Jump to content

Flurry of patronage postings


Recommended Posts

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090510/...arper_patronage

The federal cabinet filled more than a half-dozen posts at key government boards last month with Conservative supporters, including one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's closest friends.

The high-level appointments were among more than 30 plums cabinet handed out in one day at the height of internal Tory strife and speculation that Harper's leadership might be in trouble.

The handouts included a posting for a Conservative adviser and close colleague of former Reform leader Preston Manning; another for the former director of the Saskatchewan Party; and one for a former Manitoba justice minister.

Another broken promise from Harper to avoid the awarding of patronage appointments without some sort of oversight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090510/...arper_patronage

Another broken promise from Harper to avoid the awarding of patronage appointments without some sort of oversight.

Patronage is a fact of political life. There needs to be a great deal of legislative effort in this area. Such a focus would gain a lot of public support, yet yield zero political support from current elected representatives. It would make a fine platform for a true reform movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politicians lying is also a fact of political life.

Everyone lying is a fact of life as well.

It gets harder to look like a reformer though when Harper does everything contrary to what he said would be basic principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another broken promise from Harper to avoid the awarding of patronage appointments without some sort of oversight.
Acording to the article, the Cabinet made 30 appointments recently of which about 6 went to people associated (sort of) with the Conservative Party. That's patronage?

The article even tries to suggest that this "orgy of patronage appointments" is Harper's attempt to buy support within his caucus.

Excuse me if I find this article comical. It has this cute quote:

"One way to change Canada is to destroy the institutions created by your enemies," said Stephen Clarkson, a prominent author and University of Toronto political scientist.

"You transform them by putting your people in to turn a Liberal institution into a Conservative institution, or maybe even drive it into the ground."

Stephen Clarkson, a Liberal shill if ever there was one, would say something like that, wouldn't he?

Imagine! A Conservative government having power and changing government institutions!

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acording to the article, the Cabinet made 30 appointments recently of which about 6 went to people associated (sort of) with the Conservative Party. That's patronage?

According to the article all postings were supposed to be scrutinized so all of them are patronage.

Imagine! A Conservative government having power and changing government institutions!

Just more evidence that Harper really isn't a reformer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acording to the article, the Cabinet made 30 appointments recently of which about 6 went to people associated (sort of) with the Conservative Party. That's patronage?

The article even tries to suggest that this "orgy of patronage appointments" is Harper's attempt to buy support within his caucus.

Excuse me if I find this article comical. It has this cute quote:

Stephen Clarkson, a Liberal shill if ever there was one, would say something like that, wouldn't he?

Imagine! A Conservative government having power and changing government institutions!

thanks for some clarity, talk about Liberal shills :)-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a difficult task to turn around institutions that have been stacked for years with partisan Liberal appointees. The rot and culture of entitlement that has permeated the Liberal party for the past 15 years has spilled into these instutions through the purely patronage appointments. Harper wanted to change all this with the selection of Gwyn Morgan (for $1 a year) to oversee the appointments commission. He picked a very competent person and for petty reasons, the opposition refused to confirm the appointment. From the article:

Author Robert Plamondon, who has written two major books about the Conservative party, agrees the senior appointments to boards and agencies constitute more than partisan rewards for supporters.

"If you want to change these institutions, that's what you have to do," says Plamondon.

Here's some of the story about Gwyn Morgan......denied the opportunity because of his comments on immigrants - accurate and prescient but of course thrown out of context in terms of Canada by a vindictive opposition led by the Liberals:

Amid concerns about his views on immigrants, members of a House of Commons committee have rejected Stephen Harper's nominee to head a new review board for public appointments.

Calgary businessman Gwyn Morgan, the former president and CEO of energy company EnCana Corp., was personally selected by the prime minister to chair the new commission.

Gwyn Morgan told the committee it was painful to see 'a couple of sentences taken out of context from one of my speeches and leave such an untrue impression of my beliefs.'

(CBC)

However, in a 6-5 vote Tuesday, the government operations committee rejected his nomination, calling Morgan unsuitable for the job.

Harper signalled that the move effectively kills the commission, a key part of his accountability and ethics package.

"Obviously I'm very disappointed with what I think is an irresponsible decision," Harper told reporters before question period.

The prime minister said he'll likely need a majority government in order to clean up government.

"We'll obviously need a majority government to do that in the future. That's obviously what we'll be taking to the people of Canada at the appropriate time," said Harper.

Harper said he would not appoint Morgan against the committee's will, and accused opposition parties of playing partisan games.

Attacked on several comments

When Harper announced the nomination in April, he said there was "no one better qualified" for the job than Morgan.

However, opposition politicians had criticized the 60-year-old businessman's views about immigrants.

"He said that refugees tended to be less qualified than economic immigrants. He questioned the role of multiculturalism," said New Democratic Party MP Peggy Nash, who introduced the motion to reject Morgan.

"I think we are proud of our multicultural country and to stereotype whole cultures, that was problematic," she said.

