Harper accepts gift of fancy cowboy boots from Bush

[jdobbin]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...008&no_ads=

Under the Conflict of Interest Act, which Harper introduced after the 2006 election, the prime minister and cabinet ministers must declare gifts valued at more than $200 within 30 days of receipt.

The report of gifts including the boots is dated Aug. 11, while the book was reported in a declaration dated Sept. 3. The dates for receiving the gifts go back to March, which means the filings should have been made much earlier.

By law, Harper, his ministers and other public office holders must also hand over to the government all gifts valued at more than $1,000.

Harper made a big deal about the 30 day plan on reporting but it seems to have been a low priority in the last years.

[capricorn]

You're slipping dobbin. This story is dated Friday and it took you all this time to bring it to our attention.

This is truly outrageous. Harper is no less than four months late in reporting gifts he and Laureen received. How come the MSM isn't all over this?

[jdobbin]

You're slipping dobbin. This story is dated Friday and it took you all this time to bring it to our attention.

This is truly outrageous. Harper is no less than four months late in reporting gifts he and Laureen received. How come the MSM isn't all over this?

Harper just reported it and the information was just released this week.

It is just another example of Harper saying one thing and doing the other. Would you not be all over it is was anyone but Harper?

[Slim MacSquinty]

Frankly, one head of states gift to another probably doesn't apply, what would harper do, say no thanks?

What if that gift was from the Chinese head of state? You would apply a completely different set of rules.

[capricorn]

Harper just reported it and the information was just released this week.

It is just another example of Harper saying one thing and doing the other. Would you not be all over it is was anyone but Harper?

I think this calls for a public inquiry.

[Visionseeker]

Frankly, one head of states gift to another probably doesn't apply, what would harper do, say no thanks?

What if that gift was from the Chinese head of state? You would apply a completely different set of rules.

What? So you're saying that conflict of interest rules need not apply when the gift is from a foreign head of state!? Really?

Dear President Hu Jintao,

I would like to thank you on behalf of myself and my wife Lauren for the elegant set of Ming dynasty vases you had your ambassador deliver to us this morning. Lauren is quite enamoured and has become rather protective of the pieces – oh, poor choice of words – protective of the works I should say. Seems Ben will need to practice his stick-handling somewhere other than the halls of 24 Sussex from now on. LOL!

As for other matters, I am pleased to hear that your “Big Oil” guys are having such success in acquiring additional interests in and around Athabaska. When you guys set your mind to something, you really set your mind to something.

Lastly, I wanted to let you know that we have looked over the materials you sent us on the Dalai Lama and I must admit that he never struck me as a violent person. All the same, if you say he’s a bomb maker, who am I to argue?

Yours truly

Signed,

Stephen

[jdobbin]

I think this calls for a public inquiry.

I think the RCMP should be informed and a raid conducted.

[BC_chick]

You're slipping dobbin. This story is dated Friday and it took you all this time to bring it to our attention.

This is truly outrageous. Harper is no less than four months late in reporting gifts he and Laureen received. How come the MSM isn't all over this?

I don't think this is about boots, Harper, or Dobbin being the bearer of bad news.

It's about yet again another example of Harper saying one thing as opposition party leader and doing another when PM.

Now before you respond, allow me to start you off - "But the LIBERALS........!!!!!"

Edited October 6, 2008 by BC_chick

[g_bambino]

Frankly, one head of states gift to another probably doesn't apply.

Problem is, this isn't an example of a gift from one head of state to another.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Problem is, this isn't an example of a gift from one head of state to another.

I agree.

It's a gift from one old dumb ass of state to the middle-aged autoritarian midsection of another.

[TCCK]

Oh give me a &*%* break, is this the best you can come up with to throw mud at the CPC and Harper.

Lets get down to valid and serious issues that are going to affect the common person after the election.

Why did you not post: HARPER CAUGHT SPEEDING ON HIGHWAY. 110KPH in 100KPH zone. I do that everyday. I get gifts from owners of companies I do business with all the time. I have even had presents from 2 heads of countries (George Sr. & Tony Blair) People in politics in positions like the President, Prime Minister give gifts all the time as a show of respect between countries.

Who gives a crap if any politician got a gift from a fellow head of country, you're probably just mad because Bush did not give Layton, Dion , etc boots.

Edited October 6, 2008 by TCCK

[kimmy]

DEAR GOD one can only wonder what promises Harper made to Dubya in exchange for those cowboy boots!

-k

[Argus]

I don't think this is about boots, Harper, or Dobbin being the bearer of bad news.

No, it's about being able to say "harper" and "bush" in the same sentence wherever possible. That's basically all the Liberals got.

