The Commons: The Conservatives run out of answers

And Pat Martin wonders where it all went wrong


The afternoon was not without new clarification. Or at least an attempt at such.

Picking up where yesterday had left off, Thomas Mulcair endeavoured to sort out the precise value of John Baird’s assurance that the matter of Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy had been referred to two independent authorities.

“Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon, 11 times the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that the Duffy affair was going to be investigated by independent authorities, independent bodies, independent officers. When my colleague, the House Leader of the Official Opposition asked him what those were, he could not give an answer,” Mr. Mulcair recounted. “Twice during the afternoon the Prime Minister’s Office said that they were referring to the Senate’s Ethics Officer. Later it corrected that to say that it is the Senate committee, the same one that whitewashed Mike Duffy the first time, that is carrying out the investigation.”

“Ahh!” sighed the New Democrats.

Along the government’s front row, Vic Toews grumbled in Mr. Mulcair’s direction about a “bribe” (seemingly a reference to the matter of Mr. Mulcair and the mayor of Laval).

“Does the minister not realize,” Mr. Mulcair asked, “that is about as credible as Paul Martin asking Jean Chrétien to investigate the sponsorship scandal?”

The New Democrats enjoyed this reference and stood to applaud their man.

Mr. Baird now stood to quote himself. “What I did say yesterday was, and I quote: ‘Furthermore, this matter has been referred to two independent bodies for review,’ which is nothing like what he just said,” Mr. Baird explained, seeming to stress the word referred.

So… there?

It is not actually clear what this should clarify, although, as it turns out, it now seems the Senate Ethics Officer is indeed reviewing the matter. So there’s that. Unfortunately, there is not much else on offer. Or, rather, not much else that the government seems either willing or able to offer.

“Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that we were referring to some form of legal document that he was not aware of and that his understanding is that no such document exists,” Mr. Mulcair pressed with his third opportunity, speaking slowly and deliberately. “There is a trust document. There is a cheque. Will the Conservatives let the public see the trust document and the cheque?”

Mr. Baird apparently did not see any reason to acknowledge any such kind of possible distinction. “Mr. Speaker, again, what I said was that there was no legal document with which had been referred to in this House by members of the opposition on a number of occasions,” he said. “I said that our understanding was that there was no such legal document. No one in the government is aware of such a legal document.”

Nathan Cullen, the NDP House leader, now broadened the matter. “Can the Conservatives say definitively that there were no documents in the Prime Minister’s Office that related to the Mike Duffy and Nigel Wright scandal?” he wondered. “To be clear: no emails, no memos, no notes. Yes or no?”

In response to that simple query, Mr. Baird offered praise for the ethics commissioner. “This matter has been referred to her and the government is prepared to fully co-operate as she looks into this issue,” the Foreign Affairs Minister assured before repeating his understanding that a “legal agreement” does not exist.

Mr. Cullen seemed unimpressed. “Mr. Speaker,” he shot back, “somehow the Conservatives think that parsing words is going to satisfy Canadians.”

In fact, the problem for the government here is that there is very little to parse. There are only questions here that need be answered and allegations that need be addressed.

If this has hit the government harder than anything in its seven years in office, it is possibly for similar reasons. This matter of Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy is not a matter of simple pork (the G8 Legacy Fund), nor complicated accounting and procurement (the F-35), nor electioneering (In-and-Out), nor the conditions of third-world prisons in a war zone (the Afghan detainee controversy). It is neither arcane (prorogation), nor legislative (omnibus budget bills), nor parliamentary (the 2011 finding of contempt), nor merely a matter of expensive orange juice (Bev Oda). It is, instead, the stuff of primetime television drama: the allegations are the stuff of entitlement, privilege, corruption and the evasion of justice. It is an episode of The Good Wife, if perhaps not a particularly good episode of The Good Wife. Less entertaining, but allegedly real.

It is, indeed, a matter that has moved no less than the Prime Minister to express frustration, sorrow and anger.

Unfortunately for Mr. Harper, there seem few answers on the government side.

“We know now that the Conservatives on the Senate Committee on Internal Economy used their majority to doctor the final report on Senator Duffy’s expenses,” Justin Trudeau charged with his first opportunity. “Can anybody on that side of the House tell us who gave the order to whitewash the report on Senator Duffy?”

Mr. Baird apparently could not.

“If Wright is solely responsible,” Mr. Trudeau wondered, “when will the government call him to testify under oath to his malfeasance?”

Mr. Baird could only offer assurances that Mr. Harper was unaware of what Mr. Wright was up to and that Mr. Wright had done the right thing in resigning.

“Who on that committee was part of the $90,000 whitewash,” Charlie Angus asked of the Senate’s internal economy committee and the promise of a new review of Mike Duffy’s expenses, “and will they be allowed to partake in this new review or will the government do the right thing and call in the police?”

Mr. Baird deferred to the House ethics commissioner.

Later, Mr. Trudeau returned to his feet to continue posing questions. “Will the government produce the cheque?” he asked.

Mr. Baird reviewed the government’s version of events and deferred to the ethics commissioner.

Mr. Trudeau raised the possible existence of an email he seemed to think the Prime Minister’s Office was in possession of. “Will the government commit to releasing this and any other email or document, electronic or otherwise, that relates to the secret deal between the PMO and Senator Duffy?”

Mr. Baird deferred to the ethics commissioner.

Twenty-three times Mr. Baird stood this afternoon, mostly bereft of the sort of answers that might begin to settle any of this. Even his assurances were problematic. “I understand that Mr. Wright has taken sole responsibility for the decision he made on the repayment and his actions. He immediately submitted his resignation and it was immediately accepted,” Mr. Baird explained at one point, a version of the timing that seems to clash with the public record and anonymous supposition.

In the middle of the day, at the end of its line of questioning, the New Democrats sent up Pat Martin, who proceeded to do as Pat Martin does.

“Mr. Speaker, the minister is going for cocky when he should be going for contrition,” he chided Mr. Baird. “A little less swagger and a little more Jimmy Swaggart would be in order.”

This was possibly one of the finer lines in the history of this place, even if the Foreign Affairs Minister did not seem too swaggering this day.

Mr. Martin furrowed his brow and gestured with both hands to act out his sermon.

“They rode into Ottawa on their high horse of accountability, and all we have to show for it is the mess that horse left,” he quipped. “They should take their Federal Accountability Act and run it through that horse and throw it on their roses for all the good it has ever done us.”

He might’ve stopped there, but he did offer a pair of rhetorical question for the sake of the record.

“My question for the minister is simple: When did it all go so terribly wrong?” he wondered. “When did they jettison integrity and honesty and accountability for the sake of political expediency?”

The New Democrats stood to cheer this and even Liberals applauded, Mr. Trudeau thumping the top of his desk in appreciation.


The Commons: The Conservatives run out of answers

  1. way to go NDP !!!!!! – usually Pat M. is just offensive but today he actually stepped up the game to clever – I Love IT !!!! – The CPC and the NDP duking it out for the prize :) – what a wonderful system we have – athough Trudeau needs to step up his game now otherwise the NDP might be giaining on them here as after all how can the Liberals even comment on the Senate or Accountability and Transparency sort of them leaves them out of this battle :)

    • I note with satisfaction that the current prime minister only apologized after Justin Trudeau told him to and that Canadians expect it. I mean, we all know harper was lying through his helmet hair, but at least he mustered an apology to those taxpaying voters he’s helping Duffy swindle.

      • What? Harper apologized because Justin told him to? This is really getting interesting how far your mind can stretch to make things work for you. Un-be-lie-va-ble!

        So, tell me, why has Justin never spoken out publicly on Duffy’s (and other’s) expense accounts? Is that because Justin does not want to be caught having his expense account checked out?

