The Commons: No apologies

The way a Conservative backbenchers sees it, this is all about “sore losers”

The Scene. Asking about a new report of political belligerence, Nycole Turmel eventually rounded on the Prime Minister.

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister must take responsibility,” she ventured. “He created a culture in his party: victory at any cost is what matters.”

Mr. Harper was unmoved. Or at least undaunted. ”What I would say is this,” he said. “The Conservative party always accepts the verdict of the voters. We have accepted the verdict of the voters when we have won and also when we have lost. I would encourage the other parties to accept the verdict of voters as well.”

So there. As one of the Prime Minister’s backbenchers put it recently, this is all about “sore losers.” The public has passed its verdict. And the Conservatives have won a sufficient number of seats in this place to form a government. And that means, should they so choose, they can sit here for another three-and-a-half years. And there’s not much anyone can say to change that.

Of course, that also means—at least until they find a way to avoid this place entirely—that they must sit here most afternoons and listen to these inquiries and provocations.

“Mr. Speaker, this morning, like others, I was shocked to hear the recorded fundraising calls of one Don Duke, calling on behalf of the Conservative party,” Libby Davies reported next. “In these calls he treats people on the other end of the line like dirt, all in the name of filling up the Conservative war chest. The company doing the calling, RMG, received over $1.3 million from local Conservative campaigns and an unknown amount from the central campaign. My question is, how much did the Conservative war chest grow from these strong-arming tactics?”

Dean Del Mastro stood as the government side’s standard-bearer. ”Mr. Speaker, I am aware that a single member was fired for not upholding the very clear standards that this party holds itself to,” he testified. “We are very proud of the standards that we have set forth. Obviously, Canadians have supported us in that because they have in fact voted for Conservatives right across the country.”

Ms. Davies was not quite mollified by Mr. Del Mastro’s ipso facto. “Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives cannot write this off by just saying it is some sort of isolated situation,” she ventured. “The fact is, RMG merged with Xentel, that has similar dubious tactics. In February 2010, Xentel was fined $500,000 by the CRTC for violating Canada’s do not call list. It was also charged $75,000 in Missouri for ‘manipulative high pressure techniques to solicit donations.’ Sound familiar?”

This was not quite her question. “The Conservatives are accusing the NDP of demeaning voters when we ask tough questions,” she concluded. “However, what could be more demeaning than funding Xentel and RMG’s unethical behaviour?”

Ms. Davies was a detective trying to connect disparate dots, chasing something, but also maybe nothing. And so now Mr. Del Mastro was a sort of mystic, musing slogans in the form of riddles.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “we make no apologies for the fact that our party has very high standards.”

There were more questions about RMG and questions about voter registration in Eglinton-Lawrence and a question about phone calls in York Centre and a question about phone calls in Kingston and the House drifted off to other matters.

The NDP’s Marie-Claude Morin stood and asked about a report that the government was prepared to begin double-bunking prison inmates. Such arrangements, she said, increased violence, threatened prison guards and aided the spread of disease. The Correctional Investigator, she reported, had warned that double-bunking was unsafe and a violation of human rights. The government, Ms. Morin ventured, must explain these consequences.

To all this the government side sent up Candice Hoeppner, the parliamentary secretary to the minister if public safety.

“Mr. Speaker,” Ms. Hoeppner offered, “it is interesting the NDP are again concerned with the morale of inmates.”

This much was declared quite unapologetically.

The Stats. Ethics, 15 questions. Health care, five questions. Seniors, equality, national defence, prisons and the environment, two questions each. Burma, government spending, affordable housing, foreign aid, pensions, immigration, search-and-rescue and infrastructure, one question each.

Stephen Harper, seven answers. Dean Del Mastro, six answers. Leona Aglukkaq, four answers. Tim Uppal, Peter MacKay and Diane Finley, three answers each. Susan Truppe, Candice Hoeppner and Tony Clement, two answers each. Pierre Poilievre, Alice Wong, Peter Kent, Gail Shea, Bev Oda, Rick Dykstra and Denis Lebel, one answer each.




