Environment Minister Prentice to resign

[Topaz]

The minister for the environment is saying goodbye to politics by year end and joining the Bank of Commerce. I've seen him on documentary about the environment and the outdoors, which he loves, and I guess he's had enough with politics. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/101104/canada/canada_us_environment_resignation

[treehugger]

The minister for the environment is saying goodbye to politics by year end and joining the Bank of Commerce. I've seen him on documentary about the environment and the outdoors, which he loves, and I guess he's had enough with politics. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/101104/canada/canada_us_environment_resignation

The media, as usual was trying to make a big deal about Jim's leaving politics.Blaming Harper for something.

[Shakeyhands]

143 to go...

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The media, as usual was trying to make a big deal about Jim's leaving politics.Blaming Harper for something.

I think he will be back, seeking Harpers job. I think he has figured out that the next election will bring change, and he doesn't want to say he went down in defeat.

[Jack Weber]

I think he will be back, seeking Harpers job. I think he has figured out that the next election will bring change, and he doesn't want to say he went down in defeat.

I think you're right...

I think Prentice is one of the few Western Con's that could get alot of votes in Eastern Canada...

[August1991]

I think he will be back, seeking Harpers job. I think he has figured out that the next election will bring change, and he doesn't want to say he went down in defeat.

I somehow doubt it. Prentice reminds me of Frank McKenna, but with a smaller ego.

Politics at that level is a 24 hour job with alot of stress, no security and few tangible rewards. It is very tough on a family. In comparison, a bank job pays well and is relaxing - easy for the family.

For some people, politics is like an addiction and other family members suffer as a result. I think Prentice weighed it out and made his decision.

I must say that being PM (or even a simple MP) is easier than being a cabinet minister. The worst of all is a staffer in the cabinet minister's office. It's a job for single people with dysfunctional lives.

----

I worry that we have reached a stage with modern government where the only people willing to seek or accept these jobs are people who should never have them. It's like a bank that selects its president by lottery, selling lottery tickets at $10 each. The only people foolish enough to buy a ticket are precisely the people that a bank should not have as a president.

IOW, Prentice's decision to retire is unfortunate. He was a good minister. It's sad that he and his family couldn't manage political life anymore.

The media, as usual was trying to make a big deal about Jim's leaving politics.Blaming Harper for something.

I would call that Harper Derangement Syndrome. Some people hate Harper so much that they see him in every issue. If the weather prediction is for rain, they blame Harper for cutting Environment Canada's budget. Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991

[Wilber]

I realize politics is a tough row to hoe but I have a problem with people who ask for my vote then half way through the job say, sorry, got a better offer, see ya. It's a contract, if you don't intend to honor it, don't sign.

[Bryan]

I realize politics is a tough row to hoe but I have a problem with people who ask for my vote then half way through the job say, sorry, got a better offer, see ya. It's a contract, if you don't intend to honor it, don't sign.

I agree. Announce that you won't seek re-election, fine, but quitting mid term shouldn't even be allowed unless it's an emergency.

[August1991]

I realize politics is a tough row to hoe but I have a problem with people who ask for my vote then half way through the job say, sorry, got a better offer, see ya. It's a contract, if you don't intend to honor it, don't sign.

Wait a second, Wilbur. What if Prentice's wife has just been diagnosed with cancer? Would you hold him to the "contract" then?

IOW, there are myriad ways in which conditions change and people change their job. Election to parliament is not servitude.

It seems only fair that if a minister serves at the whim of the PM, and an MP serves at the whim of a riding's voters, then an MP or minister should also serve at their own whim.

------

Your "better offer" phrase deserves comment. I'm not comfortable with all these ex-politicians, ex-senior bureaucrats moving to the so-called private sector. From Ed Clark to Henri-Paul Rousseau, from Frank McKenna to, now, Jim Prentice. Think of Michael Sabia, the son of Laura Sabia.

Prentice says that he spoke to Parliament's Ethic Commissioner (as if the Ethics Commissioner is a Christian God who can judge these things and decide... ).

CIBC is not offering Prentice the job/salary because Jim Prentice has straight teeth and a full head of hair. CIBC is not even doing this because Prentice can appear on TV and sound intelligent. CIBC is doing this because of Prentice's knowledge of government and how it works - and because Prentice is a minor star to trot out in certain meetings.

This is how Canada works, English and French. We talk of Quebec Inc. Maybe we should also talk of Canada Inc.

Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991

[Wilber]

Wait a second, Wilbur. What if Prentice's wife has just been diagnosed with cancer? Would you hold him to the "contract" then?

IOW, there are myriad ways in which conditions change and people change their job. Election to parliament is not servitude.

