130

‘Clearly erroneous’


 

Greg Weston obtains a letter sent by the Auditor General to the government operations and estimates committee in regards to a supplemtary report issued by the Conservative members of that committee.

The Conservatives’ report, presented as a dissenting opinion to the Commons the morning Parliament was dissolved last month, quotes Fraser giving high marks to the Harper government for prudent spending on the summits. The report quoted the auditor general as saying: “We found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that the monies were spent as they were intended to be spent.”

But in her letter addressed to members of a Commons committee on Friday, which was received by the clerk and members on Monday, Fraser said the quote had nothing to do with the summits. Instead, the Conservatives falsely recycled an old comment she made on security spending by a previous Liberal government after the 9/11 terrorist attacks a decade ago.


 

‘Clearly erroneous’

  1. Oh, snap! Fraser got Oda-cized!!

  2. Oh, snap! Fraser got Oda-cized!!

  3. this sounds unseemly

  4. this sounds unseemly

  5. WTF? Now Robert Fife (!) has seen a later draft of the AG report, and although it is still critical of the spending, it confirms that the language around "misinforming Parliament" has been removed!

    http://twitter.com/#!/RobertFife/status/575435116

    Joan Bryden has got a lot of explaining to do.

  6. Liars every way they turn.

    Where's Dennis?

    Oh, out at the war room herding Cats?

  7. WTF? Now Robert Fife (!) has seen a later draft of the AG report, and although it is still critical of the spending, it confirms that the language around "misinforming Parliament" has been removed!

    http://twitter.com/#!/RobertFife/status/575435116

    Joan Bryden has got a lot of explaining to do.

    • Do you wonder how Bob Fife suddenly got a copy of the report?

      Paul Wells tweeted that three buskers each just handed him copies of the report. I feel left out.

      • I misquoted Wells's tweet: he said a busker handed him three versions of the report. Still feel left out.

      • Robert Fife got a copy because he works for the Conservative Television Network better known as CTV.

    • A HA! Typical liberal media bia…..Oh snap.

      NEVERMIND- Carry on- nothing to read here!

  8. Liars every way they turn.

    Where's Dennis?

    Oh, out at the war room herding Cats?

    • We just one !

      Record timing too. 4 hours and this story has been put to rest ?

      Loving it !

      The three opposition leaders just got played for fools.

      Victory Cats. Poor, poor, sad Aaron Wherry.

      • We one, you gost,

        Gloating Cats !

        • yeah you remind me alot of #winning.

      • You and Dennis are one? That's not surprising.

        • They're sharing a brain. And you know how big cats' brains are…

  9. Hooooo boy!

    Now the fat's in the fire.

  10. Hooooo boy!

    Now the fat's in the fire.

  11. So does the AG, not to mention Harper.

  12. That's just it. The only thing Harper should ever have had to explain is the final report.

    This is exactly why he shouldn't have to explain anything before that, and hopefully why Joan Bryden is starting consider her career options or consult her defamation attorney. She's stuck her neck out on this; if it turns out that the inflammatory language from the original draft she published is gone, as well as the wording around "legal issues", she should turn in her press pass. At the very least, it's time to out the person who gave her this leaked draft. Today.

  13. That's just it. The only thing Harper should ever have had to explain is the final report.

    This is exactly why he shouldn't have to explain anything before that, and hopefully why Joan Bryden is starting consider her career options or consult her defamation attorney. She's stuck her neck out on this; if it turns out that the inflammatory language from the original draft she published is gone, as well as the wording around "legal issues", she should turn in her press pass. At the very least, it's time to out the person who gave her this leaked draft. Today.

    • Not if he has been said to lie in the first report, only to have that line vanish in the final report.

      We've been here before with Bev Oda, remember?

    • if there is a discrepancy between reports there still needs to be an explanation. There could be a discrepancy and there could be a good reason for it, but Canadians deserve to know.

      • if there is a discrepancy between reports there still needs to be an explanation

        No. There absolutely does not, because these documents should never have been made public. She may have put that in a first draft and gave it to government bureaucrats. They satisfied her with enough additional information that the claims around misinforming parliament and breaking the law were unjustified and could be removed. This is all part of the draft process, which is why it happens behind closed doors without leaks to the media to create unnecessary firestorms like this one.

        The fact is that all Canadians are entitled to is a final report. The only reason we are in this situation now is because Joan Bryden saw an opportunity to cause trouble for the Conservatives with preliminary, incorrect information that she should never have had access to and should never have published.