        • I’m pretty sure Trudeau HAS spoken out about this, Francien.

          • Well, I know for a fact that Justin has spoken about this.

            Here is what he had to say, if you can believe it:

            Trudeau says he never marketed himself as an MP and says his speeches were focused on youth issues, education and the environment.

            “I talked non-political stuff,” he said.

            Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Justin+Trudeau+says+ethics+commissioner+approved+speaking+appearances/7967169/story.html#ixzz2U4a1xdNQ

            So, there you have it: Justin, the MP, getting paid an MP salary, but not considering himself a politician when he goes talking for money (and lots of it!!) privately about education, youth issues and the environment.

          • Did he charge those trips to his MP expense account? If not, he did nothing wrong. It would seem that maybe Duffy & Wallin did.

          • Well we will never find out, because who would investigate Justin?

          • Oh,I’m sure there are some PMO drones assigned to watch every penny [OK; nickel] he claims, in hopes of finding attack ad ammo…

          • Do you have any proof of that?

          • The only thing there is proof of is that the chief of staff of the Prime Minister’s Office personally gave a sitting senator a ‘gift’ of $90K to avoid an embarrassing audit of one of the CPC’s prize fundraising Senate appointees.

            Why you keep making baseless accusations against others when these facts are already established is beyond me.

          • Because she’s a CPC troll; it’s how she earns her living.

          • Oh I doubt it’s much of a living. If they do pay for it they’re being taken to the cleaners. My cats could provide more coherent TPs .

          • But a cat needs constant petting for it to be purrrrrrring along!

            I’m happy with the thumbs down I get. ‘Purrrring’ right along! :)

          • I admire your wishful thinking.

          • Make allegations against who?

          • About as much as you do that JT has been breaking any rules.

          • But I, for one, would like to know for sure whether he broke any rules or not. Perhaps you don’t want to know.

          • I don’t doubt at all that you are salivating at the very prospect. It would go a long way toward making a big enough smokescreen to hide all the CPC shenanigans. Every CPC shill must be looking very very hard for some source of misdirection about now…

          • Not so! It would be balanced investigating.

          • Balanced investing found that, of the entire Senate, four Senators were filing false claims. Of those four, 3 were appointed by Harper, and only one was cut a big fat cheque by his office.
            Unless there been some investigation into MPs expenses that investigated only Conservatives, you’re full of shit.

          • Stop witch hunting. And while you are at it, stop embarrassing yourself.

          • So you’re not in favour of balanced reporting then. Well, at least we know that now.

          • francien this isn’t about anything else but the dictator abuse of power you must be a con. MP LOL!!!!!!!!!

          • This troll has you all talking about JT and shifting from Wright, Duffy and dear leader. She’s looking at bonus money for this one. This distraction is ^NOT the issue at hand, do not feed the trolls

          • well francien why don’t you phone and ask him if you are so sure hes done wrong or better still make a complaint and have the dictator or his puppets look into it lol!!!!!!!

          • I have said that I am very interested in having Justin’s expense account opened up. What does he have to hide?

            See, I think for an MP to be paid an MP salary and to have an MP expense account, to then go, as a none-politician supposedly (said so by Justin himself) do some private speech giving, will give a high probability of mixing up the two jobs. How would Justin keep clear when he is a politician and when he is not?

            Would a politician charge school boards for speaking at their schools? Justin charged schoolboards for having him speak at their schools. How does Justin, the politician, think about that sort of behaviour?

            If Harper would have charged schoolboards for hearing him speak, would Justin be ok with that??? Are you ok with charging schoolboards for having Harper speak to them???

            It sure as hell would not be ok with me!

          • As the article you cited indicates, JT has voluntarily provided all kinds of info. He has been scrupulous in reporting his earnings and ensuring there is no conflict. If you don’t trust your own Ethics Commissioner when she says JT is doing nothing wrong, why the hell do you keep telling everyone to wait on her ruling on the DuffyWright scandal? If you think shes incompetent, why should we have any faith in her?

            Again, the article you cited listed a number of Conservatives who have accepted money for speaking engagements. Why aren’t you attacking them?

            Now that JT is the Liberal leader, I think it would be inappropriate – and against the rules. Give me proof he has done so since his win, and I’ll join you in asking for an investigation.

          • I don’t think Dawson is incompetent. On the contrary: if Dawson is good enough for judging one politician, she is good enough to judge all other politicians, Harper included.

            My point has been all along that Justin has not been investigated by the ethics commissioner since Justin became an MP.

            Justin may have told Dawson that he will keep straight in the books but how are we to know he actually did?

            You are not willing to believe that Harper is accountable, and that we need an investigation into his actions, for real.

            Well, I am thinking we cannot take anyone’s word for it before they become MP. I am in agreement of having an inquiry done by Dawson in regards to Wright/Duffy AND Harper. Therefore I find it fair to suggest that Justin is to be investigated also, since we should not take him at his word if we won’t take Harper at his. Balance, my friend. Fairness is what I am looking for!

          • You don’t have a point, and why people keep trying to reason with you is beyond me.

            Some people cannot be reasoned with because they are unreasonable.

            That said, I shall give it a shot: why don’t you write your friendly conservative MP, or ANY conservative MP, and ask THEM why they haven’t asked the ethics commission to investigate Justin. They will probably have the answers you seek. I am guessing you won’t though as this little meme of yours seems to be your way to try to change the subject whenever something you don’t like comes up.

          • Here’s the thing: Under the circumstances, we have good reason to be suspicious of Harper. There have been secretive financial shenanigans in the PMO – by his CoS, no less. And it is just the latest shady goings-on. If Harper is truly not involved, he should welcome the investigation.

            On the flip side, Justin has disclosed – publicly – far more than he needs to. Far more already than any sitting member of either House, from what I’ve seen. The article you cited says the Ethics Commissioner looked into a complaint against Del Asstro and there was no evidence of any wrongdoing. So basically, you are saying either you don’t believe her, or you want her to go on a witch hunt – equivalent of a warrantless search on someone you dislike – simply because you dislike him.

            That’s not fairness; that’s advocating persecution and institutional bullying.

            When you have something more substantive than dislike and a desire to redirect attention from your hero, we can talk again. But please, please, please stop this inane, desperate, partisan BS.

          • I don’t dislike Justin. I dislike unbalanced and selective reporting!

            Why would the press not condemn Justin for writing letters to get more foreign workers into his riding? Justin stood up in the House, telling the government about how WRONG the TFWP is! Yet, Justin wants more foreign workers in his own riding.

            What’s so special about Justin that his hypocrisy need not be condemned?

          • Yeah – and he wasn’t the only one demonstrating hypocrisy on the foreign workers front – other Lib & NDP MPs were doing the same. I can only assume their reasoning was “This is wrong, and I’ll try to change it, but in the meantime as long as the government is allowing it then it is my duty to represent my constituents and try to help those who request it to get the same access for them as those in CPC ridings have.”

          • Keith…for Gawd’s sakes…I thought YOU said you hadn’t decided who to vote for???? Why then are you doing the “he is just doing what everyone else is doing…” BS?? Come on!! WE undecideds have to hold EVERYONE accountable. We can’t be apologists for anyone….sheesh!

          • By the sounds of things francien your scared justin will beat harper ?( yes) you just watch him go justin go!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Why on earth would I be afraid of Justin becoming PM????

            But I will tell you this: I will be afraid if Canadians will elect yet another PM from Quebec and THEIR values.

            Canadians aren’t stupid!!!