It seems only fair that if a minister serves at the whim of the PM, and an MP serves at the whim of a riding's voters, then an MP or minister should also serve at their own whim.

------

Does Prentice's wife have cancer? Election to Parliament is not servitude but it is a moral contract with those who sent you there. I've worked contract jobs and if you break them, there are consequences. Prentice was elected an MP first and his contract is with those who elected him, not the PM. The voters cannot fire their MP mid contract.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Wilber

[Wilber]

CIBC is not offering Prentice the job/salary because Jim Prentice has straight teeth and a full head of hair. CIBC is not even doing this because Prentice can appear on TV and sound intelligent. CIBC is doing this because of Prentice's knowledge of government and how it works - and because Prentice is a minor star to trot out in certain meetings.

So you are saying that Prentice is parlaying the voters trust to his own advantage at their expense.

[August1991]

Does Prentice's wife have cancer?

Not that I know. But your idea would require that resigning MPs provide cause for their "breach of contract".

Election to Parliament is not servitude but it is a moral contract with those who sent you there. I've worked contract jobs and if you break them, there are consequences. Prentice was elected an MP first and his contract is with those who elected him, not the PM. The voters cannot fire their MP mid contract.

If you break a contract, you can be sued. Well, let's sue Prentice. Where? How?

You say "moral contract". IOW, it is in the court of public opinion that we can sue Prentice for breach and seek damages.

If Prentice decides in 10 years to seek re-election, I suspect that the court of public opinion will absolve him of all guilt and responsibility.

I don't know anything about Prentice's personal situation. Maybe he wants to get back into politics but he wants to have a personal warchest/financial independence before he does. For example, Paul Desmarais made Paul Martin Jnr a very wealthy man so that Martin could get involved in politics without fear for his family's well being. Charles Trudeau made his son and grandson wealthy, or wealthy enough to live well without having to work. Maybe Prentice wants the same security for his family - children and grandchildren.

----

To return to your point about a contract, Wilbur, I just don't see it your way. IMV, someone elected to parliament is our representative. They should be free to quit, change parties or vote as they see right - subject of course to re-election.

It is for voters to select a good MP in the first place.

Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991

[August1991]

So you are saying that Prentice is parlaying the voters trust to his own advantage at their expense.

Yeah, I guess that I am saying that.

But I don't blame Prentice for this situation. To blame Prentice for this would be like blaming the car drivers in front of you for a traffic jam on the expressway at 5 pm.

Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991

[Wilber]

Not that I know. But your idea would require that resigning MPs provide cause for their "breach of contract".

Yes it should.

If Prentice decides in 10 years to seek re-election, I suspect that the court of public opinion will absolve him of all guilt and responsibility.

Not me. He bailed once, he'll bail again. I would never trust anyone who broke a contract with me. If he didn't intend to honour his mandate, I would never have voted for him in the first place.

To return to your point about a contract, Wilbur, I just don't see it your way. IMV, someone elected to parliament is our representative. They should be free to quit, change parties or vote as they see right - subject of course to re-election.

He's not asking to be re-elected, just quiting for greener pastures.

[Wilber]

Yeah, I guess that I am saying that.

But I don't blame Prentice for this situation. To blame Prentice for this would be like blaming the car drivers in front of you for a traffic jam on the expressway at 5 pm.

Got me there. How so? He can always go back to being a back bencher, the job he was elected to in the first place.

[August1991]

Not me. He bailed once, he'll bail again. I would never trust anyone who broke a contract with me. If he didn't intend to honour his mandate, I would never have voted for him in the first place.

Fine. Don't vote for him.

John Turner quit, then came back and became Liberal leader and PM. He wasn't re-elected. (You win.)

Stephen Harper quit, then came back and became Conservative leader and was elected. Twice. (You lose.)

Thomas Mulcair quit, then came back, changed parties, changed parliament/jurisdiction and was elected. (You lose, I think.)

I could go on, and on. And Wilber, what do you think of Richard Nixon's phrase: "I am not a quitter."

He's not asking to be re-elected, just quiting for greener pastures.

Greener pastures? Greener pastures would be Microsoft hiring Jim Prentice because of his natural talents as a manager of software engineers.

That's not what happened.

It's worse, Wilbur. CIBC is hiring Prentice because of his political career. Private Canadian banks/businesses select their senior managers according to their success in Canadian government/bureaucracy. Such is Canada in the 21st century.

Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991

[Wilber]

I'm not debating history, just giving my opinion of elected officials who quit in midstream because they are offered another job.

I don't respect them and would never vote for them again. Sarah Palin is a prime example. She asked the people of Alaska to make her Governor and they did. Half way through her mandate, Fox News made a better offer and it was AMF Alaska. I don't respect that.

