an investment that they might someday get their snout in the government trough.

    Trudeau may have made a living speaking; but always to a partisan liberal crowd hoping to one day cash in.

    Speakers bureau took him because of his name. Sold him because of his name. Without the name and liberal connections willing to support him he would never have made it in the speaking business and would be lucky to have a job teaching school.

    A non political speaker worth $20,000 per speech in Canada would also have been doing some work south of the border at $20,000 a speech. (or more)

    To my knowledge nobody south of the border saw value. He couldn’t even get a US liberal organization billing him as the son the the great socialist Prime Minister of Canad Pierre Trudeau.
    NO REAL WORLD VALUE.
    Trudeau had and still has no speaking value outside being a liberal political hack so therefore his attraction was and is only to partisan left wingers who love daddy.

    Without daddy’s name and political connection junior has no speaking value.

    • Think a number of people on the boards of the school and the charities should be put on the carpet for hiring Trudeau. Of course maybe they thought they were the other Justin,Bieber who likely would have more entertaining and more adept at understanding politics

    • All that easy money going to a rich and powerful’s kid while I struggle to earn all year what that ingratiate makes in one or two speeches after no doubt flying first class on someone else’s dime and eating only 5 star meals while I’m stuck on the side of a frozen highway with a burnt out tranny in my 02 Windstar taking the Mrs. and the kids to Timmy’s for a double double and a honey dipper. Burns my onions, Please pass the meatloaf. I’m voting for Tommy Douglas.

  6. i don’t understand young man like him .. with great future ahead of him// do thing like that// ..what he needs the money for ///his father left him enough//i yes is sickness ../////something wrong with humanity//////.
    i yes never enough//////////

  7. Why is the privilege of a comfortable life, which leads to success, just not good enough for some people?

    What is it with these people who been raised with all the benefits of a privileged background – all the means and perks to facilitate an unencumbered path to success and in this case, is blessed as well, with the good looks of a young movie star and the history of a famous father?

    Why would person so lucky, feel that he should take that good fortune, and crassly monetize it at $20,000 a pop – all, while collecting from the taxpayer an MP’s salary, which most hardworking Canadians can only dream about.

    What is it with these people who would reduce themselves to the “equivalent of pillagers, eyeing the world (even charities) simply for what can be turned into money”.

    I contemplate the many Canadians who are really struggling and are barely making a go of it. Then I contemplate all the senator-political-hacks and senator-corporate-lackeys grubbing at the political and corporate troughs, for their entitlements-plus.

    And now a politician, with articulate moral sanctimony, defends moonlighting and earning a second income off the backs of charities…

    Hunter S. Thompson comes to mind when he wrote in ‘Generation of Swine’: “It’s a strange world. Some people get rich and others eat shit and die.”