        • i disagree. Canadians should keep an open mind about the explanation, but there should be one. If the scenario you suggest is correct, there should not be a problem.

          It's about transparency and accountability.

        • And until we even know there's a discrepancy you have no cause to call the information correct. Not that I would expect anything less of you and your reputation for honest dealings.

        • Not a fan of WikiLeaks, then?

    • It's also time for the Conservatives to explain how and why they misrepresented Sheila Fraser's words about the Liberals after 9/11 as being about the G8/G20. Today.

    • Funny, there were no muppets decrying the situation Paul Martin was put in, having to campaign with the smear of a 'report of an investigation' about (being that RCMP rarely if ever announce an 'investigation')… Harpocrisy hits new heights.

      • To be fair, Sam the Eagle offered a terse "No comment".

  14. That's not good.

  15. That's not good.

  16. Not if he has been said to lie in the first report, only to have that line vanish in the final report.

    We've been here before with Bev Oda, remember?

  17. I have to echo earlier statements and say that this is not good. Someone has some 'splaining to do if they used an 8 year old quote from the AG out of context.

  18. I have to echo earlier statements and say that this is not good. Someone has some 'splaining to do if they used an 8 year old quote from the AG out of context.

    • I just posted that it was 10 years, then a story said 2010, and then I read 10 years again. Now you say it's 8 years. Whateven the timeline it's not good. They will not explain anything. They will blame their own right wing news media and call them leftists. Deflection is the order of the day for conservatives.

  19. Do you wonder how Bob Fife suddenly got a copy of the report?

    Paul Wells tweeted that three buskers each just handed him copies of the report. I feel left out.

  20. if there is a discrepancy between reports there still needs to be an explanation. There could be a discrepancy and there could be a good reason for it, but Canadians deserve to know.

  21. We just one !

    Record timing too. 4 hours and this story has been put to rest ?

    Loving it !

    The three opposition leaders just got played for fools.

    Victory Cats. Poor, poor, sad Aaron Wherry.

  22. We one, you gost,

    Gloating Cats !

  23. Ok, so Fife says he has seen a later report (not the final report) that is damning, but less damning that what Bryden saw. Then Weston gets a letter saying the Conservatives cut and paste a glowing quote from TEN years ago about the LIBERALS. And you think Bryden has some explaining to do? Are you insane? Insanely partisan.

  24. No, JohnG. Someone obviously knew that pressure was being exerted on the AG, and it's absolutely necessary for us to know how, and why, language that states Parliament was deliberately misled (again) on spending has been expunged.

  25. Ok, so Fife says he has seen a later report (not the final report) that is damning, but less damning that what Bryden saw. Then Weston gets a letter saying the Conservatives cut and paste a glowing quote from TEN years ago about the LIBERALS. And you think Bryden has some explaining to do? Are you insane? Insanely partisan.

    • Yeah, so someone in an oppo party leaked a Jan draft to the media; then someone from CPC leaks a Feb draft to Fife.

      Stockwell Day is using what may well be his last media appearance as an MP to apologize and say he's no idea how it happened, but the "analysis" is that indeed, that paragraph that was copied from a completely different report under a completely different government years ago.

      Meanwhile Sheila says she never even appeared before the committee that "erroneously" used her quotations…

      All I can say is: timing is everything. What goes round comes round. Worms are turning. Etcetera etcetera

  26. If it even has been expunged, right?

  27. If it even has been expunged, right?

  28. if there is a discrepancy between reports there still needs to be an explanation

    No. There absolutely does not, because these documents should never have been made public. She may have put that in a first draft and gave it to government bureaucrats. They satisfied her with enough additional information that the claims around misinforming parliament and breaking the law were unjustified and could be removed. This is all part of the draft process, which is why it happens behind closed doors without leaks to the media to create unnecessary firestorms like this one.

    The fact is that all Canadians are entitled to is a final report. The only reason we are in this situation now is because Joan Bryden saw an opportunity to cause trouble for the Conservatives with preliminary, incorrect information that she should never have had access to and should never have published.

  29. "The Conservatives' report, presented as a dissenting opinion to the Commons the morning Parliament was dissolved last month, quotes Fraser giving high marks to the Harper government for prudent spending on the summits … the Conservatives falsely recycled an old comment she made on security spending by a previous Liberal government after the 9/11 terrorist attacks a decade ago."

    The Conservatives lied about what Fraser said and when she said it.

    They lie so often, it's difficult to keep track of them.