          • No francien canadians are not stupid and I bet we’ll see that in 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!If someone can watch over the robo calls!!!!! good bye mr Harper you can take that to the bank LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Good for Justin to have some more material to bring into his private speech making; next time Justin will decide to address the school kids he should ask for a higher fee. Getting paid $10,000 from local schoolboards is not nearly enough for Justin to speak about fraud.

            “Dear kids, Fraud charges no longer have to be proven. Mere allegations are enough! Please, children, do as much accusing as you can, for it will pay of handsomely. Your schoolboard has just given me a fee raise for speaking to you!!!”

            CLAP,clap, clap!!

          • This is not about justin my friend it’s about HARPER LOL!!!!!!!

          • I have visted a lot of web sites on this matter and have heard alot of opinion on this francien your the only one that I see that have your additude .I beleive you are a troll as well my friend it won’t work this time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • People who want balanced reporting are considered trolls?

            You are special.

          • Francien your not wanting balanced reporting your want!!!!!ing to take the spot light off the con. and put it on the libs. and NDP instead of what the real issues on the table are it’s HARPER DUFFY AND MR WRIGHT

          • The current reformist love of negative ads is all the proof one needs.

          • What do ads have to do with any of this? Running out of reasonable arguments?

          • Yeah, that was more than a little off-topic, wasn’t it?

          • Any one liner without further explanations attached are automatically off topic.

          • You haven’t discussed the issue yet. Your job here is to distract and take the conversation away from the issue at hand, nothing but trolling for the PMO. Try addressing the actual issue of Wright, Duffy, and Tubby. Try discussing the means, methods and ways of paying off a sitting senator.

          • Darn, you didn’t catch my one-liner set up! Must try some other time and see how you will react then.

          • well francien for one thing Haper say’s he’s against BULLYING and he’s one of the biggest BULLYs in canada look at the attack aids need I say more you don’t have a clue. You and haper take your ball and go home !!!! your showing people how stupid you are lol!!!!!!!

          • You must never have heard about Maud Barlow’s tactics. She could give you lessons on how bullying is done at its best!

            Justin would be proud!

          • do you have any prove francien that there’s not? as dirty as this dictator is I’LL bet you keith hit it right on the head!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Will we ever find out if the PM is charging Peruvian Prostitutes to his expense account? Why is nobody investigating? Why doesn’t Francien care?

          • Is there a rumor??

          • The issue is Wright, Duffy and dear leader. ^NOT JT.

            Oh look, another panda.

          • Francien why don’t you investagate this but take off your rose coloured glass first lol!!!!!!!

          • That’s a fun article. I especially enjoyed this bit:

            “NDP MP Charlie Angus on Thursday questioned why a sitting MP would need to charge Canadians to hear him speak. “I’m not Justin Trudeau but I consider that part of my parliamentary work, so I wouldn’t charge that because I’m paid for, paid by the taxpayer,” Angus told reporters after question period.”

            For you to be able to charge, Charlie, you need to have someone willing to pay to hear you speak. There are plenty of sitting MP’s and senators who accept private speaking engagements. A couple of years ago we even paid Senator Mike Duffy $7K to be the keynote at a reception. I am very curious what Duffy’s annual speaking engagement income is.

          • Who are these ‘plenty of MP’s and senators who accept private speaking engagements’ for which they get paid so much money on the side?

            And so any of these ‘plenty of MP’s and senators’ you refer to charge schoolboards $10,000 @ pop as Justin has done while sitting as an MP?

            Please, do tell. I think we should all hear who is doing this on a regular basis, to the tune of over $250,000 since becoming MP. Please, please do tell who else is doing this!

          • Such jealousy! Because JT can command more money than anyone in the CPC!

          • OH, I am jealous alright about a politician who charges schoolboards to hear him speak! I have never been so jealous in my life! LOL

          • Certainly Keith. Do you think people like Bill Clinton charged for speaking engagements while under contract to work for the taxpayer or do you think they waited until they were out of public service?

          • Aren’t you concerned about Toews expenses? Don’t you think he would have wanted to hide those hotel bills from his wife?

            Apparently Trudeau has getting paid so much for his speaking engagements he has little need to cheat on his expenses.

          • Oh, I doubt they got a hotel….He had to give her a ride home….large backseat…

          • francien your making a fool out of your self !!!!!!!!!!

          • I am making a fool of myself? I did NOT take money from schoolkids while sitting as an MP. Justin did!

          • francien when a grov. interferes with an ele.by using robo calls in canada !!!!! that just about says it all Why if the money justin took bothers you so much why don’t you go see mr. Wright and get him to cut the school a chq.than you will be able to move on LOL!!!!!!

          • I completely understand you guys defending Justin charging for his speaking engagements. No Charlie Angus wouldn’t do it but he didn’t grow up as a rich kid. He doesn’t need the money to keep himself in the lifestyle he’s become accustomed to.

          • All run by the ethics commissioner and approved. That’s right there at the OC too…if you could be arsed to look for it.

          • You gotta be kidding me!

          • Facts Francien, something you seem to be allergic to. Do i have to fetch you the link?

          • Got you covered!

          • lol This is my entertainment. Parsing Francien without losing my marbles, or my temper if i can.

          • LOLOLOL. This has been the best comment section in Macleans that I have ever seen. You guys are good.

          • And Macleans doesn’t even pay us for it. Cheap sods.

          • ?????

          • Poor joke.

          • And where are the facts you keep talking about? Opinions are not facts!

          • That’s what we keep telling you. And yet you continue to fabricate stuff about JT…

          • I have no proof about Justin’s public expense account. But I do think it reasonable that when a politician goes on so many private speaking tours while sitting as an MP, that the mix up between the public and the private expense is very probable. Hence the need for an investigation.

            But perhaps Justin will be true to his pledge: to be open and transparent. Let him post his public expense account onto his webpage for all to see.

          • I think it’s reasonable that when a politician starts banging the babysitter he might want to hide associated expenses from his wife. Aren’t you concerned about Vic Toews expense account?

          • Franny – that is not cause for “investigation”…..that is something that is evaluated via the daily checks and verifications of expense accounts. One “investigates” when an infraction has occured to determine what all the circumstances (facts) surrounding that infraction are. One does not “investigate” daily activities which are already subject to scrutiny. Jeeze your kind are sooooooo thick !!
            Like Lenny says below….I’d be much more inclined to “investigate” criminals like Toews and his buddies Duffy, Penashue, Wallin and Ford !!

          • Er, do you know what self irony is?

          • The headline of the very article you linked to. The first paragraph too. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Justin+Trudeau+says+ethics+commissioner+approved+speaking+appearances/7967169/story.html#ixzz2U4a1xdNQ

            From the article: Trudeau, 41, said he agreed to share the list of speaking events and amount paid with the Citizen in the interest of transparency and as partof a wider disclosure of his personal assets.

            A direct quote from the Ethics Commissioner, also from the article you cited:

            “There is no information before me to suggest that Mr. Trudeau was performing parliamentary duties and functions when he spoke at these events or that he acted in any way to further his private interests as apaid speaker when performing those duties and functions.”

            If you know something Mary Dawson, Ethics Commissioner and Harper appointee, does not, please share.

          • Oh, I forgot to emphasize the “in the interest of transparency” bit. Something with which the CPC seems remarkably unacquainted, despite all the lip service they give the concept.

          • Justin has not been investigated by the ethics commissioner since Justin has become an MP.

            Justin’s comments in regards to the ethics commissioner are at the time of him entering into his MP role. Since Justin becoming MP, he has raked in another 250,000 dollars for speaking privately while getting paid as an MP. The ethics commissioner has never investigated Justins’ public travel expenses and how they might overlap with his private speaking tours!

          • Fine. Present your evidence of wrongdoing and if it is more than scurrilous slander I’ll write the Ethics Commissioner myself and ask that she look into it.