Browse

The Commons: No apologies

    • Nice to see someone who does know what he’s talking about rubbishing blowhard colleagues – particularly Wente who’s become a standing joke. I rarely read her column now;I could write them with my eyes closed. Does she have no pride at all?

    • Yes when those industrious investigative reporters get some real evidence then maybe we can talk again. In the meantime they should keep digging and if they actually find some illegal activity then those that committed the criminal act should be charged. In the meantime MPs are like a herd of cats chasing their own tails..

      In the meantime Question Period has become a farce. No wonder Canadians are turned off with politics and the political system.

      • You seem to be missing the point of Mitrovica’s article.

        Here are some good takeaways:  

        “if there ever was a story that merited outrage from the opposition benches, this is it.”

        “If my lengthy career as an investigative reporter taught me anything it was not to make the assumptions pundits tend to make.”

        Yet your response is doing exactly what the pundits are doing.

        And don’t fret: those journalists seem to be uncovering interesting facts on a regular basis, like the unfilled voters forms in Joe Oliver’s riding; the account of a CPC “campaign school”; ‘ the Daily Show of Del Mastro.

        Its your prerogative to ignore these.  But, it bears noting that the Liberals chose to do the same thing and look what happened to them.

        The question is, what will it take for you to finally express outrage?

        •  for him to express outrage it will take far less, but done by Liberals.

        • Unlike you and the rest of the Harper haters on this board I will wait until there is actually some evidence which ties the Conservative campaign into dirty tricks.

          I will agree that there is something unusual that happened in Guelph. However, having a single person buying a throw away cell phone is not an indication that the party participated in dirty tricks. It borders on amateurish. Think about it.

          Why is it Joe Oliver’s fault if people in his riding got to vote without giving an address etc. EC runs the polling station and is responsible who is allowed to vote. It may or may not be true but I wouldn’t take CBC’s word for anything. If proven to be true it will take a significant number of spoiled ballots to overturn the election in that riding.

          The trouble is the opposition has been trying to create faux scandals for five years. All of these turned out to just that…faux. The daily outrage is so over the top that it borders on the absurd and a lot of Canadians then begin to ignore the whole issue.

          Let the investigation continue and when there is real provable evidence then there will be plenty of time for the opposition and the media to run around setting their hair on fire.

          In the meantime there is a country to run.

          • Do you have any idea what “faux” means?  Hint: it’s not short-hand for “Fox News”

            Proroguing to avoid a non-confidence vote. Hardly faux.
            In-and-out. Hardly faux, considering the party plead guilty *and* dropped it’s appeal on a second case.
            Refusing to give parliament the information it demanded. Again, not faux in the slightest.

          • For God’s sake Thwim give it a rest.

            Proroguing parliament is a perfectly acceptable use for a PM. Its been done 104 times in the past. Ask Bob Rae and Jean Chretien how many times they used it.

            You guys are p.ssed because you thought you had the government on the ropes over the Afghan detainee issue. The process unfolded when the House resumed and there was nothing. It sure went away quick when the opposition found nothing in all those documents. Its called a faux scandal when you find nothing.

            The in and out system has been used for years by all parties. EC changed the rules and retroactively enforced them. If they had the goods they would have taken the party to court. The party won in the lower court and so it was not as cut and dried as you suggest. EC didn’t have the goods and so they settled.

            Parliament can ask for anything they want and maybe the government has the information and maybe not.

            You guys are so desparate because you see the Conservatives heading for another majority government in 015 and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

            As Wells said in one of his columns the Libs could quadruple their vote in the next election and could not win a majority. Besides the West and the majority of Ontarians will make ensure they win. 

          • 104 times previous were never done with a pending non-confidence vote coming up on a scheduled opposition day.

            Afghan detainee did not go away, the government got ruled in contempt for refusing to provide parliament the documents it needed to govern.

            In and out DID go to court. CPC plead guilty in one case, and cancelled an appeal in the other.

