ExFlyer

Been away for 3 weeks only to come back and see WestConMan is still riding the horse with 3 asses. One in back, one in front and one on the middle. A one trick person riding a one trick pony. He is the epitome of the boy that cried wolf. https://dcmp.org/media/7006-the-boy-who-cried-wolf

There has always been a separate justice system for aboriginals.

Been away for 3 weeks only to come back and see WestConMan is still riding the horse with 3 asses. One in back, one in front and one on the middle. A one trick person riding a one trick pony. He is a epitome of the boy that cried wolf. https://dcmp.org/media/7006-the-boy-who-cried-wolf

Carbon tax 10 years ago?? Regardless, GST is on every product or service you get or buy.

Key here is the "you"never give a contract. "You" only provide a list of requirements. Only when the winner is announced do you know who it is and then, if you feel there may be a conflict, you report that. That will be investigated and the winner may be disqualified and a new company (also qualified but second cheapest) be given the contract.

Well, debating the ethics commissioners office can be fruitless. I have given links to their annual reports. Lots of information in there. I have done quite a few (hundreds I could say) Standing Offer and Supply Arrangement contracts in my PWGSC days. I can also say any calls would only be to provide status. The client does not know who is bidding. I, as an evaluator, have recused myself from evaluations because I knew the company or an individual (on a personal side) offering the services but, the client (the one requiring the services) does not see the bids, only the lowest cost compliant bidder. I have had clients come back when the winner was announced and complained they did not want the company or person but, they would have to provide, formally in writing why because the company that would be losing the bid would have to be told why. Now, has there been or can there be anomalies? For sure, no system is fault free or perfect but, it does not happen very often. (in my experience)

My head hurts. I am overrun buy fools and closed minded simpletons. I am going on a break. Need some sense in my life. Happy New Year to you all, those few intelligent ones, all the fools and simpletons alike. Sort yourselves out. To me and a few others they are easily sorted

If, if, if.... The ethics commissioner did nothing. No ifs The way it works is a requirement is written. Any company that meets the requirements then submits a bid for the product or service. A group of people (none of which work for the office that needs the product or service) then evaluates the bids and, you guessed it, lowest cost compliant wins. Yes, if there is some sort of conflict, it has to be reported. If there does not seem to be a conflict and if the service is deemed innocuous, it can easily be deemed compliant.

I guess what you are saying is once elected, a person is no longer allowed to talk to or ask, or question anyone that they knew prior to getting elected? Oh and "Dion said both confirmed to him that they did not discuss a contract with each other, with Ng saying "the entire process was delegated" to her chief of staff, who was aware of the friendship." So, as I said, using the Supply Arrangement tor

What rules? A commissioner saying one thing but doing nothing clearly indicates there are no broke rules You are so naive.... I keep saying that about you so it must be true LOL Bosses, ministers, CEO's have delegates doing the menial work for them. You and Groot must both be very low level workers, if you even work. Both do not seem to have a clue how business is structured, managed and done. You seem and sound like people on the very bottom of the totem pole and never climb up so all you do is complain about your lot in life and are pissed everyone else is doing better. Not know how and when to do things and not wanting or accepting holds you back. But hey, every business needs peons.

Baloney...make that double baloney with mustard LOL Read the reports I linked. lots of accusations and innuendos and very few, if any, repercussions.

The only one "clueless" is you. That is the most obvious thing in your post.

And did nothing... my point. "Based on the documents provided by both Ms. Ng and Ms. Alvaro, Ms. Ng does not appear to have been involved in the subsequent discussions pertaining to the negotiation of the final terms of the contract,""

You are so ignorant of the process, it is not even funny any more. I provided links and the entire process is in there. read about it instead of making unfounded assertions. Understand this too, the minister may not even know who gets contracts to do what. The process allows designated people within the organization to call up against those offers and arrangements. If you are so naive to think a minister or director or branch executive knows the minutiae details of all operations, you clearly are not thinking clearly. You are a huge complainer about management, CEO's, parliamentarians, salaries etc and that indicates to me that you are a peon that has never progressed in their career to a level where you get to know how things work in business.

Why? The ethics commissioner has done nothing so far, no ruling. I am not even sure it is going before him. He is fully aware of the Standing Offers that is why so many of the accused get off.

By all folks accused in the past, you do.

Now we have Russia, which seems a worse threat than the former Soviet Union

As I said earlier, parliamentarians in general have all run afoul of the ethics commissioner. Harper and Conservatives too. Be not too cocky as "ethics violations and scamming taxpayers" are a parliamentary sport. https://ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca/en/About-APropos/Pages/AnnualReports-RapportsAnnuels.aspx

Just as I thought, you think only liberals have ethics violations??/ LOL Don't drink that kool aid West LOL Oh? Or were they all fed up with the cons breaking the ethics rules?? LOL

Help me.... back up your BS for a change. Oh wait.... you can't? What a surprise LOL

Corruption? Where? Please provide proof of a case of corruption. A office sse of Standing Offer or Supply Arrangement is corruption??

So have the conservatives. So have plain old members of parliament regardless of political affiliation. Ethics Commissioner.... LOL See below When are you folks going to understand the ethics commissioner has no authority and is just an office of show business and of no consequence? The office is what is the scam but, it has had it's benefits for both liberal and conservative governments. It is there to stroke governments that they feel they are doing something. Somewhat like you folks do to each other LOL

What BS. Much ado about nothing. The Standing Offers are used everyday by every parliamentarian and department. It is used by every federal office throughout the country for goods and services under $25K. Supply Arrangements are another way goods and services can be procured. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/laws-regulations/labour/interpretations-policies/standing-offers.html This is common knowledge. Just because you don't know is not the fault of government nor is it a scam, it is your own ignorance of standard procedures. No scam, just everyday business.

You are just another one of those living in the past LOL

AKA Standing Offers. The same rules for everyone and for all governments regardless who is in power. Conservative or Liberal or for every member of parliament and for every department in the civil service. I am happy to enlighten you. Next time a little effort on your part would have gotten you the real answer instead of your conjecture. I know it is a lot to ask of you to get real information but hey.... LOL