          • It isn’t the fact of whether it is okay to ask for money to speak when you are already get paid by the taxpayer, it is the question of is it right to ask for money, especially from school boards where the money could be spent in so many better ways. Sometimes, we have to take off our partisan hats and ask ourselves, if this man wasn’t the leader of the party I vote for, would I think him charging money to a school board was a nice thing to do. As I have told you, I no longer have allegiance to a party. I believe it is okay to charge for speaking engagements to oil companies and other deep pockets but not to schools. I also think it would be great to give a portion of all speaking engagement money to charity.

          • And did he also get paid for canvasing for his party during elections while also charging the taxpayers for it?

          • Oh look a panda. Quick somebody change the channel.

          • are you hapers right hand man your talking like you are lol

        • I haven’t heard Toews speak out on the expense accounts. Do you think that’s because he’s been charging taxpayers for the hotel rooms he bangs the babysitter in?

        • Justin did not have to. He wanted to hear what Prime Minister had to say first. He wanted to know if Harper was going to set up an inquiry, or bring the RCMP or produce the documents. Since Harper did nothing then he can now go on the attack.

          • I will dare you to produce one report in which Justin speaks on the overspending of expense accounts. He has not talked about the expense accounts of Duffy, Wallin or any other politicians mis use of public expense accounts.

            Justin is speaking out on the deal between Wright and Duffy, but Justin has been completely silent on the expense account perse.

            Or perhaps you can prove me wrong and I will apologize.

          • I dare you to produce one report in which Vic Toews speaks on the overspending of expense accounts.

          • Remind me again…is this you “not bothering much” or have you switched back to “bothering”?

          • Well the media was talking about Duffy and implying that he was double billing the CPC party and the Senate when he was campaigning for the CPC. I did see TV reports where Duffy was along with other Senators on the campaign travels. But that was last week so I am not sure Justin knew about that or had time to speak of it since the House was off for a week and he was on Holidays. And again he wanted to know what Harper thought of that situation. Poor Harper. It seems that he may be loosing control of his party or that after seven years he is also getting a little frustrated. What you do think?

          • What I think is that you still have not given me any indication of when Justin spoke in regards to other politicians expense accounts.

        • Maybe they should check out your expense account at the PMO. Probably some pretty interesting charges there. When will you and the rest of the staff at the PMO come clean?

          • exactly – these illiterate traitors, paid by the PMO

            review the above comment thread – NO ONE in their RIGHT MIND talks like that

            This guy Francien is on all the news sites, he is a paid commenter – I think its an affront to democracy. Scumbags like him should be thrown in jail with his hero Harper.

      • At the risk of giving Francien a stroke, I think it is a great sign of leadership that Harper is now taking his lead from Trudeau. After all, we now know that Harper was clueless with respect to many activities in the PMO. (Some report that he sits for many hours behind a closed door playing a new shooter game that involves kittens).
        Anyway, once the news broke, Stephen was upset and a little hurt. However, he faced a tough choice of how to respond. His decision… he decided to back Nigel completely (and quite publicly). Immediately after Stephen learned the details, he proclaimed that Nigel had his complete confidence.

        Later, we are not quite sure when, it would seem Justin took him aside and told him Nigel’s actions were highly inappropriate. After pouting for a while, (and a long plane trip) Stephen realized that Justin was correct, but what to do. Stephen decided to try something brand new, he would share his feelings. He was hurt, he was sad, he was a little pathetic, not really a leader, but maybe a little sympathetic.

        The next two years will be tough on Stephen and Francien. Duffycult times ahead for sure. Of course, next week Michael Sona begins to talk… that should take the heat off.

        • Haha, a looong plane trip with Terry Milewski et al breathing down his neck from economy. Yeah, that’s how I think it went down too. Justin has proven a strong and capable leader, even from third party status.

        • Keep feeding the fantasy, Stewart – Harper taking his lead from Justin.

          Keep repeating such line often and soon you many think it to be true. That’s been the attitude in regards to Harper’s actions ever since he entered politics. Spread the gossip about Harper, try to bring him down, if it doesn’t work, try to spread some more gossip. Sooner or later you will get ‘m.

          You forget one important thing, however: the voters don;’t buy your line of thinking. The vote count for Harper has only grown over the past three elections. And if the media keeps up their line of attack, the voters will give Harper another solid mandate.

          • I agree, they tell the pollsters one thing just to throw Justin and the colluding MSM off. Clever voters.

          • Q: Why exactly did Nigel have Stephen’s complete confidence AFTER the story broke?

            A: Stephen needed to understand the root causes of Nigel’s transgressions.

          • LOL!

          • Not so funny when you understand that there was no such thing as root cause. Decent working relationships do not need root causes for being torn apart by outside influence. Frustration comes in many forms and have no particular root cause. Just life, and if you want to consider that to be the root cause of everything, you would be right.

            Life is the root cause of everything.

          • Ahhhhh Please stop. I don’t believe it. Poor Wright was frustrated. Oh man he could not handle the job. Well at least he is going to be in a better by the end of the summer. I hope where ever he goes his frustration does not get the better of him.

          • Well, naming persons to the senate while they are being investigated for wrongdoings seem to be the root cause of what I hear in the newspaper these days.

          • I don’t think Wright had Harper’s complete confidence after the story broke. As I have posted earlier in another post, I believe it entirely possible that Harper could not believe for himself that Wright had undertaken the action of paying for Duffy’s expenses. It must have hurt Harper tremendously that Wright could have meant so well yet did so very wrong at the same time.

            Harper and Wright, most likely, had a good working relationship, and to see one of your trusted partners make such a wrong judgement can be heart breaking. I’m sure most people can understand that. I can understand that something like that could break someone’s working relationship’s heart.

            Harper had, most likely, mixed feelings of letting loose on Wright. On the one hand Harper knew it was wrong what Wright had done as Chief of Staff, yet, on the other hand Harper must have understood what Wright had tried to do, namely get Duffy to pay back the money somehow. Sad story, really. The one who should have offered his resignation long ago (Duffy) did not do so, and Harper could not fire him either. Perhaps Wright had been extremely frustrated about those facts and decided to do what he did because of that. It is entirely possible that the scenario played itself out like that.

            Good, decent people find themselves in situations which cannot so easily be solved and such frustrations sometimes lead them astray.

          • Possibly the only sensible post you have made on here tonight.

          • So, you are saying that Harper shot from the hip without knowing the facts initially?

            How… reformist.

          • You are making me cry. I ask myself the question of why did Wright not go to Harper for his advice on how to solve the Duffy problem. Poor guy was so over his head he forgot he went to law school. How I ask you HOW could he not think that if anyone found out about giving 90K to a Senator that would not do damage to the PMO and in turn Harper. I don’t understand that one bit. It is sad so very sad. Ahhhhh.

          • I sometimes like to make up shit too, it’s comforting when you can’t find reason in what’s happened.

          • francien why would mr wright take 90k from his on pocket to i quote to do the right thing for the tax payer !!!!! Why didn’t mr wright write a check for the 3 Billion that is missing that also would be doing the right thing LOL why does haper not want the RCMP in to look things over or a public inquire where Duffy and wright and haper would have to testify under oath. If haper does both of these things and is cleared of any wrong doing I will amit I was wrong and move on if he has nothing to hide he should not appose this .my guess he won’t and me and most of canadians think he’s into this up to his neck in this. WE also think that the 90k is tax payers money not mr wrights he can prove me wrong by letting the RCMP and a public inquire now my friend that would clear the air . any thing less good bye Harper do you agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Trudeau is a fraud.

            Now, prove to me that Justin is not a fraud.

