'The confidence of the PM' - Macleans.ca

‘The confidence of the PM’


The official response from the Prime Minister’s office, arrived just now via email.

This was a private conversation, and the Minister was not aware she was being taped. While embarrassing this in no way affects the Minister’s ability to do her job. Ministers Raitt and Aglukkaq have the confidence of the PM.

Filed under:

‘The confidence of the PM’

  1. ..and PM Harper adds Natural Resources to his portfolio..

  2. When you've got a couple of cutups like Ritz and Raitt in your cabinet, who needs Hy's?

  3. I suppose you can't replace the people capable of sending a few zingers during QP…why if you did, well, you might actually have to answer questions of substance…

  4. Ministers Raitt and Aglukkaq have the confidence of the PM, do they? Well, the people have no confidence in the PM.

  5. The PMO has really screwed up the strategy on this, but they're stuck — the article clearly shows that they knew about this last week. But that's what happens when you play everyone for cynics. Unfortunately for them, people do hold their government to a higher moral standard than this.

  6. It worries me that he has confidence in Raitt.

    Ah hell, what do I care. Go ahead and wear this for a little while Mr.Harper.

  7. Hardly news. If Harper started canning people for what was on tape, he'd have to be the first to go.

  8. I think the real story here is that Michael Ignaiteff decided to prop up the Harper government because he was threatened with retaliation by the CEOs of three major banks from the Canadian Council of Chief Executives.

    Good to know where he's getting his marching orders!

    • I think the real news is that the tapes are now ahead of the binders 3 to 2!

    • Indeed.. because it's well known that a CEO of a bank will stand up in a gathering of 100 executives, make a flat out threat against a particular political party, and nobody will hear a peep about it for 6 months or more.

      • Or that its illegal for corporations and unions to donate to political parties, and has been for some time now. But I've always had my suspicions around the CON numbers…

        • Illegal to donate, yes…but where do you think the Liberal party makes up for their shortcomings in campaign donations?

          Did you say Bank loans? Correct-a-mundo.

          • Not to mention that the CEOs and their spouses can both donate and raise money.

            Who do you think organizes $500,000 fundraising dinners?

          • John G And RayK, you come off as the biggest crybabies around. Wah Wah! It's not fair. I can hear the stomping of your temper tantrums all the way out here. At least RayK is using an actual name here. He's been cutting and pasting the same tired smokescreen everywhere. Not working RayK? Probably because most of us are far smarter than yourself.

      • First, the Liberal Party cares about bank CEOs because the Bay Street crowd is where they raise their money. The threat to deny the Libs funding is part and parcel of any threat to refuse to "support" them.

        Second, we don't know that the one hundred people John McCallum refers to were privy to the specific threats that Lisa Raitt talks about on this tape. We don't know if there was a less public meeting at the same event or at another event all together.

        Third, as a simple example, I can easily believe that a major bank CEO would say something like "Forming a leftist coalition with the NDP and the Bloc would be a disaster for the Liberal Party. No one I know would support that kind of coalition–financially or otherwise." If one banker said that, and two others also spoke more generally, the implication would definitely be understood. But it certainly could have been more subtle than that, too.

        • Spin, redirect, repeat, ad nauseum.


        • First argument: Do you have any proof or is this going to be another of your exercises into conjecture?

          Second argument: Do you want a list of all the people that John McCallum was referring to? If you had the list and everyone confirmed it would you proceed to a even harder to believe conspiracy theory to back up your beliefs? Still conjecture there RayK

          Third: Implication and conjecture are not proof of anything. RayK, all you have supplied is conjecture, circumstantial evidence and your own tea leaf readings as proof. This is not proof of anything other than your conspiracy theory that you've cut and pasted on too many blogs is weak. It takes on water without being near water. Try again and this time try thinking about your "facts" and do far less indignant cut and pasting.

      • What we really need is for some enterprising young journalist to speak to other people who were present at these meetings–and perhaps Lisa Raitt–to establish the facts.

        Did multiple bank CEOs really speak against voting down the Conservatives? Didn't that seem like a coordinated effort to intimidate since there are only six major bank CEOs in the country and three of them spoke at this meeting? Was the general feeling in the room that the members of the CCCE were threatening to withdraw their support from Liberals if they defeated the government? Was there another, more private, meeting that took place during this time period or at the same CCCE event?

        These questions ought to be put to Igantieff, Raitt, a dozen people who were at this CCCE event and all six CEOs of Canada's major banks. The gist of this story may not be that difficult to confirm–though it's been made more difficult now by the fact that the Liberal wagons will now be circling.

        • So if you're "suspicions" arent confirmed will you wear a tin foil hat for a year?

  9. $20 says he'll give it to ParlSec/Chief Brownnoser Pierre "Skippy" Poilievre!

  10. While embarrassing

    Ya think? I guess, if Gerry Ritz can stay in Cabinet for joking about listeriosis, this yokel can stay too.

    I think Stephen Harper is shooting for some sort of award in the history books. Just not sure what that is, though.

  11. Indeed.. because it's well known that a CEO of a bank will stand up in a gathering of 100 executives, make a flat out threat against a particular political party, and [i]nobody[/i] will hear a peep about it for 6 months or more.

  12. I know his caucus is a bit thin on talent, but how hard is it to find someone that will just parrot what the PMO and Harper tell them what to say? It's mot like Raitt has a special talent better then anyone else at doing so.

  13. I know his caucus is a bit thin on talent, but how hard is it to find someone that will just parrot what the PMO and Harper tell them what to say? It's not like Raitt has a special talent better then anyone else at doing so.

  14. aahhhhh see! Only the important news get delivered by email!

  15. Notwithstanding the negatives (and their were a number) on Chretien, I did always respect his willingness to cut a minister loose as soon as they were a liability, esp. if they were not too close to him personally. Martin and now Harper seem to me to reluctant to can someone when the occasion calls for it.

  16. btw you think the next cabinet meeting will be fun?

    Minister Aglukkaq: "Hi Minister Raitt, think I can get, err, some help with my communications skills?…."

    • No-o-oo! She's being a good communicator! If, by communicating, one means giving a reasonably straight answer to the actual question, that is. If one means sticking it to other parties, yeah, she's not that good.

  17. Is it just me or is Jasmine MacDonnell really hot? I'd like to get more pics of her on here. But seriously, all this is wrong on so many levels. These two genuinely don't seem to give a fuk about anything other than advancing their own careers and belittling others at the expense of people suffering from cancer. I expect more from our elected officials and highly paid civil servants, so should everyone else on here. I'd also like to know what qualifications Ms. MacDonnell has which enabled her to land a job paying her $120,000 of taxpayer money. I wonder what else she has lost? I guess she looks good at cocktail parties though, so that must count for something.

  18. I was reading some comments on the HCH site and was reminded of why I disliked the Liberals in the 90s. David Dingwall. His contempt for people was at least equal to the Raitt/McConnell show. We NEED to elevate our politics or we are in trouble as a country. Another example in Brad Levigne over at the NDP. All of these professional Politickers drive me nuts. There are good people in all parties, we need you to send these bozos home.

  19. So, what have we all learned from this ugliness? The PM has set the good-behaviour bar even lower for his cabinet ministers than it was before (hard to believe this is possible). What's fascinating (and increasingly depressing) is how low can Harper's standards go?

    • Best not to ask.

  20. And the conbots are willing to exceed that lowering by 10% – give or take a conspiracy theory…

  21. Oh ya sure, hot in a I fake bake and wear pretentious clothes when all I am is a 26 year old with a crappy job and no real education. And I have absolutely no brains.