Making our streets safer


Conservative MP Peter Goldring has resigned from the Conservative caucus after being charged for refusing a breathalyzer test this weekend.

Two years ago, on the basis of civil liberties concerns, he criticized a proposal from Mothers Against Drunk Driving that would have required drivers to comply with random screening. He also apparently opposed new drunk driving legislation being pursued by the Alberta government.


Making our streets safer

  1. Sounds like self-interest. I’ll give him credit though, he did something most that most people in the Harper caucus won’t do, he took responsibility for his actions. Are you listening Peter, Tony, Vic, Ron, John, Steve?

    • You seem to be insinuating that those MP`s you have mentioned have been criminally charged. You should be more careful before slandering.

      There was a Liberal MP, Pablo Rodriguez who had a similar charge in 2010 as Goldring just received. Maybe you could comment on whether he took responsibility for his actions by resigning.

      • The only thing to apologize for is criminal actions? Being caught in a lie is otherwise permissible? or “I’m not responsible because a Liberal did it first” is good enough.

        • Goldring obviously felt that his Party would demand his resignation. Why would the Liberal Party not have felt the same way under similar circumstances ?

          • You’ve successfully read the mind of Goldring. You seem very good at that kind of thing. Otherwise, ask a Liberal. Maybe even ask Rodriguez.

            Odd that you feel party loyalty was his motive.

            Alternately, maybe Goldring actually felt guilty about what he had done, and recognized the hypocrisy. That would be quite unusual for a Conservative nowadays.

          • No mind reading is necessary in this case–Goldring felt obligated to resign. I have no idea why Rodriguez did not resign or why the Liberal Party or their supporters did not demand his resignation.

          • There is no real hypocrisy here. Goldring has publicly said he is against these tests, and when required to take one by the laws he opposed he refused. That’s matching action with words.

      • so you work for the Conservatives … not part of the 10% cuts just yet

        • No, I do not work for the Conservatives, however I do support a reduction in spending which may result in job losses in the public sector.

          • So why support Steve Harper? He’s been on a massive spending spree since he came into power? I just don’t get it.

        • Calvin is probably one of the 1500 “communications staff” the PM’s office has. Not technically working for the conservatives but doing they’re dirty work none the less.

          • Well then, where the hell is my paycheque ?

          • You’re doing this for nothing – geez – what a sucker.  There is good money and boy is there room for advancement working for Harper.  Some advice – never give it away.

          • So what/s the going ra……………nah, don/t want to go there

      • Can’t speak to Rodriguez but I can discuss the Con caucus’ intransigence as it relates to taking personal responsibility for well, pretty much anything that doesn’t exalt Steve Harper.   And yes, I think that if this happened to Rodriguez then he should have resigned. That was atypical though as the Liberals have a history of manning up when required. The Harper government, not at all.

        •  “the Liberals have a history of manning up when required.”

          Appparently you’ve never heard of “Shawinigate”.  Or Sheila Copps.  Or . . .

      • No I never insinuated that the MPs I listed should be criminally charged. That’s your reading comprehension again. I said that these “gentlemen” should man up and take responsibility for their actions. Of course, the Con reflexive response is to point a finger and blather something like ‘nana nana booboo.”

    • Heck the party itself pleaded guilty to election fraud a few weeks ago.

  2. Goldring’s mistake was that he owned up to his mistake and resigned. What was he thinking? If he’d just pulled a Pablo, and quietly rode it out, the media would have left him alone, same as they did for Rodriguez.

    • Hey, they do it for Harper and his cronies pretty much on a daily basis.

  3.   Is this an example of the “Peter principle” or the” Dilbert principle”?What principles does the Harper small “g”overment  have, other than win at any cost?

  4. He opposed an automatic breathalyer test for everyone pulled over in say, a RIDE program here in Ontario
    If you are caught speeding or driving erratically and refuse a breathalyzer, it’s a different matter altogether.

    • There is no evidence (from the articles I’ve read any way) that he was speeding or driving erractically. The cops who pulled him over were comitting random checks as part of an operation that had begun with a checkstop. This seems to be the very kind of thing that this MP is opposed to.

      • He was going home from a party fundraiser.

        And just because you oppose a law, it doesn’t mean you can break it

        • On the other hand, that is the very definition of civil disobedience. Disobeying a law *and taking the consequences thereof* as a means of protest and bringing attention to it.

          So while I disagree with Mr. Goldring’s stance, my hat’s off to him for having the courage to stand behind his conviction.

          • MPs are parliament and the law….not average citizens

            They can change laws they don’t like….the average citizen cannot

            They have no reason….and no business…to be indulging in civil disobedience

  5. So I noticed that MADD was solicited for a quote in the Goldring article. They were also solicited for a quote in the Rahim Jaffer case. But somehow, not for Pablo Rodriguez.

    In what little coverage was provided to Pablo Rodriguez (who is, by the way, the only one of these 3 who actually hit something with his car, rather than being pulled over or stopped by a spot check) why did MADD not provide a comment on his behaviour? Who makes the decision to reach out to activist organizations like MADD and solicit quotes for publication when wrongdoing like this occurs? The story-writer? The editor? The president of the Liberal Party?

    Or is there just a standing order based on the political affiliation of the perpetrator?

    • Yes, Cons point fingers and blame the Liberals.

    • So you’re accusing Sun media of being left wing now? Really?

      • The fear/prosecution centre of that poster’s brain must be 10 times the size of that of an ordinary human.

  6. I find this funny, because it actually makes the Liberals look bad!

Sign in to comment.