Tory MPs Hire

[jdobbin]

Splitting Hairs?

Not really since the original story is about MPs employing each other's family members in their offices. So far I haven't seen any evidence that anyone aside from the Tories is doing it.

[Wild Bill]

I think that was common practice with most of the auto factories, BTW, did the Tories any anything about this practice...No!

Gee, that would have been a smart move! It's hard enough for the Tories to attract votes from factory workers. You're suggesting they should REALLY tick them off?

Besides, are you implying it was only a Tory sin? That the others are blameless?

[scribblet]

Besides, are you implying it was only a Tory sin? That the others are blameless?

You mean you didn't know that

[jdobbin]

The loan he was given to purchase CSL would have been unattainable without political influence according to a PM tv biography. I can likely find a cite online for you later.

Anything but Canada Free Press...thanks.

Are the Liberals now referring to government as "a family company"?

Pretty sure I was referring to CSL which Martin placed in a blind trust in 1994 and transferred to his sons in 2003.

CSL. I can get you a citation later. Should take about 30 seconds, but my dentist is calling. And I always smile when I read your posts.

I've seen all sorts of corruption claims that cover Gomery, McKenna, Desmarsais, etc.

If Harper believes any of it is true, he should say so. Perhaps then he could justify MPs employing each other's children.

Boy, I love these "but the Liberals!"

[jdobbin]

You mean you didn't know that

It just means that Tories are hypocrites. Do as I say, not as I do.

[Who's Doing What?]

well everybody else does it so I guess...........

I thought I was promised that things were going to be different under this government? There always seems to be an excuse as well. Oh well. Looking forward to the fall.

That seems to be the point all the die-hard CPC supporters conveniently forget. Especially when they cry "but the Liberals...."

[Who's Doing What?]

Virtually everyone on the Hill is related to someone else on the hill, and has been for as long as anyone there can remember.

It's a real inbred hick town is it? lol

Suddenly scenes from Deliverance are popping into my head.

There is absolutely nothing new in this story. It's just the Liberal Star on a slow news day trying to smear the tories.

Tinfoil Hats all around!

[Who's Doing What?]

Can you imagine if the Tory's gave millions in contracts to one of their MP's sons or daughters? My god, you'd have a field day.

Well, first they would have to be in power for more than two consecutive majorities. You know, to get all the right judges and bureaucrats in place.

Edited May 29, 2008 by Who's Doing What?

[Who's Doing What?]

Good plan. Scrap the rules on nepotism. Afterall, the Tories don't pay attention to them anyway.

[FTA Lawyer]

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/s...48-6bd164a30654

Nice to see how Tories get around the nepotism prohibition.

The Headline of the article states that the rules allow the hires...what exactly are the Tories "getting around"?

This has got to be about the dumbest criticism I have ever seen. Guess what, doctors' kids often become doctors, lawyers' kids often become lawyers, teachers' kids...well you get the point I hope...

Before I went to law school I worked at my uncle's law firm...ooohhh!!! oh my God, how can that be?!?! shouldn't somebody write a newspaper article about it?

Let's see, I'm a 20 year old political science major at a respected Canadian University. I want desperately to cut my teeth on "the Hill". But wait, my dad is an MP!?!?! Woe is me, the stupid asses who wrote this article would have it so that I am precluded in pursuing my career ambition because my dad has the job?!?!?!

Who do you think you would apply to for a job if you were Mark Toews???????????????????? Are you actually expecting anyone to seriously think that he ought to either: 1) Not be allowed to learn and gain experience in a vocation of his choice for however long his dad might be an MP or 2) Be forced to send his resume to Stephane Dion so that when he "gets around" the nepotism prohibition it looks better?!?!?!

Did I mention this is the dumbest criticism I have ever seen?

FTA

[jdobbin]

The Headline of the article states that the rules allow the hires...what exactly are the Tories "getting around"?

It's funny how the other parties have managed to avoid it but not the Tories.

[FTA Lawyer]

It's funny how the other parties have managed to avoid it but not the Tories.

Avoid what? Respond to my post dobbin...you're now doing what you openly trash as the "but Liberals" style of argument putting in a one-liner that the other parties are not breaking the rules better than the Tories are not breaking the rules.

The fact remains that the Tories are not breaking the rules and you can't articulate why that bothers you so much.

Do you have evidence that Mark Toews is an incompetent worker who could only have been hired by a Tory MP as a favor to Vic Toews? If not, you have nothing and you prove that the story is nothing.

FTA

[jdobbin]

Avoid what? Respond to my post dobbin...you're now doing what you openly trash as the "but Liberals" style of argument putting in a one-liner that the other parties are not breaking the rules better than the Tories are not breaking the rules.