            I’m not desperate because I see the CPC heading for a majority government. Unlike you, I don’t care who fucking wins. I care about this country getting good governance. If Mr. Harper would stop lying and start acting like he promised he was going to way back in 2006, he’d have my support. At the time, I was not in favor of him because I knew what the Reform party was about, but I was willing to allow that he might be alright if he followed through. See, that’s the thing, I was ready to be swayed, even if it meant having to deal with some of the reform economic policies (which I feel are simply brain-dead) because it meant I could see a return to good governance — something which the Liberals had lost over their couple decades in power.

            And then his very first action as Prime Minister was to break his promise on both appointed senators, and on breaking the culture of inappropriately rewarding political allies. That crystallized my opposition to him personally. He then followed it up by breaking his promises on income trusts and softwood lumber.

            Since then, he’s become focused on increasing the power of the PMO, reducing transparency and accountability for the entire political class, and basically destroying the one area where I had hope he might make improvements.

            So unlike you, for me it’s got nothing to do with who wins. It’s got to do with who respects *my* government.
            Mr. Harper and his cronies do not. I want them gone.

            Were I to support any party, it would have been the Greens before May took control and it took its swing to the left.

          • “It borders on amateurish”

            Yes, because the hallmark of the CPC is professionalism and an image of competence, like del Mastro, Poilievre, the clumsily executed In-and-Out scheme, and  various efforts executed by Teneyke in the past (Oily the splotch, a days “leave of absence” to participate in partisan activity) Finley showing up at committees uninvited and throwing tantrums, Mackay’s helicopter ride and subsequent unsuccessful attempts to claim the others did it too, and, well, anything Tony Clement does.

            “Why is it Joe Oliver’s fault if people in his riding got to vote without giving an address etc. EC runs the polling station and is responsible who is allowed to vote.”

            Who said it was Oliver’s fault?  I just mentioned it was his riding.  Of course EC is responsible to ensure voters are validly registered, but for me the larger question is, why did there seem to be quite a significant number of voters registering on the spot (was it 2700?), and why the clearly fake addresses?  One case was reported this morning of twelve family members with different addresses and none having a previous address; this sounds like an organized effort.

            “It may or may not be true but I wouldn’t take CBC’s word for anything.”

            Setting aside the standard CPC premise of CBC bias, which is not proven (ironically you use the expression “real provable evidence” elsewhere in your post), the reporter in this case is Milewski who famously was a thorn in side to the Chretien Liberal government, so he can hardly be considered biased.

          • I have some questions about Elections Canada.  Since they no longer go door to door t o enumerate, how do they determine who is eligible to vote?  Shouldn’t people have to show proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate or passport when voting?  I don’t think there is enough oversite to ensure non citizens don’t vote.

          • Spencerdc:

            Google is your friend.

            Here’s a link to the relevant page from the Elections Canada website:

            http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=reg/des&document=index&lang=e 

            It includes a link to the procedure for registering at the polls on election day, procedures that would appear to have not been followed in the Eglinton—Lawrence riding, as per CBC reports.

            Even if they did go door to door to enumerate, how would they be in a position to determine citizenship any better than the prescribed procedures at the polls? For equivalent results, this current approach is less expensive and thus the savings can be put to better uses like building gazebos.

  1. The NDP did something clever with their motion to give EC additional powers for the next election.    The NDP amended it to extend those additional powers to investigation the 2011 election.  So the Conservatives said they can no longer support it.  

    • Do you have a link?

      Hey ,maybe those guys read macleans too? Good for them. Maybe they are ready to govern after all?

    • However, what you failed to point out is that the Conservatives will abstain from the vote. The NDP pushed too far and now will lose the motion which the Conservatives originally agreed to support. So now it will never see the light of day.

      By the way EC already has the authority to ask for receipts.

      • Uh, no she didn’t fail to point that  out.   Her comment is composed of three sentences – try reading all of them.

      • So, can you tell me hollinm, why the CPC does not support the Chief Electoral Officer having powers for the 2011 election that it will support for the 2015 election?

