scribblet

I doubt the Liberal party actually gave money to the Unions also. WFC was started by some unions, which included, const. trades, nurses and teachers but a couple of teacher unions may not back the Liberals now. The WFC spends millions on attack ads and according to the P.C.s they spent $2.1 million on attack ads during last year's election. I think the candidate can spend something likea $1.19 per no. of electors, so should there also be limits on third parties in order to level the playing field ? I guess it begs the question, should third parties be subject to spending limits during a campaign ?

Sometimes it's better not to do that as it just gives them credibility. No answer would make them happy unless it was a confession. In other words, maybe he didn't want to get into wallowing with the pigs.

Personally I don’t care whether the charity’s Liberal board made a mistake in inviting him. The point is that as an MP he should not have been charging a speaker’s fee to charities. He should’ve had a clue it would be bad optics. I guess his expensing Grey Goose and big lunches should’ve been a clue to his future behaviour http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/05/20120502-200351.html Trudeau expensed a $127 lunch for two that included fine brandies and on another occasion he billed $93 for sushi lunch for two. Other receipts show a taste for the premium Grey Goose vodka. In 2005, Trudeau charged the taxpayer-funded group for a $350 steak dinner in Halifax. The documents don't show how many people were present and questions about properly documenting expenses were subsequently raised by an auditor. The documents also show that during Trudeau's time as chair, Katimavik engaged in selective political activity.

I’d be more impressed if, in addition to returning the fees collected from charities, Mr. Trudeau refunded the salary he collected as an MP while away from the House of Commons and his duties.

This is from 2011 talking about their 'end run' around the elections act which they are getting away with. No doubt they are an unethical union-backed Ontario Liberal Party front who have nothing to do with regular working families (well, not those kind of 'families')... http://ogca.ca/working-families-coalition-does-an-end-run-on-elections-finances-act/ and here http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/christina_blizzard/2011/03/04/17500486.html OK, let's call this coalition what it is: A union-backed group that spends big bucks to push the Liberal agenda and uses negative ads to attack the Tories. Here's the Oscar message in part: "We've built a province that's the envy of many. But special interests are planning to use our provincial elections to reverse our progress," said the voiceover. Of course, their version of "special interests" doesn't include powerful unions that do business with the province but who masquerade as just your average guy at election time.

Yes, this group is a front for the Liberals and campaign on their behalf. They object to being depicted as such though and have recently sent a cease and desist letter to Hudak. It's a good way to circumvent the Ontario Elections Act and they get away with it.

He was given a warning.

He was a money lender which I know Trudeau is not, but it's a term generally used these days to mean a 'cheap bas...d'. No other inferences is or was intended, but you know that. It's better to let the unsubstantiated accusations hang.

Anti semitic - oh wow, talk about imputing thoughts and actions that never existed. Of course you know that all one has to do is accuse someone of racism or bigotry and it stops the discussion. People get wise to that though... but carry on, your MO is showing.

Aaahhh, sure whatever turns you on, but keep defending Shylock. He could do a lot for his image now and gain brownie points by returning it. Not to mention of course that he missed two votes on the day he was out making money off a charity. The event was held on Monday, April 30, 2012. Records show Trudeau missed two votes in the House that day. Also note that MLA Rob Norris was there also but did not accept a fee.

That is still an alleged fraud as far as Duffy goes, and no evidence of any fraud by Harper at all. Stick to facts. I agree the subject of Trudeau's taking from a charity, or at least not showing good faith by returning money etc. deserves it's own thread.

Justin Trudeau got rich from taking speaking fees from schools, unions and charities but I don`t think I`ve seen so many people making the case for an MP taking from charities.

Well said !!

He's a millionaire MP who gets paid for speaking engagements, some of which are on company time. Most MPs don't charge to speak, especially to a charity. Granted he doesn't have to return the money but it would be a great gesture of good will on his part, particularly as we know he can afford it. Most people give to a charity, not take from it. Edited to say, where on company time. Apparently now he's the leader he no longer does it.

I don't blame him for getting P.O.d at the harassment, they got an answer but won't accept it.

Wondering that too. Of what value is Canadian citizenship if there really isn't a need to acquire it. IMO allowing non citizens to vote devalues it (citizenship).

Sure it is, but rumours, innuendo and unsubstantiated allegations are just as bad.

I didn't know that.. imagine the mileage Tim Hudak would get out of that, imagein - Liberal 'Rae days'... I heard an interview today with the Min. of Education, it is amazing how they are presenting the 2%. It's not a raise doncha know. It's ketch up (catch up)

Mr. Mulcair has voted against transparency and posting expenses on line... why is that?

Of course it's blown out of proportion, after all, it was only a security breach. Heck Mr. Angry fought the law, and the law won

I think Canada is the only country to not have any abortion law at all. I don't see how anyone can object to limits on late term abortions.. e.g. 24 weeks..

and calling in substitute teachers. But really, shouldn't teachers be setting an example to their students ? The recent spate of sick usage brought this on when the teachers started using up sick days rather than lose them. Sick days are for illness, not for goofing off. Most places including the city have done away with this banking your sick days then get a huge payout for not using them.

And paying teachers a bonus if they use fewer than 6 sick days.. Say what, since when do we pay employees for not misusing sick days.

Verrrryyyy Innteerrresting.. he runs 5 stop signs then says "Do you know who I am".. Mr. Angry indeed... Imagine the outrage if that had been a conservative

Right, but they opposition doesn`t want to believe otherwise. There is no proof that Mr. Harper approved the cheque.. not one shred of evidence. He (Harper) can`t produce the cheque because it`s not his to produce.