During a February speech in Toronto, Morgan said multiculturalism could work to divide Canadians.

"Recent riots in France and Australia are timely and troubling examples," he said.

"It seems as if multiculturalism in these countries has created subcultures bearing little relation to the mainstream culture and values of the country."

Beliefs being distorted, Morgan says

In December, Morgan linked rising gang violence in Canada to immigrants from Jamaica and Indo-China. Those cultures are "dominated by violence and lawlessness," he said.

Speaking to the Commons committee on Tuesday, Morgan said it was painful to see "a couple of sentences taken out of context from one of my speeches and leave such an untrue impression of my beliefs."

'Kangaroo court' made partisan decision, Tory alleges

Tory MP Jason Kenney called the vote a partisan lynching of a man with a record of "sterling service" in the business community.

"What we had was a kangaroo court where the decision was predetermined and where the reputation of Canada's top business leader was run into the gutter for short-term political reasons," said Kenney.

A key plank in the Conservative government's accountability package, the appointments commission was to develop guidelines and oversee major federal appointments. Morgan would have been paid $1 a year, an honourary amount.

Link: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/05/16/...n-rejected.html

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper wanted to change all this with the selection of Gwyn Morgan (for $1 a year) to oversee the appointments commission. He picked a very competent person and for petty reasons, the opposition refused to confirm the appointment.

And this serves as a beautiful example of why we need not drift towards the American way of confirmation hearings for Crown appointments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the article all postings were supposed to be scrutinized so all of them are patronage.

What astounding hypocrisy. But then, every bit of political propaganda you post reeks of it.

In a Liberal government, 20 of the thirty would be Liberal bagmen, and the other 10 would be people who bought their appointments with under the table money funnelled into the pockets of Liberal bagmen.

Just more evidence that Harper really isn't a reformer.

More evidence of how much of an improvement he is over your vile party of self-serving political vermin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What astounding hypocrisy. But then, every bit of political propaganda you post reeks of it.

Every one of your posts reeks of denial and apology.

In a Liberal government, 20 of the thirty would be Liberal bagmen, and the other 10 would be people who bought their appointments with under the table money funnelled into the pockets of Liberal bagmen.

Another in an increasing "but the Liberals..."

Harper said that he would put patronage under scrutiny. Is this not a broken promise?

More evidence of how much of an improvement he is over your vile party of self-serving political vermin.

More evidence of just how much your lying party is trying to do exactly what they criticized the Liberals for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's some of the story about Gwyn Morgan......denied the opportunity because of his comments on immigrants - accurate and prescient but of course thrown out of context in terms of Canada by a vindictive opposition led by the Liberals:

And now Harper won't do anything on this file? C'mon.

Was it or was it now a promise that he made? It has been dumped in favour of a culture of entitlement among Tories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the article all postings were supposed to be scrutinized so all of them are patronage.

Dobbin - you're better than that.....at least I always thought you were. By that logic, you admit that every single Liberal appointment was patronage......and as partisan as many of their appointments were, even I have to believe that some were worthy. There are hundreds of Liberal appointees throughout Crown Corporations - that's what happens when you have successive majority governments. It would take a similar run of power for the Conservatives to create some balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper's promise was for something completely different than past practices.

Maybe, but you didn't specify. And, the practices aren't past, they're also current. The Prime Minster faces the House of Commons on a regular basis to deal with scrutiny in all matters of government, including appointments made by the Governor-in-Council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but you didn't specify. And, the practices aren't past, they're also current. The Prime Minster faces the House of Commons on a regular basis to deal with scrutiny in all matters of government, including appointments made by the Governor-in-Council.

However, this wasn't satisfactory to Harper when he was in Opposition. He made it a priority to have those appointments scrutinized before they were made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dobbin - you're better than that.....at least I always thought you were. By that logic, you admit that every single Liberal appointment was patronage......and as partisan as many of their appointments were, even I have to believe that some were worthy. There are hundreds of Liberal appointees throughout Crown Corporations - that's what happens when you have successive majority governments. It would take a similar run of power for the Conservatives to create some balance.

Every single Liberal appointment was patronage. It doesn't mean that some weren't worthy but they were all patronage nonetheless.

Harper said that he was going to something different. He didn't say he was going to flood the civil service with Conservative appointments. I know this is what some Tories want now because they believe that all of the civil service is full of enemies but that is not what they argued for in Opposition. To argue now that it is needed to create balance ignores the fact that Harper and the Opposition made a promise to do something differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, this wasn't satisfactory to Harper when he was in Opposition. He made it a priority to have those appointments scrutinized before they were made.

And apparently attempted to do so, only to be thwarted by the present Loyal Opposition. What is to be done in the meantime when posts become vacant? Frankly, this is one promise I'd be happy to see left unfulfilled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And apparently attempted to do so, only to be thwarted by the present Loyal Opposition. What is to be done in the meantime when posts become vacant? Frankly, this is one promise I'd be happy to see left unfulfilled.

