all of you need to see this!

[msdogfood]

Look at this!!!

Has the PMO lost its mind???

WOW! why do this The PMO will be more exposed ... that is nice for me but how could they be so stupid!???.

[Topaz]

Look at this!!!

Has the PMO lost its mind???

WOW! why do this The PMO will be more exposed ... that is nice for me but how could they be so stupid!???.

If you didn't see the house committee on this go to www.c-pac.ca, left-side of page click PROGRAMS, which you'll find House committees and then over on the right-side of page you'll see may 13, 2010, the committee meeting were Ryan Sparrow is before the committee. The thing is, Finley doesn't want to let him talk and so she there unvited and all hell breaks out within the conservatives, giving the chairman more programs then he needs, of course he 's a liberal, but he doing everything by the rules.

[Argus]

Look at this!!!

Has the PMO lost its mind???

WOW! why do this The PMO will be more exposed ... that is nice for me but how could they be so stupid!???.

One of the problems of this parliament is that the opposition, having not a single solitary idea for a a new policy or program which might win them votes, having uncharismatic and unpopular leaders, basically has no way to improve their position they can think of but to turn each of the committees into a dirt-digging operation. It's ultimately why this parliament will fail and we'll wind up in another election, too. It's turned what are supposed to be parliamentary committees dedicated to serious inquiry into a bunch of National Inquirers using their powers to demand documents and testimony from anyone in government on any subject they hope might expose some sort of dirt. I know it thrill lefty partisans who drool at the prospect of some sort of illegality being exposed - thus far to no purpose - but it's not impressing Canadians. The Liberals keep going down and down and down. And the only thing which has temporarily improved the fortunes of the NDP is layton getting cancer and disappearing from sight. Furthermore, it is further lowering the already low state of cordiality on the hill, as the Conservatives are rapidly coming to view the opposition in the same way Hollywood stars view the Paparazzi.

[Wild Bill]

One of the problems of this parliament is that the opposition, having not a single solitary idea for a a new policy or program which might win them votes, having uncharismatic and unpopular leaders, basically has no way to improve their position they can think of but to turn each of the committees into a dirt-digging operation. It's ultimately why this parliament will fail and we'll wind up in another election, too. It's turned what are supposed to be parliamentary committees dedicated to serious inquiry into a bunch of National Inquirers using their powers to demand documents and testimony from anyone in government on any subject they hope might expose some sort of dirt. I know it thrill lefty partisans who drool at the prospect of some sort of illegality being exposed - thus far to no purpose - but it's not impressing Canadians. The Liberals keep going down and down and down. And the only thing which has temporarily improved the fortunes of the NDP is layton getting cancer and disappearing from sight. Furthermore, it is further lowering the already low state of cordiality on the hill, as the Conservatives are rapidly coming to view the opposition in the same way Hollywood stars view the Paparazzi.

I think you're right on this one, Argus. The Liberals do seem more like muck-rakers than honest investigators. Their plan seems to be to just rake up whatever muck they can and hope something sticks.

There's no sense of substance to their muck and for that reason they keep slowly losing popular respect. Political junkies like ourselves may get all wigged out on some particular point of order or legality but to the "masses" it's all rather esoteric. In other words, it's not really interesting muck being raked and the muck-rakers keep getting more and more boring.

It's kind of a desperation tactic, like spending your entire paycheck on lottery tickets. They are obviously hoping that something big will come up in the muck and the Canadian people will rise up in anger against Harper, to then sweep the Liberals back into power!

I guess this is easier than actually developing leadership and substantive policies of your own! Perhaps the Liberals are so confident that they will find something of substance in the muck because they think the Tories are the same as themselves.

Who knows, maybe they will find something. Still, I'm glad it's them spending all that time and energy and not me!

Edited May 24, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Topaz]

If you are a Harper supporter than yeah I can understand you views but there are rules in committee and they have to be followed, even the government! Have any of the Harperites watched the committee meeting in questioned? The Tories do what ever they can to high jack the committees if they aren't going their way. It's sickening! Now Harper wants to stop staffer from going before the committee and yet while in opposition to wanted that exact same rule to apply to the Liberals in the Adsscam! Please! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/cabinet-bans-political-staffers-from-testifying-at-committees/article1578703/

[dre]

One of the problems of this parliament is that the opposition, having not a single solitary idea for a a new policy or program which might win them votes, having uncharismatic and unpopular leaders, basically has no way to improve their position they can think of but to turn each of the committees into a dirt-digging operation. It's ultimately why this parliament will fail and we'll wind up in another election, too. It's turned what are supposed to be parliamentary committees dedicated to serious inquiry into a bunch of National Inquirers using their powers to demand documents and testimony from anyone in government on any subject they hope might expose some sort of dirt. I know it thrill lefty partisans who drool at the prospect of some sort of illegality being exposed - thus far to no purpose - but it's not impressing Canadians. The Liberals keep going down and down and down. And the only thing which has temporarily improved the fortunes of the NDP is layton getting cancer and disappearing from sight. Furthermore, it is further lowering the already low state of cordiality on the hill, as the Conservatives are rapidly coming to view the opposition in the same way Hollywood stars view the Paparazzi.