          • I beleive it’s not poor Justin you don’t like !!!!! I think it’s Quebec that you are against and that makes you a racest my friend!!!!! Quebec is a part of canada look at ns Haper has said they are all welfare he hates any one who doesn’t go along with him or he will do his best to punish you!!!!! PROVE TO ME HE IS A FRAUD!!!!!!

          • Yes, there are some who try to do that. Then there is me trying to get some balance within our political system and trying to get some balance within the reporting of it.

            Think about the recent BC elections. The pundits and pollsters were wrong, completely wrong, because people in BC woke up when Christy Clark told them what the media would not tell them. After such telling, the win was hers.

          • Think about the recent Alberta elections. The pundits and pollsters were wrong, completely wrong, because people
            in Alberta woke up when Allison Redford told them what the media would not tell
            them. After such telling, the win was hers.

          • The Alberta election, of late, turned in Redford’s favour after the Wild Rose party did not condemn some outlandish remarks by some of its members. Bad mistake on their part.

          • No, I’m pretty sure my version is about is acurate as your laughable version of the election in BC.

          • I should consider the implications of that serious if I were you, Francien.

          • LOLOL. Well Harper does not need much when only 60% of the voters make the decision.

          • Francien are you on POT!!!!!!!!!??????????????

          • Why would you think I am on pot?

            Because I am so mellow?

          • LOLNo just the way your talking. I put a post below tell me if you agree!!!!!!!!! I surpose you might have fell and hit your head!!!!!!!!!!! sorry I never thought of that!!!!!!!

    • I appreciate the opposition is excited. But Coyne is right. Doesn’t anyone on the opposition benches possess the kind of legal skills to cross examine the likes of Baird? ( Would it do any good?)Ask some questions that put the govt on record, instead of all this rhetorical posturing. This is easy stuff for an old hand like Baird. Although it does make for compelling tv sound bites.

  2. “They rode into Ottawa on their high horse of accountability, and all we have to show for it is the mess that horse left,” he quipped. “They should take their Federal Accountability Act and run it through that horse and throw it on their roses for all the good it has ever done us.”

    LOL! A brilliant summary of claimed intent versus action.

    • Not a real horse though. Harper at the front, Baird in the ass end.

  3. So where is all that accountability and change Harper promised us!?!?!?

    • Will be delivered along with the F-35s.

      • And the robocall culprits.

        • and to reform/ fix the senate and get elected officials into the Senate. He lied there.

          and Harper also muzzled our scientist from talking to the media (Accountable and transparency is in there too).

          • Tony Gazebo, where’s the paper trail? why is it not made public?

            where’s the transparency there? not much at all.

    • He LIED! Surprise!

      • He lied about what? He accepted his Chief of Staff resignation, did he not?

        • He lied about accountability… over and over and over again. It should be Harper’s resignation. The buck stops with him.

          • When did he lie about accountability?

          • How do I lie to thee? Let me count the ways…

            The question should more correctly be: “When didn’t he lie about accountability?”

          • Damn near every time his lips moved?

          • When he claimed to have a glancing familiarity of the word.

          • The illegitimate Harper party and it’s dingleberry followers all wear peril-sensitive glasses it seems.

          • LOLOL. He did not lied. He just did not implement the procedure to produce accountability once he had a majority. If anything it shows that accountability was not priority for him and the CPC as it was made out to be in 2006. And yes the Liberal and maybe the NDP did hold up legislation while the conservatives ran minority governments but by the end he had a majority in the Senate. It seems to me that accountability was just nothing more than an election promise. Something to tease the electorate. Do you want him to waste that?

        • He told us direct from Peru he didn’t know and did not direct Wright but excepted his resignation.

  4. there are lots of answers, it’s called the ‘truth’, something well never get from this conservative party government.

  5. Cons never had any answers….just 18th century ideology.

    They’ve never noticed the change in date.

    • Emily! Is that really you? Where have you been?

      • Yup, really me. LOL

        Long boring story, But I’m here again.

        • Can’t believe I’m admitting this, but I missed you & was worried.

          And now, back to the sparring…

          • SMOOCH!

          • Get A Room!

      • Locked up in FV’s basement eh. Did you tunnel out?

        • Heh..if you meant this for me, FV is locked in her own mental basement….no escaping!

          • Wrong address. Let’s hope it stays that way…for her own good.

  6. Paul Martin said he was not aware of the adscam, which ran for months, years! And people were willing to believe such bs blindly.

    But when one transaction takes place between Wright and Duffy, it is not credible to believe that the PM did not know about it.

    There are many people who have hated Harper ever since he got into politics. I know, I know, it is difficult to swallow that a man being elected in the west has gone on to become PM of Canada. The mere thought of it still drives people bonkers.

    But I will tell you that if people will not see the ethics commissioner Dawson as an independent body for investigating, and if people will not accept the independence of the senate, then all judgement coming from Dawson or the senate must be thrown out. All of them, past, present and future judgements. People cannot have it both ways! Credible reporters must be aware of that, no?

    Enough of the selective choosing!

    • You do know that Martin himself called the investigation into Adscam, right? And that many in his own party were criminally punished?

      Harper is a WELL KNOWN control freak. It is simply not plausible that his own office could pay off a Senator, without him knowing.

      • Martin may have called for the investigation into Adscam, but the fact remains that Paul Martin was finance minister all the while when adscam was running amok right under his nose………………..for months, years! He never heard a thing, never saw a thing, never got an inkling of what was going on right there in his own beloved Quebec! Oh, how the minds of some people works!

        Just because you and so many others have repeated over and over again that Harper is a control freak does not mean he actually is a control freak. YOU and others have repeated the opinion that Harper is a control freak and therefore he must be a control freak.

        You think if many of us would repeat often enough that the sky is pink, and only pink, that sooner or later the sky will really be pink? I don’t buy it, but you might!

        • So are you saying “If you believed Martin, then leave me to my own delusions”? Or “Stop crapping on me; I have just as much right to be a hypocrite as any Liberal”?

          • Please don’t start twisting my words again, and don’t start thinking on my behalf!

            What I am saying is that this Wright/Duffy deal is not comparable to the Liberal adscam. There is no reasonable comparison to be made.

            And I have outlined the reasons for non comparison in my original post. Please read it and you will understand what I am saying.

          • You want a serious answer to your nonsense? OK then…

            The people responsible for Adscam did not report to Martin. They were not appointed by Martin. They were investigated at Martin’s direction. Those found to be involved were not invited back into the party.

            Contrast that to Harper. In the immediate instance, both Duffy and Wright were appointed by Harper. Wright reported directly to Harper and was his right hand man. Duffy was appointed because of his lack of ethics: “Thanks for the hatchet job on Dion, Duff! Don’t worry about that ethics investigation ending your career in journalism – I happen to have a seat to fill in the Senate.”

            Then there are the various aides who have taken one for the team, were fired loudly, then quietly hired back to other roles.

            And the guy who skimmed $50 million to bribe his constituents with gazebos; Harper was so indignantly outraged that he put ol’ Tony in charge of the nation’s purse strings.

            …need I go on?

            What we have in the CPC is a culture of corruption. Convictions for election tampering. Spending government funds to promote Party.

            Yes, there were crooks in the Liberal party. They were in the minority and they were cleaned out, at great cost to the party politically.

            We have no one big scandal with the CPC… yet. But we have an endless list of smaller, institutional, promoted-from-the-top behaviour that no one with a grain of sense or morality could possibly condone.

            And all CPC supporters do about it is plug their ears, cover their eyes, and chant their “Adscam” mantra over and over… as you just did. Stop living in the past and take a good look at the party you love. If you can manage to get the blindfold off, I doubt you’ll like what you see.

          • The gazebos were a bribe?

            Need I go on?