    I don't care if your Conservative Party member or not, if you care a lick about responsible government and honesty in public affairs, you should vote against these bozos.

  30. In the immortal words of Jean-Claude Van Damme, "Ooooh- dats gotta 'urt"

  31. "The Conservatives%E2%80%99 report, presented as a dissenting opinion to the Commons the morning Parliament was dissolved last month, quotes Fraser giving high marks to the Harper government for prudent spending on the summits … the Conservatives falsely recycled an old comment she made on security spending by a previous Liberal government after the 9/11 terrorist attacks a decade ago."

    The Conservatives lied about what Fraser said and when she said it.

    They lie so often, it's difficult to keep track of them.

    I don't care if your Conservative Party member or not, if you care a lick about responsible government and honesty in public affairs, you should vote against these bozos.

  32. "The Conservatives' report, presented as a dissenting opinion to the Commons the morning Parliament was dissolved last month, quotes Fraser giving high marks to the Harper government for prudent spending on the summits … the Conservatives falsely recycled an old comment she made on security spending by a previous Liberal government after the 9/11 terrorist attacks a decade ago."

    The Conservatives lied about what Fraser said and when she said it.

    They lie so often, it's difficult to keep track of them.

    I don't care if your Conservative Party member or not, if you care a lick about responsible government and honesty in public affairs, you should vote against these bozos.

    • But if you don't vote for them they've threatened funding to your riding!

      • when did the Mob take over?

  33. In the immortal words of Jean-Claude Van Damme, "Ooooh- dats gotta 'urt"

  34. A HA! Typical liberal media bia…..Oh snap.

    NEVERMIND- Carry on- nothing to read here!

  35. i disagree. Canadians should keep an open mind about the explanation, but there should be one. If the scenario you suggest is correct, there should not be a problem.

    It's about transparency and accountability.

  36. And until we even know there's a discrepancy you have no cause to call the information correct. Not that I would expect anything less of you and your reputation for honest dealings.

  37. "Someone obviously knew that pressure was being exerted on the AG"

    Oh please – I suggest you do some research on the audit function and the protocols employed by auditors, including auditor generals, prior to issuing final reports. There is always – always – opportunity for the auditee to review preliminary findings and provide further comments/information/explanation to try to clear up misunderstandings, further inform why decisions were made, etc. This is not "pressure being exerted on the AG" – it is business as usual in dealing with an auditor. Or do you not think it appropriate that persons being audited be afforded an opportunity to respond to preliminary findings, in which case I hope for your sake your name is never picked out of the ole CRA spinning drum.

  38. "Someone obviously knew that pressure was being exerted on the AG"

    Oh please – I suggest you do some research on the audit function and the protocols employed by auditors, including auditor generals, prior to issuing final reports. There is always – always – opportunity for the auditee to review preliminary findings and provide further comments/information/explanation to try to clear up misunderstandings, further inform why decisions were made, etc. This is not "pressure being exerted on the AG" – it is business as usual in dealing with an auditor. Or do you not think it appropriate that persons being audited be afforded an opportunity to respond to preliminary findings, in which case I hope for your sake your name is never picked out of the ole CRA spinning drum.

    • auditors generals

  39. Yeah, so someone in an oppo party leaked a Jan draft to the media; then someone from CPC leaks a Feb draft to Fife.

    Stockwell Day is using what may well be his last media appearance as an MP to apologize and say he's no idea how it happened, but the "analysis" is that indeed, that paragraph that was copied from a completely different report under a completely different government years ago.

    Meanwhile Sheila says she never even appeared before the committee that "erroneously" used her quotations…

    All I can say is: timing is everything. What goes round comes round. Worms are turning. Etcetera etcetera

  40. yeah you remind me alot of #winning.

  41. Rob Silver predicted that if the final AG report was good for the conservatives, they would leak it today. Maybe the later draft if more favourable to them than the final report? Did the Conservatives leak this new draft?
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/seco

  42. Rob Silver predicted that if the final AG report was good for the conservatives, they would leak it today. Maybe the later draft if more favourable to them than the final report? Did the Conservatives leak this new draft?
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/seco

    • If Robert Fife has it I gaurantee the conservatives leaked it to him. He's one of them! Mark my words, he is on the Harper list of the next round of CTV conservative senators.

  43. I misquoted Wells's tweet: he said a busker handed him three versions of the report. Still feel left out.

  44. It's also time for the Conservatives to explain how and why they misrepresented Sheila Fraser's words about the Liberals after 9/11 as being about the G8/G20. Today.