The fact remains that the Tories are not breaking the rules and you can't articulate why that bothers you so much.

Do you have evidence that Mark Toews is an incompetent worker who could only have been hired by a Tory MP as a favor to Vic Toews? If not, you have nothing and you prove that the story is nothing.

I think the only one getting heated about anything is you.

I can't recall where I said they are breaking the rules. I just said they are getting around the rules by having other party MPs hire their direct family members. I'm sure if it was the Liberals doing it, I'd hear a different story.

It is doubtful that there will ever be any rules against MPs hiring family of their fellow party members. However, it usually adds to the cynicism about politics in general. And that is a legitimate criticism. I'm glad there is no evidence that other parties are doing it. Political office is a trust and nepotism has been rampant on the public dime to the point that the prohibition was introduced in the first place. I'd hate for the impression to be that I'll hire your son if you hire my daughter as a way of getting round it.

One last thing: the Harper Tories have railed against this type of cronyism long before they got into power. It is hard to believe that they don't have a problem with it now.

Edited May 29, 2008 by jdobbin

[FTA Lawyer]

I think the only one getting heated about anything is you.

I can't recall where I said they are breaking the rules. I just said they are getting around the rules by having other party MPs hire their direct family members. I'm sure if it was the Liberals doing it, I'd hear a different story.

It is doubtful that there will ever be any rules against MPs hiring family of their fellow party members. However, it usually adds to the cynicism about politics in general. And that is a legitimate criticism. I'm glad there is no evidence that other parties are doing it. Political office is a trust and nepotism has been rampant on the public dime to the point that the prohibition was introduced in the first place. I'd hate for the impression to be that I'll hire your son if you hire my daughter as a way of getting round it.

One last thing: the Harper Tories have railed against this type of cronyism long before they got into power. It is hard to believe that they don't have a problem with it now.

I'll take that as a "no"...you don't have any evidence that Mark Toews or any other MP's kid has been hired into a job they are not competent for.

This hullabaloo by definition cannot be nepotism unless the person hired was given favoritism or priority due to his family ties. There is no evidence of that either in the media story or in your posts.

This hullabloo by definition cannot be cronyism unless the kid was hired regardless of qualifications as a gift to the dad for his long history with the party. There is no evidence of that either in the media story or in your posts.

There is no story.

But I'll still ask you again...is your view that Mark Toews is required to forego any aspirations to federal politics because his dad is an MP, or must he apply for jobs in political parties not of his choosing?

And, no, I don't care one way or another if it's CPC, Liberal, NDP...I hate pandering to partisan form over substance in whatever form it takes. I will equally ridicule those who said Cretien's lawyer daughter should not have been on a 2010 Olympic organizing committee if they had no evidence to show she was given favoritism in spite of lack of ability.

To argue otherwise is to say that the spawn of very successful and talented people should be forced not to work in certain careers and I just can't accept that level of feeble-minded allegiance to mud-slinging.

FTA

[jdobbin]

I'll take that as a "no"...you don't have any evidence that Mark Toews or any other MP's kid has been hired into a job they are not competent for.

I could care less if he was competent.

It was Harper's party that made a big deal about this exact type of hiring and called it nepotism before they became government.

This hullabaloo by definition cannot be nepotism unless the person hired was given favoritism or priority due to his family ties. There is no evidence of that either in the media story or in your posts.

This hullabloo by definition cannot be cronyism unless the kid was hired regardless of qualifications as a gift to the dad for his long history with the party. There is no evidence of that either in the media story or in your posts.

There is no story.

But I'll still ask you again...is your view that Mark Toews is required to forego any aspirations to federal politics because his dad is an MP, or must he apply for jobs in political parties not of his choosing?

And, no, I don't care one way or another if it's CPC, Liberal, NDP...I hate pandering to partisan form over substance in whatever form it takes. I will equally ridicule those who said Cretien's lawyer daughter should not have been on a 2010 Olympic organizing committee if they had no evidence to show she was given favoritism in spite of lack of ability.

To argue otherwise is to say that the spawn of very successful and talented people should be forced not to work in certain careers and I just can't accept that level of feeble-minded allegiance to mud-slinging.

Harper's party didn't think too much about PC members hiring each other's daughters and made a big deal about Chretien's daughter.

It seems they have a different view on it now.

I personally think Harper was right at the time. The level of cynicism rises to a boil when it seems that nepotism on the public dime happens. Other parties seem to have avoided it and I don't hear them complaining about thwarted aspirations of their children. Toews could work directly for the party rather than on the taxpayer dime.