          • Yup! Bribing voters with their own money. Money that should have been spent elsewhere. Money that has yet to be properly accounted for.

            In most governments, guys who do that get turfed – even prosecuted. Not rewarded.

          • The gazebo was one of 33 projects that cost $50 M,
            Liberals always make it sound like it all went on a gazebo.

          • Call it shorthand. But hey, if you want to present the full laundry list of all the projects to which misappropriated funds were redirected – go ahead!

          • I think the reason gazebos is mostly mentioned is because the paper trail for the misappropriated funds has never been provided.

          • One of 33 projects funded with money ($50 Million) that was misappropriated from Border Services. It doesn’t matter if the money was used to dry the tears of children, it was stolen money. It was stolen by Tony Clement to get his useless skinny ass re-elected.

          • It really is a culture of corruption, Not financial, per se, but moral. Or lack thereof. The one worry is, every time one of these comes up- and this is a biggie – word goes out to some op or another to Make It Messy, i.e., blur the lines, confuse the narrative, and deflect the questions until no clear line of inquiry is possible. Diffusion is everything with this bunch.

            That said, gotta love the…sound?..sight?.(whatever..it’s loved) of righteous (in the best way) indignation in…whatever time this is?

          • Oh please Keith,

            Adscam was run out of the Ministry of Public Works….Gagliano;
            Ouellet was in cabinet and appointed to Canada Post,
            Pelletier was Chretien’s Chief of Staff and appointed to Via Rail

            It’s ugly, it was huge, it involved many Liberals.
            The money was stolen, laundered and stuffed into people’s pocket.
            You can criticize how the Harper government spends money, that is not the same as or in the same category as Adscam

          • Not arguing Adscam was in any way OK. They got what they deserved (well, maybe certain individuals deserved a lot more, but I’m thinking the party as a whole; a lot of good, innocent people went down as a result of the actions of the guilty). But Francien was trying to say Martin was involved; there is no evidence of this. They were all Chretien men – and Chretien and Martin were bitter enemies.

            It is also history.

            On the other hand the current government’s sleaze and corruption is clearly, if not directed by, then condoned by the PM. Oh he and his ministers find some flunky to take the fall when necessary, but most of those get hired back while the guys truly responsible get rewarded.

            Instead of reliving history of more than a decade past by people long out of power and party, and pay attention to the present-day world you live in. “They did it too” or “They did it worse” does NOT excuse the CPC of their own bad behaviour. Especially since they rode to power promising better behaviour, transparency and accountability. When measured against their own promises, they are failing miserably.

          • “What I am saying is that this Wright/Duffy deal is not comparable to the Liberal adscam.”

            Exactly. So find an adscam board somewhere on the internet to take it to.

          • Oh, how I love it when you like me out of here! Tells me that what I have to say does touch a nerve. Seems to me I have to keep posting. LOL

          • In a rare moment of lucidity you just told us adscam has nothing to do with the current situation. It only makes sense to discuss it elsewhere, doesn’t it?

          • But for people here trying very hard to compare the Duffy/Wright affair to adscam needs to be refuted. That’s why I’m here. To refute where refuting is needed.

            Thank you for responding to my posts. I appreciate it.

          • No, the partisan conservative HACKS keep bringing up Adscam as a distraction. It’s one of the clear talking points that your team is currently employing. Nobody else gives two hoots about it, because it’s done, investigated, put to bed, over.

            It’s only being used by YOUR BUDDIES to show “see, see, they do it too”


          • Bullshit. You brought the topic up, attempting to compare the credibility of Martin’s claim to know nothing, to Harper’s claim.

          • LOLOL. I love you die hard conservatives. Always bringing up the Liberals whenever the CPC is getting crapped on because of a stupid mistake. Keep it up I love the delusions of grandeur. LOLOL

          • Francien the adscam the Liberals pulled out was very similar to the money laundering in and out scheme the Harper party used to cheat in the 2006 elections and was charged for by elections Canada.

          • How so? Please do tell. In what way is it similar?

          • Both involved putting money into one place to launder it into another.

          • Obviously you don’t understand the practice of money laundering!

          • And you are the expert in corruption and crime through personal experience?

          • No, I am not an expert in corruption and crime through personal experience. In fact I never had anything to do with either corruption or crime.

            But I do understand what money laundering entails. That’s why I know how to stay away from it!

          • Funny thing about that in and out scheme…The Bloc sued one of their MPs for refusing to participate in their in and out scheme, and won.

          • It’s bizarre that people like you believe they can simply lie to a bunch of other people who are sitting in front of the internet.

          • Except that she is right about the Bloc. I remember it well and I’ve always been amazed at how it disappeared down the memory hole. As you say, lenny, we are all sitting in front of the internet so we can easily verify the truth of the matter. Start here in the Background section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_and_Out_scandal#See_also

          • I’d like to see where you got that information from please and if true I can see the similarities to what happened to Helena Guergis. She too refused to participate in the Harper party illegal activity. Why didn’t the Harper party just sue her for that if it was so easy to win?

          • But you’re the one who brought up the comparison in the first…never mind…

          • It’s pathetic, is it not? They don’t even remember what they typed an hour ago.

            They’re just flailing about at this point.

          • Yup.

          • Actually, I did not!

          • I think you did you know.

          • You go right ahead and try to do the thinking for me! You actually think you can! That is the funny part!

          • No my dear, that isn’t even close to being the funny part.

          • Then why try to do the thinking for me if there is no joy in it for you?

          • But you can’t be sure of that. Would it not be better for someone independent to find out what the truth is?

          • Mary Dawson, as ethics commissioner is not independent? If so, then all judgement made so far by Ms.Dawson must be found invalid? Are you prepared to do that?

            Be careful what you wish for!

          • Francien your words come out twisted because the morals, ethics and thoughts they stem from are also twisted.

          • You wrang the truth out of that one Keith. :)

        • Well was not this scandal under Harper’s nose as well? If so don’t you want to find out how deep the problem that Wright may have created? Calling an inquiry and finding the truth would make the Conservative look better than the Liberals under Chretien and also show Harper to be a control freak that should be respected.

          • An investigation has started! What about that have you not understood? How many times must that be repeated before you accept that an investigation has started. We will find out where it will lead.

          • It’s not an investigation at this point, it’s a delay.

          • So Mary Dawson starting off the investigation is not valid?

            Be careful what you wish for!

          • I’ve focused and TARGETED my wishes and have great anticipation for their fruition. :)

          • Hope to see you here when your wishes won’t come true!

        • Just like Harper is saying I didn’t know and ran up the plane dragging his yellow belly and his tail behind him. And finally found the nerve to make a statement a world away from Canada in Peru.

          • Adscam went on for months and years!!!! And Martin, the finance minister had never noticed anything???

          • To clarify what exactly a finance minister does: he or she prepares an annual budget (plus occasional updates) that set out an overall spending plan for the government. He or she does not sit at a desk all day signing cheques for every single government expenditure.

          • I have never said that Martin does the cheque signing. (was ascam not mostly about envelopes of cash in any case??)

            I’m well aware of what a finance minister does. And when making up his budget, did Paul ever wonder why so much money was allocated to ad agencies within Quebec?

      • Liberal party supporters were punished, but no Liberal sitting in Parliament was convicted because the statute of limitations re: MPs had run out.
        That’s why Chretien kept throwing up barriers and proroguing and then quit, he had to run out the time.
        That time limit was extended in the Federal Accountability Act, a direct result of Adscam
        Martin was handed a mess.

    • Hay everyone! If you believed something about someone else some other time then you totally have to believe Harper. Kay?