        • He already has the power. Read the act. EC has already issued their report saying that the election was fair and square and he say no irregularities.

          • And in 1996, there was nothing wrong with the sponsorship program either.

          • Give me a break. There is nothing to compare to adscam and you know it.

  2. Inmates, potential liberal voters or reluctant, tardy Tory donors – it’s all the same really.

  3. Out with QP and in with Twitter – much more entertaining, lol

    “Public Safety Minister Vic Toews took to Twitter Thursday to attack opposition MPs after being given access to records on the people who have viewed his 2007 divorce records.

    “It seems @PaulDewar MB organizer Thomas Linner was sent to collect dirt on my divorce records,” Toews said on Twitter at about 3 p.m.”

    http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/08/vic-toews-divorce/  

    • So what. It’s publicly available info.Toews made his bed, he can now sleep in it.

      • He is motivated by revenge,not concern for his  wives and children.

        • Yes, he’s a Conservative, so he’s 100% evil.

  4. There is a chap, now a LeMonde stringer, who’s doing yeoman’s…wait…no…real journamalistic type stuff (you know, facts, data, and the compiling thereof to create a larger, comprehensible picture) on this particular matter. He has been doing so for awhile. Unsure whether the url is acceptable to Disqus, but here it is:

    http://www.unfuckwithable.ca

    Like, really, really, persistent and determined work. Worth a look.

    • Thanks for that – hope he does look into my riding…

  5. “Sore Losers” he says.  Already, the Conservatives have been found guilty of the IN and OUT scheme; yet Conservative supporters continue with this hyperbolic rhetoric “Sore Losers”.  Only people with no respect for democracy claim that these legitimate concerns amount to no more than whining by those who lost the election.  Hyperbolic dismissal of those who are calling for answers and accountability is disrespectful of democracy.

  6. There was a time in our history, before the development of our common law, before principles of fundamental justice, when there was literally mob rule.  Before fairness, justice, and everything our Western Democracy now holds dear, there was a system in place where guilt was determinined by lining up the number of accusers.  Gather sufficient people to point the finger of guilt, regardless as to evidence, and one would be convicted.

    How terribly unfortunate, that in their desperate desire to regain power, the parties of the left (and more importantly their abettors in the media) are seeking to cast the pall of guilt by drumming up accusers.  “Look at all the people accusing them of guilt!  We don’t need evidence, our mob says they are guilty!”

    And how terribly ironic that those who act in such pre-democratic barbaric ways, do so in the name of saving “democracy”.

    • No, there was never a time of ‘mob rule’….and the ‘common law’ is something we inherited from England. 

      Guilt was never determined in such a way.

      The only ‘left’ party is the NDP, and they don’t have any ‘abettors’ in the media.

      Yes, we need evidence and there is no mob.

      Pre-democracy managed quite well without barbarism

      And I suggest you go and sober up.

    • Warrants are being used to obtain permission to search.  Harper wants to eliminate them for internet snoopng.  Try to keep up.


    •  there was a system in place where guilt was determinined by lining up the number of accusers.  Gather sufficient people to point the finger of guilt, regardless as to evidence, and one would be convicted.”

      For a sec I thought you were extolling the virtues of CPC tough-on-crime legislation.  So hard to tell the difference.

    • “There was a time in our history…”

      Interesting take on history, totally unsupported by facts, records, artifacts, or archeology or any other evidence-based source of knowledge.

      In other words, a typical Con self-serving construction of the world.

      • When magna cartas roamed the earth…

        • I’m picturing that.

    • You are channelling the fevered imagination of Rousseau, then? Or Hobbes’ ‘pre-crime’ envisioning of a ‘war of all against all’ to justify a sovereign? Because this ‘mob rule’ of which you speak is…when?…where? Not here, surely. We’re founded by armed conquest, then expanded by cops and merchants working side-by-each.  Fort-by-fort. Trading stations in the wake.

      If being a big-ass Fat-C, Conservative means ‘cops. merchants and soldiers’ to the detriment of the greater good, say it. 