Harper withdrew his choice and made no more attempts to do what he promised to do. It is ironic that Harper wanted scrutiny for patronage appointments but didn't want it for his patronage appointments commissioner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper withdrew his choice and made no more attempts to do what he promised to do. It is ironic that Harper wanted scrutiny for patronage appointments but didn't want it for his patronage appointments commissioner.

It's not like the Liberals are howling for reform though are they? For there to be any meaningful reform you need either a majority government or the support of the Opposition.

You can call it a broken promise but this is just like the Senate appointments. It's stupid for the CPC NOT to appoint their own people in a Liberal stacked bureaucracy when the Liberals are 100% certain to continue their old ways and 100% certain to block any reform.

What are you getting at here Jdobbin? It's okay for the Liberals to make patronage appointments but NOT for the CPC because they promised to change things, even though they're not being allowed to change things by the opposition??

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like the Liberals are howling for reform though are they? For there to be any meaningful reform you need either a majority government or the support of the Opposition.

It's not like the Tories wanted to pursue this in any meaningful way. They pretty much said it was their way or the highway.

You can call it a broken promise but this is just like the Senate appointments. It's stupid for the CPC NOT to appoint their own people in a Liberal stacked bureaucracy when the Liberals are 100% certain to continue their old ways and 100% certain to block any reform.

Hard to call for reform when all you so is the same thing you criticize others for. Give us a majority and we will actually do what we say? Not a lot of credibility there.

What are you getting at here Jdobbin? It's okay for the Liberals to make patronage appointments but NOT for the CPC because they promised to change things, even though they're not being allowed to change things by the opposition??

The Liberals were getting raked over the coals for what the Tories are doing now.

It is a broken promise and there really isn't any getting around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not like the Tories wanted to pursue this in any meaningful way. They pretty much said it was their way or the highway.

The Tories did not have carte-blanche to do whatever they wanted. The opposition would not have allowed it despite how impotent Dion was. Without a majority, none of these things can happen, especially not Senate Reform. You can say what YOU think the CPC WOULD have done with a majority, but we'll never really know and your opinion is irrelevant and far from unbiased anyhow.

Hard to call for reform when all you so is the same thing you criticize others for. Give us a majority and we will actually do what we say? Not a lot of credibility there.

The alternative for the Tories is to take a principled stance, handicap themselves by maintaining a Liberal-dominated Senate and bureaucracy, and then allow the Liberals to further stack them following imminent CPC defeat over the next months or year or so. Gee I wonder which is smarter to do.

It is a broken promise and there really isn't any getting around it.

It's an unfulfilled promise and the people who were counting on it understand why it hasn't come to pass. The main critics on this issue are people like you who don't actually want the reforms but will try to score points on it as a broken promise anyways.

Edited by Moonbox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tories did not have carte-blanche to do whatever they wanted. The opposition would not have allowed it despite how impotent Dion was. Without a majority, none of these things can happen, especially not Senate Reform. You can say what YOU think the CPC WOULD have done with a majority, but we'll never really know and your opinion is irrelevant and far from unbiased anyhow.

I have never claimed an unbiased opinion. I am saying the Tories showed no evidence of cooperating with the Opposition on any issue except Afghanistan which truly and really could have brought their government down.

It was our way or the highway on almost all issues. The Tories withdrew their initiative on appointments reform.

As for the Senate, I happen to think it is a Constitutional matter and so do a lot of people. Even with a majority, I think they would face a successful court challenge on things like terms limits and elections.

The alternative for the Tories is to take a principled stance, handicap themselves by maintaining a Liberal-dominated Senate and bureaucracy, and then allow the Liberals to further stack them following imminent CPC defeat over the next months or year or so. Gee I wonder which is smarter to do.

The alternative is for the Tories to stop making promises they have no intention of keeping.

Of if that is there plan all along then the alternative is for people to be made aware of how untrusty those promises are.

Harper and the many on the right wing believe that the civil service, courts and sometimes the police are all out to get them. It has fueled the demand that all of those areas should be be purged with trusted Conservative members.

It is hard to believe that the Conservatives really believe in reform when they do the same thing they accuse the Liberals do. Blaming the Liberals for this behaviour must be getting old for the electorate if the polls are any indication.

So when people ask themselves what the alternative is as one Sun columnist asked last week: They say if the government wants to act like Liberals, why not elect the real thing?

It's an unfulfilled promise and the people who were counting on it understand why it hasn't come to pass. The main critics on this issue are people like you who don't actually want the reforms but will try to score points on it as a broken promise anyways.

Just as the Tories did for years of the Liberal's daycare promise even when they don't believe in daycare.

Well, now the Tories have a record in government the excuse for not doing things keeps going back to the whine that the Opposition keeps preventing those promises for happening. It is a little hard to reckon when Dion was pushed around as the Tories won repeated confidence measures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...