[Keepitsimple]

I personally think Harper was right at the time. The level of cynicism rises to a boil when it seems that nepotism on the public dime happens. Other parties seem to have avoided it and I don't hear them complaining about thwarted aspirations of their children. Toews could work directly for the party rather than on the taxpayer dime.

I've got a problem with this thread on two fronts. Firstly, the reports cites only three "examples" of relatives working for other MPs. The reporter had access to the entire directory - so I'm sure they would have come up with more if they could - so that they could make the headline "Tories Rife with nepotism/patronage". So clearly, the occurrances are relatively few. Secondly, I don't see a problem with siblings working for other MPs. Sons and daughters often follow in the parents' footsteps and to deny them that right - if they are qualified - seems improper. It would not be right to have them work directly for the parents. That is clearly nepotism. Working for another MP however, seems OK to me. Why would an MP use someone's relative if it had a negative impact on their ability to run their office or do their job? MPs have limited budgets and they need competent people. The NDP seem to have a policy against any and all use of relatives. From this story, it appears that the Tories have a policy against direct nepotism. What is the Liberal policy? Another tempest in a teapot.

Edited May 29, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[jdobbin]

I've got a problem with this thread on two fronts. Firstly, the reports cites only three "examples" of relatives working for other MPs. The reporter had access to the entire directory - so I'm sure they would have come up with more if they could - so that they could make the headline "Tories Rife with nepotism/patronage". So clearly, the occurrances are relatively few. Secondly, I don't see a problem with siblings working for other MPs. Sons and daughters often follow in the parents' footsteps and to deny them that right - if they are qualified - seems improper. It would not be right to have them work directly for the parents. That is clearly nepotism. Working for another MP however, seems OK to me. Why would an MP use someone's relative if it had a negative impact on their ability to run their office or do their job? MPs have limited budgets and they need competent people. The NDP seem to have a policy against any and all use of relatives. From this story, it appears that the Tories have a policy against direct nepotism. What is the Liberal policy? Another tempest in a teapot.

Once again this would probably not have been such a big deal if his party didn't try to roast the PCs on hiring each other's daughter's back in the 1990s. Harper was quite vocal back then on nepotism and cronyism.

It is obvious that even in the 1990s, a few incidents where the PCs and the NDP hired each other's family made for a frothy shake for Harper and the Reformers.

[guyser]

Tempest in a tea pot.

Where else does anyone get a job as a student or young teen? You ask your parents if they know anyone. Come on, this is the way it is always done. As for transperancy or what else the CPC has said, I would not link it to these actions for the reason these are assistant jobs for the summer.

Hell I got a sweet job in an engineering company my dad was a VP in, and it confirmed I did not want to be an P. Engineer.

This is nothing.

[M.Dancer]

Tempest in a tea pot.

Where else does anyone get a job as a student or young teen? You ask your parents if they know anyone. Come on, this is the way it is always done. As for transperancy or what else the CPC has said, I would not link it to these actions for the reason these are assistant jobs for the summer.

Hell I got a sweet job in an engineering company my dad was a VP in, and it confirmed I did not want to be an P. Engineer.

This is nothing.

I had a sweet job while I was in high school via my brother (who is 12 years older than me)too.

I worked for CP transport on the loading docks unloading by hand 40ft trailers packed with 40kilo bags of suger....

$14.00 buckeroos an hour when the minimum (what a high school kids expects to make...) was $2.95.....Over a hundred bucks a day when an ounce of mexican was $20.00....

[Topaz]

Gee, that would have been a smart move! It's hard enough for the Tories to attract votes from factory workers. You're suggesting they should REALLY tick them off?

Besides, are you implying it was only a Tory sin? That the others are blameless?

NO, I was relying to the fact that someone said about the other parties never said anything about the practice of hiring relatives and I said that the Cons didn't either. Most of the time its WHO you know and not WHAT you know that gets you a job.

[madmax]

The NDP seem to have a policy against any and all use of relatives. From this story, it appears that the Tories have a policy against direct nepotism. What is the Liberal policy? Another tempest in a teapot.

Could be...

[guyser]

I had a sweet job while I was in high school via my brother (who is 12 years older than me)too.

I worked for CP transport on the loading docks unloading by hand 40ft trailers packed with 40kilo bags of suger....

$14.00 buckeroos an hour when the minimum (what a high school kids expects to make...) was $2.95.....Over a hundred bucks a day when an ounce of mexican was $20.00....

Which explains lots of CP's struggles I suppose. Considering how old you are (2.95?) $14 an hour was major money. Hell the lineup for that job wage today would be a mile long.

$20? Damn man......was the telephone number cherry4-212?