    • Nothing less than a full RCMP investigation will suffice! The Harper Government CANNOT be trusted! There is not one shred of credibility left when it comes to the ReformaCONs. Hopefully the hate for Harper that you refer to will be demonstrated by voters in 2015 (or before). Ethics commissioner? Pulease! Is that a joke? Stephen Harper became PM of Canada via fraud. He’s more appropriately known as Canada’s CRIME minister and in reality, he’s nothing more than a CEO for corrupt corporations. Are you not aware of his record to date? Let me help refresh your memory: http://harperwatch.wordpress.com/

      • Liberals always assume everyone hates Harper as much as they do, and voters will come to their senses and vote Liberals back in.
        How’s that working for you?

        • You got 24% of the electorate to vote for your team last election. I hope you liked that, because it will be a high water mark for your gang for quite some time.

        • I’m not a liberal. I’m quite undecided at who might be the best of the worst. Even the ReformaCON base is beginning to cool toward Harper. I’m just someone who believes in personal integrity no matter which party you support. I’d take the red Tories over THuG blue any day.

          • No way the ReformaCon case is going to turn on Harper. They are just like any hard core member of any group. There way of thinking about their party can be compared to a Communist, Fascist, Islamist, die hard Liberal or die hard NDPier. What the Conservative have on their side is that they don’t have to worry about the 40% of the electors that don’t vote.

    • You seem to be conveniently forgetting that so many voters, including many of their own supporters, bailed on the Liberals that they got tossed from office. This is hardly selective choosing.

      Many of us are equal-opportunity detesters of corruption in public office. We don’t like it, no matter which party is wallowing in it.

      We especially don’t like it in a government.

      • Yup!

      • Right on. But Sharon and Francien will say NOTHING about the current corruption with their “team”. All they can do is bring up the past. Events that were examined by an INDEPENDENT review. Not by “committees” populated by partisan senators.

        They support their “team” no matter what.

        The rest of us acknowledge corruption occurs in every party, and condemn it all.

    • Could you please tell me why in you opinion the Conservative Party does not do the same as the Liberals did with ADSCAM? That is set up an inquiry. If you believe that the only ones involve where Wright and Duffy then it will show everyone the PM was telling the truth. It would show that the Conservatives are better than the Liberals. Sure it would cost money but don’t you think it would be money well spent? At least it would get you better PR than the ads touting the economic action plans or the jobs plans if what the government is telling its the truth.

      • Adscam, Confessed Liberal operatives laundered millions of taxpayer money, stuffed the cash into brown bags and distributed it to their friends, Liberal friendly businesses and back into LPC coffers.
        Chretien knew nothing.
        Cheque-gate, Chief of Staff cuts a personal cheque to a Senator and he used the money to pay back taxpayers $90k for ineligible expenses.
        Harper knew nothing.
        See the difference?

        • Sharon what the Liberals did in Adscam according to your version here sounds very much like the in and out scam the Harper party used to cheat in the 2006 elections no?

        • True that Chretien did nothing. True it involve the PMO in Chretiens time but the Liberals under Martin did begin inquiry. And that inquiry cost them the election in 2006.

          Harper says he knows nothing. His chief of staff from PMO implicated in the mess re Senator scandal. Does Harper call and inquiry? No. Why not? Is he hiding something? Or is he waiting for the next PM to do the deed?

      • Have you not heard? The process of investigation has already begun. We will all hear soon where those early investigations may lead to. Perhaps further investigations, perhaps not.

        Patience is a virtue. It really is!

        • Investigation by the Conservative led senate committee that whitewashed the original Deloitte report?

          Boy, I bet they’re going to do a great job.

          Investigation by the Ethics Commissioner appointed by Harper? Who said it would take at least a year? And who has no power to subpoena anyone? I bet Wright is quaking in his boots – he just will decline to participate.

          • You want it both ways again, don’t you Dave? If you do not accept that rulings by Mary Dawson are valid, then all the judgements she has made must be regarded as invalid. Are you prepared to do that?

            I think Wright is a real man. Real men don’t quack iheir boots. Real men understand real life too well.

          • Keep jibber jabbing your pathetic talking points.

            There needs to be a REAL independent inquiry here.

            The public wants it, no matter the tiny minority of Harper sycophants who would prefer that this whole mess just quietly disappear. And yes, you are a tiny minority now. Get used to it.

          • I have just said that out of the initial investigation, a further investigation may come about. What is not to understand about that!

            Of course I want the investigations to come to the bottom of this affair. But that also means to me, that when a bottom has been found, it is time to stop the digging. You may want to keep digging until they someone finds something incriminating about Harper, but that would be wishful thinking on your part. Real investigations are not about fulfilling your personal wishes.

          • Ducks quack in their boots (those that can afford them). People quake in them.

    • What about pandas? Tell us how cute the pandas are. Or maybe try to find something that Lester Pearson did – I bet he kicked a puppy once!

      You guys are scraping the bottom of the barrel. Aren’t you embarrassed yet?

    • This comment was deleted.

      • It bothers you what I have to say, doesn’t it? Oh, ……..

    • I do not hate Harper, but I do hate many of his policies. I don’t care where he comes from.
      I hate the fact that my country’s international reputation has been damaged.
      I hate the fact that he sent us into a war that has killed and injured so many of our citizens.
      I hate the fact that he tried to deregulate the banks (when he was in opposition). Not only was regulation the only thing that cushioned us from economic devastation, he had the nerve to take credit for it.
      I hate the fact that he has shut down important research projects and pulled us out of international projects.
      I hate the cancelling of the long form census, muzzling scientists, removing environmental controls.
      I hate the way he prorogues parliament – I had never heard that word before.
      And I even hate his tax cuts. My benefit is somewhere around $20 per month. I’m sure Mr. Harper and many more of the 1% are getting far more benefit from it. I’m donating mine to the local food bank, since helping people in need is not a priority for this group. And please don’t give us the usual rhetoric about welfare bums. The majority of the poor are working poor.

  7. Cons say… Adscam squawk squawk… adscam squawk squawk…

    • they don’t have a whole lot to use against the massive amount of corruption the Con’s have racked up in just a few short years.

      • The ad scam was terrible but the amount of money the Cons were going to screw us over on the fighter jets is pretty bad. Not to mention all the other things they’ve screwed us over is comparable.

        and they aren’t transparent at all.

        • Well that’s rich.
          What did it cost taxpayers when Chretien cancelled our helicopters…$500M.
          And what did it cost taxpayers when McGuinty cancelled the gas plants…..$585M
          So that’s just 2 single acts of Liberal and total damage over $1B

          • Again Sharon which one of these things is right and which is wrong? You’re an interesting person Sharon. Very interesting.

          • $3.1 Billion dollars. What? Where? Duh, we don’t know.

            Maybe behind the cushions of the sumptuous PMO sofas?

          • The trunk of Clement’s car?

          • I think the talking points call for you to bring up Obama at this point Sharon.

          • Sharon, go back to school and try to develop an IQ, will you? Your boy has been PM for what? How many years now? Is he going to be a weenie-boy and constantly bring up OOOOOLD history to downplay his many, many, many indiscretions, lies, untruths, cheating, cowardice, etc?

            Give it a rest, honey. You are coming across as a Stepford Drone (Crone)

          • Stick to federal politics and not provincial. Man you people are imploding quickly Loonie bin next step for you all.

          • And where is the missing $3.1 Billion? That’s almost $1000.00 for every person in Canada! Do you easily lose $1000.00? I don’t.

            Maybe the Conservative partisans like you should be made to pay up the difference btw what you identify as $1 Billion lost by Lib federal and provincial leaders (even though this is a federal discussion, but of course you keep moving goal posts as you people tend to do) and the recent $3.1 billion of lost $ … and then add in the other waste the Conservatives have mismanaged. Also, pay up for the lost retirement years Harper needlessly took from Canadians under 50.