I know why Prentice was hired.

[August1991]

I'm not debating history, just giving my opinion of elected officials who quit in midstream because they are offered another job.

I don't respect them and would never vote for them again.

Fine, your call. But as I said, you might be condemning Prentice for a decision that concerns his personal life. (True. If he entered politics, then he has given up any privacy. His private life is now public and if changes in this private life has motivated his decision to retire, then he should make it public.) (Does that make sense?)

----

Never vote for them again?

Wilber, I'd bet money now that if Prentice returns to politics (I think he won't), and becomes a federal Conservative leader, you'd vote for his party.

----

My quibble with Prentice is not his resignation in mid-mandate but a system where politicians/bureaucrats can easily make a short public career and then go for the big bucks in the "private" sector.

If Prentice had fulfilled his mandate and at the next election, he had decided to leave public office and accept a job at the CIBC, you Wilber would be happy because he "respected the contract".

I would be appalled that it is so easy for a federal minister to move to a Bay Street job.

[Wilber]

Fine, your call. But as I said, you might be condemning Prentice for a decision that concerns his personal life. (True. If he entered politics, then he has given up any privacy. His private life is now public and if changes in this private life has motivated his decision to retire, then he should make it public.) (Does that make sense?)

Yes he should. I don't expect elected officials to sacrifice their families to their public lives.

Never vote for them again?

Wilber, I'd bet money now that if Prentice returns to politics (I think he won't), and becomes a federal Conservative leader, you'd vote for his party.

Don't count on it, I am not a dyed in the wool Conservative.

My quibble with Prentice is not his resignation in mid-mandate but a system where politicians/bureaucrats can easily make a short public career and then go for the big bucks in the "private" sector.

I have no issue with them making big bucks in the private sector as long as they fulfill their obligations to those who elected them.

If Prentice had fulfilled his mandate and at the next election, he had decided to leave public office and accept a job at the CIBC, you Wilber would be happy because he "respected the contract".

Not necessarily happy but satisfied he had fulfilled the obligation he had to the people who voted for him.

I would be appalled that it is so easy for a federal minister to move to a Bay Street job.

Everyone has to make a living and lets face it, none of us would omit something from our resume that would help us get a better job.

[Smallc]

I really don't see the problem. We seem to try to hold politicians to a much higher standard than we hold ourselves and our fellow citizens. We criticize them from every direction at every opportunity...and we expect them to like it. People take better positions all of the time. They aren't married to the job. There will be a by election, and Prentice will be replaced. Until then, the people of the riding will receive representation from Gordon O'Connor. It's really not that big an issue.

[Wilber]

I really don't see the problem. We seem to try to hold politicians to a much higher standard than we hold ourselves and our fellow citizens. We criticize them from every direction at every opportunity...and we expect them to like it. People take better positions all of the time. They aren't married to the job. There will be a by election, and Prentice will be replaced. Until then, the people of the riding will receive representation from Gordon O'Connor. It's really not that big an issue.

It's not a practical problem, it's a matter of honouring an obligation you asked to take on.

[Evening Star]

He honoured the obligation for the couple of years that he was paid to do so. Now the constituents get to vote for someone else to represent them. I'm not a CPC or Prentice fan at all but I don't see the issue here. Quite agree with Smallc.

[Smallc]

It's not a practical problem, it's a matter of honouring an obligation you asked to take on.

Do you mean to tell me that if tomorrow you got offered a job, one that you really wanted (after having another that you loved taken away from you) that paid ten time the salary, that you wouldn't break your "obligation" to your employer? Like I said, they aren't married to the job. They can leave any time, just like I left my last permanent job in February. Someone who can put up with the boss that went through 5 underlings before you in the last two years (sorry, off topic) will replace them.

[Smallc]

He honoured the obligation for the couple of years that he was paid to do so.

Add to that the fact that this is a minority parliament, as well as the fact that in Canada we don't have set terms, and it becomes even harder to criticize (at least in my view).

[August1991]

Everyone has to make a living and lets face it, none of us would omit something from our resume that would help us get a better job.

I guess that we choose the greater sin.

I fear a society where private organizations select their managers depending on public whim. I am willing to let a lottery choose State leaders, but not private managers.

Moreover, I deplore a society where private organizations hire politicians/bureaucrats as managers. Prentice, McKenna and too many others have set a terrible incentive.

If you want to be rich, first go into politics/bureaucracy. And then go into private business.

----

We have Canada Inc, a Canadian nomenklatura. To enter it, an ambitious young man should go into politics/bureaucracy first, and then move to the so-called "private" sector.

Jim Prentice and Frank McKenna both did this.

Edited November 5, 2010 by August1991