Aide quits Minister refuses too

[Topaz]

The assistant to the Min. of Nat, resources quit after it was found out he had 4X block info from getting out when asked. The Min. of Nat. Resources refuses to resign. The Tory policy is the Ministers is responsible for what their people do BUT they aren't going to lose THEIR job when the staff screws up. This little scheme could back fire on this minister. I also think the the Minister of Labour, who was the minsiter of Nat. Rsources when most of this was happeing should also be pulled from her job because she did do her job as minister of NR and that's why Hsrper moved her quietly. http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Aide+quits+minister+refuses+resign/3613382/story.html

[ToadBrother]

The assistant to the Min. of Nat, resources quit after it was found out he had 4X block info from getting out when asked. The Min. of Nat. Resources refuses to resign. The Tory policy is the Ministers is responsible for what their people do BUT they aren't going to lose THEIR job when the staff screws up. This little scheme could back fire on this minister. I also think the the Minister of Labour, who was the minsiter of Nat. Rsources when most of this was happeing should also be pulled from her job because she did do her job as minister of NR and that's why Hsrper moved her quietly. http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Aide+quits+minister+refuses+resign/3613382/story.html

I frankly don't think it's so big a deal that the Minister need resign, but what would a session of Parliament be without a weekly demand for some minister or another resign.

[msdogfood]

I frankly don't think it's so big a deal that the Minister need resign, but what would a session of Parliament be without a weekly demand for some minister or another resign.

This may be big!!!

[nicky10013]

I frankly don't think it's so big a deal that the Minister need resign, but what would a session of Parliament be without a weekly demand for some minister or another resign.

I don't disagree but it sure highlights the blatant hypocrisy of the government which at the end of the day is probably the main goal. Staffers are protected by the minister to protect them blocking FOI requests, until of course the staffers in question are actually named. Then, it's not the minister's fault.

[RNG]

SSDD

[Shakeyhands]

SSDD

Self Serving Dasterdly Duo?

Edited October 4, 2010 by Shakeyhands

[The_Squid]

I frankly don't think it's so big a deal that the Minister need resign, but what would a session of Parliament be without a weekly demand for some minister or another resign.

When an aide to a Minister commits a criminal act by asserting undue influence to deny Canadians their legal right to know, I think it IS a big deal.

Did the Minister direct him to commit an illegal act? I don't think it is a stretch to think that he was taking direction from his boss. In which case, the Minister also performed, or advised someone to perform, an illegal act. Which is a criminal offence...

Political staff have no authority to order documents censored and can only review material to help prepare the minister for embarrassing disclosures.

The act forbids anyone to "direct, propose, counsel or cause any person" to conceal a record, with a maximum penalty of $10,000 and two years in jail.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/20101001/paradis-aide-101001/

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1204992.html

[nicky10013]

SSDD

Variation on the same old same old. Well, the Liberals did it so what are you complaining despite the fact that the CPC was elected on promising to clean it up. How far we've come. :lol: :lol:

[Shakeyhands]

Variation on the same old same old. Well, the Liberals did it so what are you complaining despite the fact that the CPC was elected on promising to clean it up. How far we've come. :lol: :lol:

Ahhh yes, I see it now. When did the Liberals do anything like that, I certainly don't recall so a refresher may be in order?

[nicky10013]

Ahhh yes, I see it now. When did the Liberals do anything like that, I certainly don't recall so a refresher may be in order?

Nobody is trying to excuse what the Liberals did. CPCers are despite being oh so holier than thou 4 years ago. That's the entire point.

[nicky10013]

Uh Oh. Seems as though this staffer wasn't alone in blocking FOI requests.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-staffer-didnt-work-alone-in-vetting-ati-requests/article1742112/

[Shakeyhands]

No booster club posts this morning?

[Molly]

Variation on the same old same old. Well, the Liberals did it so what are you complaining despite the fact that the CPC was elected on promising to clean it up. How far we've come. :lol: :lol:

Honestly, Nicky... when?

Certainly access to information legislation has been necessary simply because no administration likes to have folks sniffing through the laundry basket, and many politicians have found compliance deadly uncomfortable (and dragged their feet as hard as the law would allow)... but when did the Liberals approach this kind of obsessive (mendacious) drive to suppress information?

This is one for which I don't believe the Tory whine that 'The Liberals did it first.' That's a disgracefully poor excuse even when it's true... but on this issue, I don't think it is.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Molly

[capricorn]

Paradis has to go. If he is allowed to remain as Minister it will be a signal to others that our ATI laws are really not that important. ATI is more than important, it is the law. A well functioning ATI Act is essential to keeping tabs on what goes on behind the scenes of government operations.

Having any politician slough off our ATI laws as minor inconveniences that can be blocked at the first whiff of trouble is nothing short of contempt.

Just because the Liberals are hypocrites for calling for Paradis' head when their own ethics record stinks, doesn't give Paradis any right to continue with the subversion.

His resignation must be tabled.

And accepted.

http://www.ottawasun.com/comment/editorial/2010/10/04/15580296.html

And that goes for the CBC, in a snit because it was made subject to the ATI Act in 2007.

The CBC has refused to release a range of documents including:

** Business and hospitality expenses from the 2007 royal visit

** Records of the handover between former CBC president Robert Rabinovitch and current president Hubert Lacroix;

** Access to Information fees paid in 2007-2008;

** The contest to choose the new Hockey Night in Canada theme song.

---

"CBC information is not government information," said Lesperance

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/MediaNews/2010/09/13/15338231.html

One billion dollars a year in taxpayer funds to keep the CBC afloat says that CBC information is government information.

[Shakeyhands]

Paradis has to go. If he is allowed to remain as Minister it will be a signal to others that our ATI laws are really not that important. ATI is more than important, it is the law. A well functioning ATI Act is essential to keeping tabs on what goes on behind the scenes of government operations.

http://www.ottawasun.com/comment/editorial/2010/10/04/15580296.html

And that goes for the CBC, in a snit because it was made subject to the ATI Act in 2007.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/MediaNews/2010/09/13/15338231.html

One billion dollars a year in taxpayer funds to keep the CBC afloat says that CBC information is government information.

Start a CBC thread then.

[nicky10013]

Honestly, Nicky... when?

Certainly access to information legislation has been necessary simply because no administration likes to have folks sniffing through the laundry basket, and many politicians have found compliance deadly uncomfortable (and dragged their feet as hard as the law would allow)... but when did the Liberals approach this kind of obsessive (mendacious) drive to suppress information?

This is one for which I don't believe the Tory whine that 'The Liberals did it first.' That's a disgracefully poor excuse even when it's true... but on this issue, I don't think it is.

Supressing information in this matter, I don't believe they did it to this degree either. I was just paraphrasing what SSDD really meant.