  45. Harper should just quit now – once the general public learns that a (gasp!) minority report attached to the one authored by Libs/Dippers/Blocers on the (shudder!!) government operations and estimates committee included a positive AG quote about processes and controls used by the CPCs, but actually established by Libs (lock up the children!!!), IT IS OVER!!!

    This latest outrage makes the Oda thingy and not knowing how much jets yet to be fully designed will eventually cost thingy PALE in comparison. I am quite confident the outrage of my fellow Canadians over this imbroglio will manifest in an actual audible cry that will resound across the country any minute now – wait a minute, is that It?!!

    (Um, maybe not quite yet but certainly by supper time!)

  46. Harper should just quit now – once the general public learns that a (gasp!) minority report attached to the one authored by Libs/Dippers/Blocers on the (shudder!!) government operations and estimates committee included a positive AG quote about processes and controls used by the CPCs, but actually established by Libs (lock up the children!!!), IT IS OVER!!!

    This latest outrage makes the Oda thingy and not knowing how much jets yet to be fully designed will eventually cost thingy PALE in comparison. I am quite confident the outrage of my fellow Canadians over this imbroglio will manifest in an actual audible cry that will resound across the country any minute now – wait a minute, is that It?!!

    (Um, maybe not quite yet but certainly by supper time!)

    • So you're okay with the CPC deliberately misquoting the most honourable person in Ottawa in order to make themselves look good? And hoping she'll never see it?

      It's amazing how much lies and deceit you CPC supporters are able to ignore.

      And before you start in on Adscam, allow me to point out Harper was first elected because many who normally vote Liberal walked away in disgust over their dishonest behaviour – whereas the more scandals and lies the CPC gets caught in, the more their supporters flock to them. That's plain bizarre.

      Whatt he hell has gone wrong with this country?

  47. If they can misquote the AG completely <a href="http:// (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html#),” target=”_blank”> <a href="http://(http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html#),” target=”_blank”>(http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html#), how do we know that the "final draft" that Bob Fife saw has not been ODAcized?

    Until the AG confirms that it is the same final report that she signed off on, why would we trust anything this government comes out with (no opposition party presumably would have been able to get their hands on the final draft).

  48. If they can misquote the AG completely (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-weston-ag-fraser.html#), how do we know that the "final draft" that Bob Fife saw has not been ODAcized?

    Until the AG confirms that it is the same final report that she signed off on, why would we trust anything this government comes out with (no opposition party presumably would have been able to get their hands on the final draft).

    • Exactly. this cannot be emphasized enough

  49. You and Dennis are one? That's not surprising.

  50. They're sharing a brain. And you know how big cats' brains are…

  51. But if you don't vote for them they've threatened funding to your riding!

  52. Exactly. this cannot be emphasized enough

  53. The government cuts and pastes a quote completely out of context to create a false impression regarding the thoughts of the Auditor General on a given issue. Yeah, no big deal.

    Great message to send: truth doesn't matter. Be proud.

  54. While the opposition sees scandal the Conservatives see majority.

    Stuck at 40%, who are the voters who will take them over the top? The kind of voters that prefer their government to dish out the pork, ignore laws, rules and conventions and take care of their friends.

    Get on the gravy train before its too late! All the chatter just drives home the message.

    And I'm supposed to encourage my kids to get engaged with politics.

  55. While the opposition sees scandal the Conservatives see majority.

    Stuck at 40%, who are the voters who will take them over the top? The kind of voters that prefer their government to dish out the pork, ignore laws, rules and conventions and take care of their friends.

    Get on the gravy train before its too late! All the chatter just drives home the message.

    And I'm supposed to encourage my kids to get engaged with politics.

  56. Another media generated "scandal".

    The media is relentless in their efforts to get their fellow liberal academic media elite – Iggy – into power.

    And so the fact that the Liberals apparently still have in their caucus to be an MP, a FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY,

    is unseen by media eyes, deliberately turned the other way.

    Put this in perspective folks.

    To our ever balanced media,

    THE LIBERAL PARTY CURRENTLY HAVING THE FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY in their caucus isn't enough to generate a single headline and no more than a tiny whisper by the media.

    That,

    ladies and gentlemen,

    is the epitome of an outrageous bias, in which a magnifying glass is applied to the right, a blind eye to the left.

    How fitting, that the media in attempting to generate scandal after scandal, and only against the "incorrect" party, is itself the scandal of our generation.