            As a responsible conservative I am sure you must be rich with your superior ideas – so pay back what you allowed to be taken from us. And if you are too poor to do so, then STFU already.

        • The ad scam was peanuts. It cost each taxpayer around 10 cents. Now, losing 3.1 billion … Not to mention taking a surplus and turning it into a huge debt.

      • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Scandal

        trump that.

        Give it up will you? What’s boring is your inability to carry the can for your own parties sins. No one is interested in hearing the liberals were worse 7 years into Harper’s gloriously accountable reign over us.

      • Playground politics.
        “did not”
        “well he did it too”
        “it’s not my fault”

        Real adults and leaders stand up, give evidence and admit their mistakes. Constant denials with no real information mean nothing.

  8. As an aside, I do feel sorry for John Baird. I’m not sure of much in this murky affair, but I’m positive Baird had nothing to do with it. Yet, today, he’s the guy eating the gigantic crap sandwich cooked up for him by Harper, Duffy and Wright. Harper owes him a case of beer… he earned it today.

    • No he didn’t he’s just getting payback for other thing’s he’s done. they all suck.

      • Oh, the comment boards… never a shortage of humourless partisans.

    • Yep….Baird did seem decidedly uncomfortable with having to take the flak which Harper should rightly have been fielding…It couldn’t have been easy…infact the whole Conservative bench seemed uncommonly quiet and unsettled…something which they are not prone to even on a bad day….In this Harper has let his own people down by his cowardly refusal to at least try and clear the air a bit before leaving for Peru…it’s strange behavior for a PM who is constantly postulating about how accountable he and his government are, then turns on his heels and refuses to take questions, and only does so once he has left the country…his behavior just doesn’t compute../make sense.

    • I know his reputation in Ottawa, but Baird used to be my MP in Nepean and I must admit that he walked my street, numerous times, shaking hands, listening, and smiling. That deserves credit because I can’t say I’ve met any of my other MP’s in the five other jurisdictions I’ve lived in, but I met Baird on my street twice.

      • That’s definitely worthy of respect, but I suppose it’s a bit easier to spend time in your riding while the House is in session when your riding is Ottawa West.

      • Are you saying that he was the finest man to ever walk the streets of Napean?

  9. OMG, this comment board is boring, just a bunch of Liberal agreeing with each other.

    Well, there are so few of you left, it’s natural you all come to the same place.

    If you guys think the latest Liberal Puppet Media gang up on PMSH will stick, think again.

    The Prime Minister told the truth at the Peru media event about what and when he knew. PMO went public about Nigel’s personal cheque to Duffy.

    How do Liberals handle scandals…
    When Chretien found out about Alfonso Gagliano (suspected of ties to the Bonnano organized crime family) and the Sponsorship Scandal, he gave him a comfy rug and Ambassadorship to Denmark.
    If his friends are not given risky loans, the bank manager gets fired. Then in a tell wrongfull dismissal suit, we find out Chretien had an interest in the golf course which was denied a loan from the FBDB

    The Senate mess is at the doings of the Senate.
    Oh, and Liberal Senators sit on that internal board, wrote a report and said nothing, nothing about any special deal for Duffy.

    • Sharon you’re making it sound like one of these things is okay while the other is not. Which is which?

      • That’s the way right-wing conservatives act everywhere. No ethical standard, just constant relativity and poo throwing until they get their way – truth be damned.

        • Truth, logic, data and expertise mean nothing to this government. They have learned that pandering to knee jerk emotional responses gets them more votes.

          It’s no longer about leading or doing the best for Canada and Canadians, or even listening to what we want our country to be. It’s all about winning the game, with votes as the score.

    • The Senate mess is at the doings of Conservatives of the Senate.

    • And again, the CPC cry: “The Liberals got to scam Canadians – why do you get so upset when it’s OUR turn?”

    • Actually senator Munson is speaking out. And the liberal house leader tried to get the cops in. Stopped by the cons on that internal board. Try to keep up.

    • To be trite, two wrongs do not make a right.

      The Liberals were justly thrown out of office for their scandals. Good for us voters! It seems that electoral defeat is the appropriate treatment for governments that are scandalous. And the current government certainly seems scandalous to me.

    • Grow a pair of shoulders, honey.

      • @ Susan Wilson…Grow a few brain cells, one or two would be about right. Then you would have as many as all the parrot trolls like you who troll all the Media blogs in Canada.

    • It’s not only this comment thread…it’s every comment thread..the NP, CBC, Globe & Mail, The Star, Ipolitics, The Huffington Post. Canadians are furious and voicing our concerns. For too long Harper has managed to weasel out of answering questions on scandals in his government…this time Harper himself is attached to it…and there is no way he can detach from it…the PMO is his inner Sanctum..controlled by him…or???

    • Say what you want about the Liberals – no government anywhere has ever governed without a scandal or two at some point. However, the Liberals never cancelled research projects, muzzled scientists, backed out of international agreements, sent our military to a war, or conveniently prorogued parliament – in fact, most of us had never heard that word until Harper used it. Oh, and the Liberals left a budget surplus which this government has managed to turn into a huge debt.

      The liberals may have done some shady deals, but they never defiled our international reputation like this government has done. I no longer wear the maple leaf when I travel.

  10. So when will PEI charge Duffy for filing a false declaration in his December 2012 application for a PEI Health card? The Provincial rules on residency are very clear, 6 months plus a day, and filing a false claim is an Offence!

    • Didn’t he try to get his application rushed and they declined?

  11. I cannot begin to tell you how much unadulterated pride I feel in having these duplicitous and really sleazy things respresent my beloved country both at home and on the world stage.
    mr harper and his band of thuggish yes-man creeps brings this wonderful country to new heights – transcending even the stellar perfomance of brian mulroney.
    What a wonderful legacy, stephen. And here I thought you were just a Liar and a Cheat and completely overlooked your bright and shining Cowardice. Congratulations!

    • You forgot incompetence.

  12. Harper definitely wears this mess with Duffy, Brazeau and Wallin – it all could have been avoided if Harper had put more effort into his Senate “nominee” selection process

    Surely to God there are at least 105 Canadians out there who would vote the CPC line AND are squeaky clean ethically. At our work places we all know who are the scrupulous people and who are the people with lower ethical standards.

    • the only problem with that is that anyone willing to just rubber stamp the illegitimate Harper government party line right away puts them in the unethical, slippery greasy dirty morally category. So no matter who Harper has appointed they don’t fill the bill of appropriate Senator material.

  13. Speaking of workplaces, how many of you think this scenario would be acceptable at work:
    1) go on a bunch of work related trips
    2) claim a total of $90K worth of illegitimate expenses
    3) when caught out, claim the rules weren’t clear
    4) then pay back the $90K and expect all to be forgiven
    Not in a million years would that fly in the private sector.

  14. The Neo-Con boat is sinking.
    Inlcuding Tim Hudak and Rob Ford.

  15. This is why the NDP is the Opposition, and why they will be part of the next Government of Canada.

    • Just have to ensure Libs and Dippers do not cannibalize each other and allow the Cons to slip past yet again as they work the new house seats.

  16. “When did they jettison integrity and honesty and accountability for the sake of political expediency?” I think we all know the answer to that one — there was never any jettisoning to be done — they are still sticking to the rhetoric around those qualities, though, for what that’s worth.

  17. Harper’s conforce running out of words of deceit? All of their expenses need to be made available! Sorry for Harper, but his lack of leadership puts him out alongside his conforce. he should have been more careful as who he wanted by his side. Proof that we cannot trust in his judgement!

Sign in to comment.