      If you can’t, you’re cowards. If you do, best of luck.

      And didn’t Joe Oliver look like Bambi in the headlghts of a Fort Mac Sludgehauler today?

  7. The angry, vulgar invective directed at those who take positions contrary to statist/leftist postions; the demands to “shut up” by self appointed comment thread enforcers; the palpable hatred throughout,  tell us much about the state of today’s “progressive” left.

    It also tells us much about the blog post author who attract such types like flies.

    • No, it just tells us about the state of your fevered imagination…about as real as your version of history. LOL

    • But, but, but,…. they`re trying to save democracy.

      • Well somebody has to, and it’s obvious the Cons aren’t even trying.

        • Yes, this is why selfless heroes like Emily are on these message boards 24/7 — to save democracy.

          Or they might just be pathetic partisan hacks.

          • You and Dennis F should get together and make a two man cross you both can get up on.

          • That would be collaboration and teamwork: distinctly communist traits. They need to keep competing to see who may construct the tallest and most impressive cross from which to weep.

          • Dennis believes he’s the most intelligent guy on the planet and that everyone else is stoopid.

          • Or they might just be commenting on something that interests them….but I’m glad to know it bugs Conbots like you.

        • It’d obvious the Cons care not a whit for democracy and the rule of law. They seem to be more concerned upholding the “Rule of Steve.”

          • Yes, they are alien lizard people who have come to Planet Earth to enslave us all.  Rise Up!

          • I knew it! But aren’t you afraid of what Anna will do to you for ratting them out?

    • “Todays progressive left.”

      Hey! I think  Kody/Biff/ Chet has returned folks, or the ghost of him anyway.

      Now i know the conbots are desperate. Welcome back Kody…been seconded from the PMO have you? 

      • I saw that too!  Welcome back, chiff.

        … we haven’t missed you.

        I hereby rename you chifferton.

    • Reds! Everywhere!

  8.  If nothing else the Robo call scanadal has led to the creation of a new word

    Mastrobation: (noun) working the same point again and again in the hope of getting your party off…

    Every time Dean gets up clutching that yellow piece of paper and starts to speak, it’s just…..

  9. I am convinced that every member of the #cpc is a #cocaine-abusing #drunk, #punishment #fetishist #pervert #cdnpoli #electionfraud

  10. Dear Aaron,

    I thoroughly enjoy reading your columns, but am becoming more annoyed with the HoC every time I read one… I humbly submit to you the following suggestions:

    -Move the summary tally of “answers” to the top of the article.
    -Break the section into two, “Answers” and “Responses”.

    This will allow me to properly mentally prepare myself for the aggravation that follows.

  11. Try going to the NP or any Sun board and you will see the same thing, only from the other side of the political spectrum.  Mike Murphy, Sassylassie, IanGFoulds,  . . . .  (and on the Sun boards you have the added bonus that the columns – of which not all pemit commenting – usually are written by someone who sounds like they write some of their commenters material as well).

    And of course the Macleans boards have their own set of CPC yes-men (and -women I suppose), so spare us the martyr act.

  12. Another day, and the conservatives have managed to get the sordid images of Vic Toews in front of us once again. Why do they insist on dragging this on and on? Let’s go back and pick this festering sore open again. She was how old? He did what? He was convicted of what??? So it is true, we have convicts running our prisons?

    Really, what is the point? Adam Carroll did nothing wrong and in fact, likely used less “Parliamentary resources” than Jason Kenny did, with his office preparing and hand delivering fundraising letters. How much of our tax payers’ dollars went to that little exercise?

    No respect for anything, these low life childish bullies. How about getting your office budgets in line before you go spouting off that you know how to manage an economy? 

    How about you go one week without a new blaring example of your complete hypocrisy?

    How about you drop your little vengeance campaign and get to governing?

    Completely unbelievable.

  13. People get the kind of government they deserve, spoken by some one much wiser than I, but it sure applies here. What were we thinking?????????????