  57. Another media generated "scandal".

    The media is relentless in their efforts to get their fellow liberal academic media elite – Iggy – into power.

    And so the fact that the Liberals apparently still have in their caucus to be an MP, a FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY,

    is unseen by media eyes, deliberately turned the other way.

    Put this in perspective folks.

    To our ever balanced media,

    THE LIBERAL PARTY CURRENTLY HAVING THE FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY in their caucus isn't enough to generate a single headline and no more than a tiny whisper by the media.

    That,

    ladies and gentlemen,

    is the epitome of an outrageous bias, in which a magnifying glass is applied to the right, a blind eye to the left.

    How fitting, that the media in attempting to generate scandal after scandal, and only against the "incorrect" party, is itself the scandal of our generation.

    • Message: It's OK to rip quotes out of context, by the AG no less, and insert them completely, laughably, out of context in order to bolster your cause in an official parliamentary document.

      • Let's compare:

        assuming it's being reported fairly against the CPC which is doubtful, to say the least:

        making an out of context statement to support your cause,

        or,

        having in caucus and running to be a Liberal MP, the FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY.

        The comparison itself is rediculous, one being rather common place in politics (see Iggy's voting American, ahem "out of context" statement), and one is utterly shocking.

        Yet the utterly shocking story, isn't even mentioned.

        Which is, itself, utterly shocking.

        More shocking is Iggy's claim that he was "fired" when that is, apparently, impossible at this point.

        And finally, the shockingest, is the media's utter disinterest in Iggy's ficticious firing.

        Shocking.

        • 'assuming it's being reported fairly against the CPC which is doubtful, to say the least'

          How is this story being reported unfairly? What possible excuses could be given for misrepresenting the AG in an official parliamentary document? I'm all ears. Speculate if you want. Give me something to make me doubt the veracity of these reports (beyond liberal media boilerplate).

          As for the other matter — which PALES in comparison — Andre Forbes is clearly not welcome in the Liberal Party. He's still running for the Liberals because of the party's regulations, not because Iggy wants to keep him around. If he's elected, he'll be swiftly kicked out of caucus. If you want to fault the Liberal Party for having shabby party rules, fine. If you want to fault the Liberal Party for failing to vet candidates, fine. But if you're going to suggest that this story is on par with falsifying the statements of the AG in a parliamentary document… wow.

          • The contentious quote appeared in a minority addendum to a report tabled by the Government Operations and Estimates committee which is currently dominated by Libs and Dippers who have turned the committee into a star chamber wherein they get to hide behind parliamentary privilege to stumble over each other to get the best sound bite on the news that night – just what do "busty hookers" allegedly dining with Rahim Jaffer got to do with government operations or estimates, anyway?

            That is the context of the contentious quote. If you want to delude yourself into thinking anybody by the Harper-hating sycophants in the MSM care one wit about it or that it will last as a news story beyond tomorrow, have at er. Better yet, continue to egg Iggy and Layton on to exploit the "issue" as a sure means to electoral victory on May 2.

          • Shorter GreatWallsofFire: It's okay to lie and mis quote the AG as long as it's just to people you don't like.

          • So say the truth-hating Conservatives.

          • Unbelievable. If we had video of Harper eating kittens, you'd still defend him, wouldn't you.
            WAR IS PEACE
            FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
            IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

            But nice try in your attempt to (why am I not surprised) misrepresent the situation. Just in case you believe yourself, let me help. A minority addendum to a committee report is written, as it says right on it, by, in this case, the Conservative members of said committee. That means the domination of Libs and Dippers is completely irrelevant since they had nothing to do with the writing of this minority addendum. And here, I'll even paste the paragraph for you.

            "All witnesses brought forwarded testimony demonstrating strong endorsement of
            the government's unprecedented transparency to summit costs.
            The Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, states in his report on the
            summits that: “The PBO's research of publicly available information indicates that
            no other host country has provided ‘total' security costs to this level of detail.”
            The Auditor General, Sheila Fraser commented in this regard the following: "We
            found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that the
            monies were spent as they were intended to be spent,"

          • There's no need whatsoever to misrepresent the "situation", because the "situation" doesn't even come close to registering 1 on the political richter scale for average Canadians.

            To recap: the situation involves an arguably misleading quote (arguable because until her final G8 report is released, we have no way of knowing whether perhaps it's the AG who "recycled" her own quote) in an obscure addendum to a partisan hatchet job of a report rendered utterly irrelevant literally hours after it was released by the actions of the opposition in bringing down the government on other grounds.