I personally think theres nowhere near ENOUGH investigations into our government, and that nowhere near ENOUGH documents are siezed and inspected. I think we need about 100 times as much of this type of activity as we have now, no matter WHO the sitting government is. Id like to see something similar to the drug testing they have in the Olympics where government officials are chosen at random, completely audited and frog-marched in front of the judiciary.

If every politician operated under the premise that at ANY TIME all of their activity could be completely and publically investigated without warning then we would have a more honest and open government.

[DrGreenthumb]

I personally think theres nowhere near ENOUGH investigations into our government, and that nowhere near ENOUGH documents are siezed and inspected. I think we need about 100 times as much of this type of activity as we have now, no matter WHO the sitting government is. Id like to see something similar to the drug testing they have in the Olympics where government officials are chosen at random, completely audited and frog-marched in front of the judiciary.

If every politician operated under the premise that at ANY TIME all of their activity could be completely and publically investigated without warning then we would have a more honest and open government.

You got that right.

[Born Free]

Clearly Sparrow & Finley are not to believed in anything they say. These folks are scuzzballs.

[eyeball]

I personally think theres nowhere near ENOUGH investigations into our government, and that nowhere near ENOUGH documents are siezed and inspected. I think we need about 100 times as much of this type of activity as we have now, no matter WHO the sitting government is. Id like to see something similar to the drug testing they have in the Olympics where government officials are chosen at random, completely audited and frog-marched in front of the judiciary.

If every politician operated under the premise that at ANY TIME all of their activity could be completely and publically investigated without warning then we would have a more honest and open government.

What about this idea that's been floated around here lately that people are being unreasonably naive to expect politicians to be truthful? I get the distinct impression that many observers and participants in our system believe in their hearts that it can't function without a little corruption to grease the wheels.

Would it be too much to expect that politicians acknowledge this so people can stop wasting time begrudging them every time they get a few cookie crumbs on their sleeves?

Does corruption grease or sand the wheels of growth? This still seems to be a good question in some circles.

Edited May 25, 2010 by eyeball

[Born Free]

A vote for "our great leader" (aka Harper) is a vote for transparent, open government unless you want to actually find out what they are doing.....

[waldo]

If you didn't see the house committee on this go to www.c-pac.ca, left-side of page click PROGRAMS, which you'll find House committees and then over on the right-side of page you'll see may 13, 2010, the committee meeting were Ryan Sparrow is before the committee. The thing is, Finley doesn't want to let him talk and so she there unvited and all hell breaks out within the conservatives, giving the chairman more programs then he needs, of course he 's a liberal, but he doing everything by the rules.

the actual CPAC video-feed of the May 13 meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics - here: at roughly the 08:00 minute mark, you can watch the actual exchange with Finley, where short minutes later she requests the committee respect the long standing traditions of Parliament... huh! Say what?

whether this particular issue with Ryan Sparrow, ultimately, proves anything of significance/account, the real issue that seems to have surfaced through the committee, is that Sparrow (and his office) has "adjusted" 51 "media inquiries" (over the last 6 months), as prepared by respective government department staff/bureaucrats. Harper Conservatives, tailoring the message - transparent and accountable!

[Argus]

I personally think theres nowhere near ENOUGH investigations into our government, and that nowhere near ENOUGH documents are siezed and inspected. I think we need about 100 times as much of this type of activity as we have now, no matter WHO the sitting government is. Id like to see something similar to the drug testing they have in the Olympics where government officials are chosen at random, completely audited and frog-marched in front of the judiciary.

If every politician operated under the premise that at ANY TIME all of their activity could be completely and publically investigated without warning then we would have a more honest and open government.

The problem with this is you seem to want all public servants to live as though they were in a police state. Remember, you have no right to remain silent and right to speak with an attorney, nor is there any rule that defends you from being required to give evidence which incriminates you. And if all that isn't bad enough, the people ordered in for questioning aren't actually suspected of any crime. Oh yes, and the people questioning you are hardly neutral. They really, REALLY want to find you guilty of something - anything.