  14. It’s no surprise that this type of behaviour has come out at this time and has been connected to this party… 

    Whatever the reason or excuses or firings or result, the people have been given the notion that Canada is not immune to 3rd world tactics… 

    congratulations Conservative Party of Canada!!!!  

    T.C.

  15. My question is; Has there been one person come forward and declare that they missed casting their vote, or, that they changed how they voted; because of a phone call, damaged lawn sign, or any one of the other dozen juvenile Halloween tricks that all political parties play on each other during an election?

  16. actually the vast majority believe this is nothing more than the left whining because they lost, decisively.  the ignorance, lies and just plain desperation of ultra left wing groups such as leadnow and openmedia.. will in the long run bring the more intelligent thinking Canadian to the PCs.

    • The PC’s?

      • yes majority now and a larger majority after the next election.. keep on whining ….

        • Federally, there aren’t any PCs. So that would be a neat trick. Will they be dusting off Joe Clark as leader of the resurrection?

  17. Its very interesting that the Government of Canada being chained to the political views of Washington on making its viewpoint known throughout the world when it comes to voting irregularities is doing everything it can to sweep the dirt sticking to it under the rug. It is a pity that there is no process in place whereby the Governor General could suspend Parliament & order a new election & let the cards fall where they may without political interference from any party. Let the Conservatives if they feel they are right go to the people with this. If they don’t, then this government is no better than a corrupt petty 3rd world dictatorship that plays dirty politics!

    • 1. Name one individual who has claimed to have been unable to vote, or, who changed their vote as a result of a robocall by any of the parties.
      2. Are you suggesting that anytime a conservative party wins an election, they are subject to the rule that; if allegations of impropriety are made- so far not even close to proven, the GG must call a new election if the level of left wing caterwauling achieves a predetermined decibel level?
      3. The Conservatives will indeed go to the people, in another 3 years, and if this scandal actually does begin to put some meat on its bones, the people can throw them out. 

      • 1. http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/03/01/add-five-more-to-the-list/
        Not that it even matters.. attempted murder is still a crime.
        2. A democracy is the system whereby the majority is given what it wants. With FPTP we typically content ourselves with a plurality since it can be hard to determine what the majority didn’t want.  That said,  I certainly think there’s room for the GG to look at the prevailing will of the people and decide that an election is needed. Of course, how that “will of the people” is determined is a difficult measure, and personally, I don’t think we’re anywhere near close enough to having enough people to really say what that is.
        3. Actually, that’s rather the point of this whole thing. If the CPC is using voter supression tactics and/or perhaps worse, than the concern is that maybe the people *can’t* throw them out.

        This is the problem. Corrupt politicians and parties will always exist. It’s the nature of power. So long as we have free and fair elections, we can deal with them. But the moment anybody starts to screw with the process of the free and fair election, that puts our ability to handle the bad stuff in jeopardy, and we need to come down on all responsible like a ton of bricks coated with the Ebola virus. Even if it’s just “reasonable doubt” levels that someone did it. Will we catch innocents sometime? Yes. But this is one case where I think it’s better to catch a lot of innocent folk than miss a single guilty one.

        • .1. Well, there is one. Is there proof yet that the call was made by the the PCs and not another party, or shall we just assume that? After all, conservatives are not supposed to be in power in Justin’s Canada.

          2. Considering the size of the protests being mustered- in spite of a 2 week constant left wing media cacophony, I’d suggest the majority of people might not be clamoring for another election.
          3. Are you seriously suggesting that the results of the election would be materially different if the 40,000 people who have complained had voted differently? anyway, most of the complaints are about removal of lawn signs. I’ve had rogue NDers do that in my neighborhood.
          4. When we start throwing out the results of an election before guilt of malfeasance is established, we have switched to govt. by the will of sore losers.

  18. Canadians see our Federal Government as a group of elected MPs, who are out of tune with the wishes and needs of Canadians!  As well, there is a strong perception that the PC party and PM Harper wants to win and remain in power at all costs.  We have compared our politics to that of our neighbours to the south, but we are stooping lower in the “phone scams, etc!”