            I know it's a subtle difference that might prove elusive when one's view of such things is clouded by Harper-hate, but there is a difference between "defending" the actions of the CPC in said circumstance and suggesting those actions, however egregious, don't amount to a hill of beans in the greater scheme of things and, in particular, in shaping the decisions of Canadians as to who to vote for. May 2 could prove me wrong, but my sense is that the average Canadian might be engaged if the Libs & Dippers want go after the CPC for the decision to host the G8/buy F35s/stop funding Kairos, but they quickly tune out once the Libs/Dips try to generate outrage by parsing the minutia of how the CPC go about implementing their decisions.

            The real scandal that I think might engage Canadians is the circumstance of some partisan mandarin breaching the confidentiality of the AG's office by leaking a first draft – which are never ever made public – to the opposition/MSM for partisan political purposes. In the words of Ignatieff, such "fooling around" with the fundamental machinery of Canadian democracy warrants not just summary dismissal, but an RCMP investigation. Sadly, the MSM hasn't shown much interest in pursuing the "real story" when it comes to Lib/Dipper malfeasance.

          • 'arguable because until her final G8 report is released, we have no way of knowing whether perhaps it's the AG who "recycled" her own quote)'

            Well, it was the AG who pointed out that the quote was misused. Also, it was the Conservatives' report to parliament, not the AG's. Also, the Conservatives apologized for misusing it. Say what you will about the significance of this incident, or the coverage of the event, but it was clearly the fault of the government and no one else.

        • Having an mp espose family values and then get caught fathering a child with a mistress? Yeah he's in your party, chief.

    • Contempt of Parliment is the scandal of our generation. It's the scandal of every generation before us and probably every generation after us. Harper has a new commonwealth record. First time ever. Vote Harper, he's number 1!

  58. Message: It's OK to rip quotes out of context, by the AG no less, and insert them completely, laughably, out of context in order to bolster your cause in an official parliamentary document.

  59. Robert Fife got a copy because he works for the Conservative Television Network better known as CTV.

  60. I just posted that it was 10 years, then a story said 2010, and then I read 10 years again. Now you say it's 8 years. Whateven the timeline it's not good. They will not explain anything. They will blame their own right wing news media and call them leftists. Deflection is the order of the day for conservatives.

  61. Let's compare:

    assuming it's being reported fairly against the CPC which is doubtful, to say the least:

    making an out of context statement to support your cause,

    or,

    having in caucus and running to be a Liberal MP, the FOUNDER OF A WHITE SUPREMIST PARTY.

    The comparison itself is rediculous, one being rather common place in politics (see Iggy's voting American, ahem "out of context" statement), and one is utterly shocking.

    Yet the utterly shocking story, isn't even mentioned.

    Which is, itself, utterly shocking.

    More shocking is Iggy's claim that he was "fired" when that is, apparently, impossible at this point.

    And finally, the shockingest, is the media's utter disinterest in Iggy's ficticious firing.

    Shocking.

  62. If Robert Fife has it I gaurantee the conservatives leaked it to him. He's one of them! Mark my words, he is on the Harper list of the next round of CTV conservative senators.

  63. Contempt of Parliment is the scandal of our generation. It's the scandal of every generation before us and probably every generation after us. Harper has a new commonwealth record. First time ever. Vote Harper, he's number 1!

  64. 'assuming it's being reported fairly against the CPC which is doubtful, to say the least'

    How is this story being reported unfairly? What possible excuses could be given for misrepresenting the AG in an official parliamentary document? I'm all ears. Speculate if you want. Give me something to make me doubt the veracity of these reports (beyond liberal media boilerplate).

    As for the other matter — which PALES in comparison — Andre Forbes is clearly not welcome in the Liberal Party. He's still running for the Liberals because of the party's regulations, not because Iggy wants to keep him around. If he's elected, he'll be swiftly kicked out of caucus. If you want to fault the Liberal Party for having shabby party rules, fine. If you want to fault the Liberal Party for failing to vet candidates, fine. But if you're going to suggest that this story is on par with falsifying the statements of the AG in a parliamentary document… wow.

  65. Having an mp espose family values and then get caught fathering a child with a mistress? Yeah he's in your party, chief.

  66. The contentious quote appeared in a minority addendum to a report tabled by the Government Operations and Estimates committee which is currently dominated by Libs and Dippers who have turned the committee into a star chamber wherein they get to hide behind parliamentary privilege to stumble over each other to get the best sound bite on the news that night – just what do "busty hookers" allegedly dining with Rahim Jaffer got to do with government operations or estimates, anyway?