I predict that come next election, even if Obama gets in and Harper becomes is best friend in the whole world, next election the Liberals will still be desperately trying to say Harper and Bush in the same sentence.

[PoliticalCitizen]

No, it's about being able to say "harper" and "bush" in the same sentence wherever possible. That's basically all the Liberals got.

I predict that come next election, even if Obama gets in and Harper becomes is best friend in the whole world, next election the Liberals will still be desperately trying to say Harper and Bush in the same sentence.

If Harper discredits himself AGAIN by being unable to handle a minority government I don't think there will be need to compare him to Bush.

[lukin]

Frankly, one head of states gift to another probably doesn't apply, what would harper do, say no thanks?

What if that gift was from the Chinese head of state? You would apply a completely different set of rules.

Thanks for bringing some common sense to this ridiculous thread.

[jdobbin]

DEAR GOD one can only wonder what promises Harper made to Dubya in exchange for those cowboy boots!

I think Harper clearly articulated the problem was when a head of government receives numerous gifts simply because he is the leader. There had been a growing number of occasions when leaders received expensive gifts and no protocol was in place to report them in a detailed or timely matter.

It amazes me that Conservatives brush aside any questions as to why it took so long to report gifts when they made a big deal of it. To go to the extent of hiding behind the Privacy Act strikes me as ridiculous for a public official who should expect disclosure. It also makes me question if there is anything else that is being reported late or being left off the list.

Edited October 6, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

Who gives a crap if any politician got a gift from a fellow head of country, you're probably just mad because Bush did not give Layton, Dion , etc boots.

Apparently Harper once cared. He is the one who put the legislation in place. Are you saying that once he was in office for a while, it was not important anymore? That he was entitled to his entitlements?

[jdobbin]

No, it's about being able to say "harper" and "bush" in the same sentence wherever possible. That's basically all the Liberals got.

Dion has not mentioned anything about it at all.

The media has reported it because Harper wanted the public to know what gifts were received by the government and how transparent and speedy the government was in making that information available.

The Conservative supporters here seem to think this is about the optics of Bush giving a gift rather than Harper following his owl legislation.

[Argus]

Dion has not mentioned anything about it at all.

He knew how petty it would look. Apparently your standards are lower than his.

[jdobbin]

He knew how petty it would look. Apparently your standards are lower than his.

Well, we certainly know that Conservative supporters here don't think that the Tories should be held to the standard that they themselves set when first introducing the legislation. Let's be clear: Harper wanted the public to see how transparent and speedy he was in reporting gifts. Tories here think it is petty to remind anyone that reporting is not speedy and it is not transparent why it isn't when the government hides behind the Privacy Act.

Edited October 6, 2008 by jdobbin

[cybercoma]

I think Harper clearly articulated the problem was when a head of government receives numerous gifts simply because he is the leader. There had been a growing number of occasions when leaders received expensive gifts and no protocol was in place to report them in a detailed or timely matter.

It amazes me that Conservatives brush aside any questions as to why it took so long to report gifts when they made a big deal of it. To go to the extent of hiding behind the Privacy Act strikes me as ridiculous for a public official who should expect disclosure. It also makes me question if there is anything else that is being reported late or being left off the list.

- A pair of boots is not numerous gifts.

- The protocol, in your words, is to report the gifts, which was done.

So, what exactly is the problem?

[jdobbin]

- A pair of boots is not numerous gifts.

- The protocol, in your words, is to report the gifts, which was done.

So, what exactly is the problem?

The protocol was reporting within 30 days. Harper said the timeliness was an important as the details.

[Wild Bill]

The protocol was reporting within 30 days. Harper said the timeliness was an important as the details.

Give him a break, jdobbin! It likely took him at least 30 days to eat all those kittens Bush gave him with the boots!

[capricorn]

No, it's about being able to say "harper" and "bush" in the same sentence wherever possible.

The dead giveaway that this was the intention can be seen right in the thread's title. "Harper accepts gift of fancy cowboy boots from Bush" says nothing about late reporting.

Furthermore, there might be a valid explanation as to why there was a 4 month delay in reporting the gifts. It appears the administrative process is being revised to simplify reporting.

"We are looking into the reasons for this and are addressing it as a priority in a variety of ways, including reminding them of their obligations and simplifying the reporting procedures."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...me=election2008

[jdobbin]

The dead giveaway that this was the intention can be seen right in the thread's title. "Harper accepts gift of fancy cowboy boots from Bush" says nothing about late reporting.

That was the exact CTV header.

Furthermore, there might be a valid explanation as to why there was a 4 month delay in reporting the gifts. It appears the administrative process is being revised to simplify reporting.

The story further went on to say that there was no explanation for why gifts reported late and that the Privacy Act prevented asking. I don't believe the Act applies in this case.