    • The federal party headed by Harper is not the PC party. The Progressive Conservatives ceased to exist federally about a decade ago. The Conservative Party of Canada is definitely not progressive.

      • And some would say they’re not even conservative.

      • You are right this is not the Progressive Conservative Party. That party was Liberal lite and that is why real Conservatives left the fold and started the Alliance Party. We had enough with the Liberal b.s. We don`t need a pretend Liberal party. We will leave that to the NDP who try to move to the mushy middle in an attempt to attract a wider group of voters.

        • So you opted for a pretend conservative party instead?

          • Conservative in name only, they seem to have settled for – pretty slick marketing on Harper’s part.

          • We will see what you think as Harper and his government introduce conservative ideals over the next three years. I suspect you lefties will be screaming like little piggies who no longer can feed at the trough.

  19. This issue is about arrogance. In my riding, Eglinton-Lawrence in Toronto,  I received a least a half-dozen ‘RoboCalls’ from Joe Oliver, Lorraine Harper and Stephen himself. Annoying to say the least, but it was the other half-dozen live phone calls that say it all. They asked for my son, who I politely told them was out of the country (studying in Berlin), and not call again. The same woman, over two weeks prior to the election, called three more times with my message the same :”Don’t call him again, he’s out of the country”. The third time I lost my patience and asked her to remove my phone number and never call again. The response was, ” Only your son can request that”. When I emphasized that it’s my phone number, my house and my time, she reemphasized that I don’t have the right to ask that they don’t phone again. The next two times the same woman phoned, I just hung up. Annoying arrogance! 

  20. The Vote Suppression Scandal or allerged election fraud, during the May 2, 2011 Canadian federal election occurred country wide in 77 out of 308 ridings and, but in at least 16 ridings where there race between candidates was close. This unprecedented tampering with the right to vote is countrywide and illegal. Hopefully, Elections Canada, with whom Prime Minister Stephen Harper intends to cooperate fully but has called “idiots”,will be able to report on its findings before another election is called. However, events since 2005 (proroguement of two parliaments, the Conservatives guilty of election fraud in 2011, admitted Conservative calls to Irwin Cottlers constituents claiming he was leaving his seat, 5 years of attack ads, the Conservative government  finding itself in contempt of Parliament, the admitted fraud in Guelph, and Harper’s control of of his party and his members), do not incline one to believe the government. 

    If an independent inquiry is not held, the Canadian public may may not have the facts but may come to believe that Mr. Harper is at the root of this win at all costs effort and it won’t matter if there is an inquiry or not.

    As one who has worked on the last campaign and managed the provison of robocalls and used voter’s lists, these must be paid for out of party funds, and an accoujnting must be given.  Some rogue volunteers cannot do this outside the accounting mechanisms for the election.  There is a paper trail and a record of who was called and the scripts involved.  This one  is not going away.

    • Of course you are the judge, jury and executioneer. You don’t know what in the hell you are talking about. There is no evidence that the Conservatives did anything wrong. There appears to be something that went on in Guelph but it looks like there is blame all around. However, perhaps you don’t believe that Valeriote’s call was a robocall. It was illegal because it did not identify the caller or the party.

      The Conservatives were not convicted of fraud and you know it. If EC had such a great case they would have finished the court case. Their case was weak because they lost in a lower court decision. They were fined for a misdeamour.

      Harper, as PM, has the right to prorogue just like all previous PMs. Whether you like it or not is inmaterial. He did nothing that other PM’s have done. Ask Bob Rae how many times he prorogued when Premier of Ontario. Jean Chretien prorogued to delay the sponsorship scandal. When Harper passes new laws giving himself more power you may have an argument.

      Recent polls do not support your contention that the public will not believe Harper. They are split. There will be no public inquiry. Let EC and the RCMP do their jobs. That’s what they are paid for.

      If as you suggest the robocall affair will no go away. Then relax. Let the process unfold.

Sign in to comment.