    That is the context of the contentious quote. If you want to delude yourself into thinking anybody by the Harper-hating sycophants in the MSM care one wit about it or that it will last as a news story beyond tomorrow, have at er. Better yet, continue to egg Iggy and Layton on to exploit the "issue" as a sure means to electoral victory on May 2.

  67. when did the Mob take over?

  68. Shorter GreatWallsofFire: It's okay to lie and mis quote the AG as long as it's just to people you don't like.

  69. So say the truth-hating Conservatives.

  70. Unbelievable. If we had video of Harper eating kittens, you'd still defend him, wouldn't you.
    WAR IS PEACE
    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

    But nice try in your attempt to (why am I not surprised) misrepresent the situation. Just in case you believe yourself, let me help. A minority addendum to a committee report is written, as it says right on it, by, in this case, the Conservative members of said committee. That means the domination of Libs and Dippers is completely irrelevant since they had nothing to do with the writing of this minority addendum. And here, I'll even paste the paragraph for you.

    "All witnesses brought forwarded testimony demonstrating strong endorsement of
    the government's unprecedented transparency to summit costs.
    The Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, states in his report on the
    summits that: “The PBO's research of publicly available information indicates that
    no other host country has provided ‘total' security costs to this level of detail.”
    The Auditor General, Sheila Fraser commented in this regard the following: "We
    found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that the
    monies were spent as they were intended to be spent,"

  71. Unbelievable. If we had video of Harper eating kittens, you'd still defend him, wouldn't you.
    WAR IS PEACE
    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

    But nice try in your attempt to (why am I not surprised) misrepresent the situation. Just in case you believe yourself, let me help. A minority addendum to a committee report is written, as it says right on it, by, in this case, the Conservative members of said committee. That means the domination of Libs and Dippers is completely irrelevant since they had nothing to do with the writing of this minority addendum. And here, I'll even paste the paragraph for you.

    "All witnesses brought forwarded testimony demonstrating strong endorsement of
    the government's unprecedented transparency to summit costs.
    The Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, states in his report on the
    summits that: “The PBO%E2%80%99s research of publicly available information indicates that
    no other host country has provided ‘total%E2%80%99 security costs to this level of detail.”
    The Auditor General, Sheila Fraser commented in this regard the following: "We
    found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that the
    monies were spent as they were intended to be spent,"

  72. Not a fan of WikiLeaks, then?

  73. Do you realy think Harper could sway Sheila in that way? She's the one person in Ottawa I trust – and I think many others fel the same. If she even hinted the CPC were trying to use undue influence, the repurcussions would be severe. Even the PMO has better sense than to try that.

  74. Do you realy think Harper could sway Sheila in that way? She's the one person in Ottawa I trust – and I think many others fel the same. If she even hinted the CPC were trying to use undue influence, the repurcussions would be severe. Even the PMO has better sense than to try that.

  75. So you're okay with the CPC deliberately misquoting the most honourable person in Ottawa in order to make themselves look good? And hoping she'll never see it?

    It's amazing how much lies and deceit you CPC supporters are able to ignore.

    And before you start in on Adscam, allow me to point out Harper was first elected because many who normally vote Liberal walked away in disgust over their dishonest behaviour – whereas the more scandals and lies the CPC gets caught in, the more their supporters flock to them. That's plain bizarre.

    Whatt he hell has gone wrong with this country?

  76. Funny, there were no muppets decrying the situation Paul Martin was put in, having to campaign with the smear of a 'report of an investigation' about (being that RCMP rarely if ever announce an 'investigation')… Harpocrisy hits new heights.

  77. To be fair, Sam the Eagle offered a terse "No comment".

  78. I heard an unequivocal apology issued by Stockwell Day on the radio this moring. Made me remember why people liked him for a while – it was sincere, clear and not like the usual hypothetical apologies issued by this (and many other) governments.

    Enough said for me on this matter…but clearly bad timing for the Conservatives.

  79. I heard an unequivocal apology issued by Stockwell Day on the radio this moring. Made me remember why people liked him for a while – it was sincere, clear and not like the usual hypothetical apologies issued by this (and many other) governments.

    Enough said for me on this matter…but clearly bad timing for the Conservatives.