No, the tories have a point in that staffers are neither trained nor in many cases equipped to be public political operatives. If the committees were being run by neutral people that would be one thing, but you're asking staffers of the government party to go before a bunch of hostile opposition MPs who's aim is to embarrass and humiliate them, and through them the government, to allege all manner of wrongdoing in as rude and even slanderous a manner as they choose, and with no supporting evidence, to engage in fishing expeditions in hopes of tripping up the staffer in some way and hopefully using him or her to embarrass their minister.

As the Brits would say, that just ain't cricket. If you want to ask questions about the conduct of the ministers office then ask the minister.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Argus

[GostHacked]

You got that right.

Second'd !!!!!!

[Born Free]

The problem with this is you seem to want all public servants to live as though they were in a police state....

We are in a police state and its being run by Harper.

[Argus]

We are in a police state and its being run by Harper.

One would think that anti-government zealots like you would be in prison by now then.

[dre]

The problem with this is you seem to want all public servants to live as though they were in a police state. Remember, you have no right to remain silent and right to speak with an attorney, nor is there any rule that defends you from being required to give evidence which incriminates you. And if all that isn't bad enough, the people ordered in for questioning aren't actually suspected of any crime. Oh yes, and the people questioning you are hardly neutral. They really, REALLY want to find you guilty of something - anything.

No, the tories have a point in that staffers are neither trained nor in many cases equipped to be public political operatives. If the committees were being run by neutral people that would be one thing, but you're asking staffers of the government party to go before a bunch of hostile opposition MPs who's aim is to embarrass and humiliate them, and through them the government, to allege all manner of wrongdoing in as rude and even slanderous a manner as they choose, and with no supporting evidence, to engage in fishing expeditions in hopes of tripping up the staffer in some way and hopefully using him or her to embarrass their minister.

As the Brits would say, that just ain't cricket. If you want to ask questions about the conduct of the ministers office then ask the minister.

The problem with this is you seem to want all public servants to live as though they were in a police state. Remember, you have no right to remain silent and right to speak with an attorney, nor is there any rule that defends you from being required to give evidence which incriminates you.

No I want them to be treated like what they are... our employees. If you walk down to the IT department at the company you own to ask about an ongoing project does your IT staff have the right to remain silent?... or consult an attorney before giving you information about YOUR business?

By your logic every employee in the world is living in a police state, because the people that sign their paycheck can demand answers or information or action from them.

Everything they do should be a matter of pubic record with very few exceptions. You and others have bought the lie that these people need to operate in secrecy (for our own good) hook line and sinker and the result of that is that we get consistantly shitty governance. Democracy is pointless without transparency.

but you're asking staffers of the government party to go before a bunch of hostile opposition MPs who's aim is to embarrass and humiliate them, and through them the government, to allege all manner of wrongdoing in as rude and even slanderous a manner as they choose, and with no supporting evidence, to engage in fishing expeditions in hopes of tripping up the staffer in some way and hopefully using him or her to embarrass their minister.

Boooo fuckin hooo. All the more reason to not do things that would be embarassing, humiliating, or incriminating.

[Topaz]

The problem with this is you seem to want all public servants to live as though they were in a police state. Remember, you have no right to remain silent and right to speak with an attorney, nor is there any rule that defends you from being required to give evidence which incriminates you. And if all that isn't bad enough, the people ordered in for questioning aren't actually suspected of any crime. Oh yes, and the people questioning you are hardly neutral. They really, REALLY want to find you guilty of something - anything.

No, the tories have a point in that staffers are neither trained nor in many cases equipped to be public political operatives. If the committees were being run by neutral people that would be one thing, but you're asking staffers of the government party to go before a bunch of hostile opposition MPs who's aim is to embarrass and humiliate them, and through them the government, to allege all manner of wrongdoing in as rude and even slanderous a manner as they choose, and with no supporting evidence, to engage in fishing expeditions in hopes of tripping up the staffer in some way and hopefully using him or her to embarrass their minister.

As the Brits would say, that just ain't cricket. If you want to ask questions about the conduct of the ministers office then ask the minister.

Really, when Harper was in opposition he opposed that! He wanted the staffers to answer questiona about adscam and now since its HIS government under question, he's against it! Double standard again!

[Born Free]

One would think that anti-government zealots like you would be in prison by now then.

To suggest that I'm anti-government proves my point about you. You dont think. You fall in line like all dumb party zealots do.

I simply expect my government to do what they say. Harper is constantly proving otherwise.