    • I give Stock and the Conservatives credit for the apology as well, but I can't for the life of me understand HOW this happened, how this is an 'innocent mistake'. I don't say that to 'pile on' the Conservatives… but I just can't . If somebody can give me a good reason why this happened that isn't skunky, I'm all ears. How the f*ck do quotes from the AG that have NOTHING to do with the matter at hand get lifted and inserted into another document, wildly out of context? How does this happen?

      • Yeah fair point – I assume it was a Ryan Sparrow type moment vs. top-down direction.

        As an aside: a bit sad when you and I both compliment the government for apologizing well. Speaks to a rather low bar, wouldn't you say? This is like the election of lowered expectations.

  80. There's no need whatsoever to misrepresent the "situation", because the "situation" doesn't even come close to registering 1 on the political richter scale for average Canadians.

    To recap: the situation involves an arguably misleading quote (arguable because until her final G8 report is released, we have no way of knowing whether perhaps it's the AG who "recycled" her own quote) in an obscure addendum to a partisan hatchet job of a report rendered utterly irrelevant literally hours after it was released by the actions of the opposition in bringing down the government on other grounds.

    I know it's a subtle difference that might prove elusive when one's view of such things is clouded by Harper-hate, but there is a difference between "defending" the actions of the CPC in said circumstance and suggesting those actions, however egregious, don't amount to a hill of beans in the greater scheme of things and, in particular, in shaping the decisions of Canadians as to who to vote for. May 2 could prove me wrong, but my sense is that the average Canadian might be engaged if the Libs & Dippers want go after the CPC for the decision to host the G8/buy F35s/stop funding Kairos, but they quickly tune out once the Libs/Dips try to generate outrage by parsing the minutia of how the CPC go about implementing their decisions.

    The real scandal that I think might engage Canadians is the circumstance of some partisan mandarin breaching the confidentiality of the AG's office by leaking a first draft – which are never ever made public – to the opposition/MSM for partisan political purposes. In the words of Ignatieff, such "fooling around" with the fundamental machinery of Canadian democracy warrants not just summary dismissal, but an RCMP investigation. Sadly, the MSM hasn't shown much interest in pursuing the "real story" when it comes to Lib/Dipper malfeasance.

  81. To recap: You just called the AG a liar. Oh, also Stockwell Day. Or at least, they both agree there is nothing "arguable" about it.

    And it is only subtle to Harper-lovers. The rest of, with clear glasses, can see this for what it is just fine.

  82. Where did I call the AG a liar? I'm not disputing the contentious AG quote pertained to "processes and control" put in place for a different summit, as pointed out by the AG. I'm suggesting that it's not outside the realm of possibility the same quote appears in the G8 report that the AG is currently refusing to release (although a late or final draft is presumably already in the hands of the CPC).

    I can't imagine you're a Harper-lover, yet the subtly of the distinction between "defending" and "dismissing as inconsequential" apparently still eludes you, although I do agree that most Canadians are "see(ing) this for what it is", as evidenced by the invariant latest polling data.

  83. Where did I call the AG a liar? I'm not disputing the contentious AG quote pertained to "processes and control" put in place for a different summit, as pointed out by the AG. I'm suggesting that it's not outside the realm of possibility the same quote appears in the G8 report that the AG is currently refusing to release (although a late or final draft is presumably already in the hands of the CPC).

    I can't imagine you're a Harper-lover, yet the subtly of the distinction between "defending" and "dismissing as inconsequential" apparently still eludes you, although I do agree that most Canadians are "see(ing) this for what it is", as evidenced by the invariant latest polling data.

  84. 'arguable because until her final G8 report is released, we have no way of knowing whether perhaps it's the AG who "recycled" her own quote)'

    Well, it was the AG who pointed out that the quote was misused. Also, it was the Conservatives' report to parliament, not the AG's. Also, the Conservatives apologized for misusing it. Say what you will about the significance of this incident, or the coverage of the event, but it was clearly the fault of the government and no one else.

  85. I give Stock and the Conservatives credit for the apology as well, but I can't for the life of me understand HOW this happened, how this is an 'innocent mistake'. I don't say that to 'pile on' the Conservatives… but I just can't . If somebody can give me a good reason why this happened that isn't skunky, I'm all ears. How the f*ck do quotes from the AG that have NOTHING to do with the matter at hand get lifted and inserted into another document, wildly out of context? How does this happen?

  86. auditors generals

  87. Yeah fair point – I assume it was a Ryan Sparrow type moment vs. top-down direction.

    As an aside: a bit sad when you and I both compliment the government for apologizing well. Speaks to a rather low bar, wouldn't you say? This is like the election of lowered expectations.

Sign in to comment.