[msdogfood]

Yes or no

Parliament can subpoena anyone to appear before it like a court???.

I thank its YES!!.

[Argus]

No I want them to be treated like what they are... our employees. If you walk down to the IT department at the company you own to ask about an ongoing project does your IT staff have the right to remain silent?... or consult an attorney before giving you information about YOUR business?

You don't go to the IT department and demand the guy who installs windows on your PC give you a rundown about ongoing projects. He's likely to have at best an incomplete picture, and embarrass his boss as well as give you inaccurate information. You want the information you go to the head of IT.

By your logic every employee in the world is living in a police state, because the people that sign their paycheck can demand answers or information or action from them.

Have you ever worked for a large organization? Employees don't answer questions for anyone but their own manager/boss. If other areas want information, they go to the boss, who goes to his employees, gathers that information, then responds on behalf of that department or area.

Everything they do should be a matter of pubic record with very few exceptions. You and others have bought the lie that these people need to operate in secrecy (for our own good) hook line and sinker and the result of that is that we get consistantly shitty governance. Democracy is pointless without transparency.

Well I agree there is too much secrecy in government. But that doesn't mean I want a cadre of opposition MPs able to call lower level public servants on the carpet to put them through the wringer. Department heads are briefed and trained to deal with queries about their departments. In this case that would be the minister or deputy ministers. They're the ones who get the big bucks. Let them deal with a bunch of feral political animals.

Boooo fuckin hooo. All the more reason to not do things that would be embarassing, humiliating, or incriminating.

Even though you haven't got a clue whether they've done anything wrong or not.

[DrGreenthumb]

You don't go to the IT department and demand the guy who installs windows on your PC give you a rundown about ongoing projects. He's likely to have at best an incomplete picture, and embarrass his boss as well as give you inaccurate information. You want the information you go to the head of IT.

If windows seems to be installed improperly or I find out that he has installed an illegal copy on my computer I damn sure WOULD ask the guy who installed it.

[DrGreenthumb]

Hey Toadbrother, you out there? Just a question for the local expert on the rights of Parliament. Can the staffers legally refuse to appear before the committee? I thought only ministers and MP's could do that? Is this another case of possible contempt? Or would the house first have to vote in a majority that the staffers MUST appear?

[msdogfood]

Hey Toadbrother, you out there? Just a question for the local expert on the rights of Parliament. Can the staffers legally refuse to appear before the committee? I thought only ministers and MP's could do that? Is this another case of possible contempt? Or would the house first have to vote in a majority that the staffers MUST appear?

That was my Question too but as i understand it

refuse to appear before the committee ministers or staff may get you a contempt of Parliament if a subpoena is issued to you like a court!!!

[waldo]

the actual CPAC video-feed of the May 13 meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics - here: at roughly the 08:00 minute mark, you can watch the actual exchange with Finley, where short minutes later she requests the committee respect the long standing traditions of Parliament... huh! Say what?

whether this particular issue with Ryan Sparrow, ultimately, proves anything of significance/account, the real issue that seems to have surfaced through the committee, is that Sparrow (and his office) has "adjusted" 51 "media inquiries" (over the last 6 months), as prepared by respective government department staff/bureaucrats. Harper Conservatives, tailoring the message - transparent and accountable!

of course Ryan Sparrow wasn't the first inconvenient revelation/review of Conservative censoring brought forward by the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics... only a few weeks back the committee heard from Sebastien Togneri, in regards his censoring handiwork as the parliamentary affairs director to then-Public Works minister Christian Paradis => Tories blocked full release of sensitive Public Works report

which sees today's fitting culmination where the Conservative Government House Leader informs the House of Commons that departmental staff members will no longer appear before those, as stated, “hostile” Parliamentary committees... apparently... subpoenas be damned!

Speaker Peter Milliken may again have to decide which is dominant, the Prime Minister’s Office or Parliament – a ruling that follows on his decision the government could not withhold documents demanded by MPs.

[Topaz]

Today, I saw the committee with John Baird appearing instead of Soudas the communicator for the PMO, who refused to show or the PMO refused to allow him to show. The Tories can't have it both ways. They say only the ministers should talk at the committee and so since Harper is the Prime Minister he doesn't HAVE to. That being said why then did the MINISTER of Natural Resources and the former minister, refuse to come before the committee? They are/were the ministers. If the PM, won't talk and won't let Soudas talk then they should allow Pierre, secretary to the PM talk. He likes to talk and talk within this committee, so he can go from seating on the right to seating in the front. Watching the Tories perform in the House and in committee meeting , just re-firms why the HIll is so dysfunctional.