AG Draft Report: G8 Funding Lacked Transparency

[guyser]

Seeing all the money they spent in and around Huntsville and wondering why , I am not entirely surprised in Sheila Fraser's report.

Seems Tony "I saved a drowning girl" and Clod the Mayor of Huntsville were doing some spending!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/972725--tories-misinformed-parliament-on-g8-fund-auditor-general?bn=1

[ToadBrother]

Auditor's draft report alleges Tories misspent G8 funds

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-ag-report.html

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20110411/ag-says-tories-misinformed-parliament-on-g8-fund-110411/20110411?s_name=election2011

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/04/11/tories-misled-parliament-to-get-g20-funding-auditor-generals-report/

Edited April 11, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Harry]

Could this turn out to be the game-changer?

[William Ashley]

Auditor's draft report alleges Tories misspent G8 funds

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/11/cv-election-ag-report.html

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20110411/ag-says-tories-misinformed-parliament-on-g8-fund-110411/20110411?s_name=election2011

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/04/11/tories-misled-parliament-to-get-g20-funding-auditor-generals-report/

Sooner is better than never.

Your tone almost insinuates that you want illegal government embezzlements to be "covered up" and unknown.

Sounds scummy to me, you must be conservative. I can picture you now with little mini Fraser effigy dolls on a Barbie sized guillotine, and a big poster of Stevo on your wall for your guilty pleasures.

Edited April 11, 2011 by William Ashley

[ToadBrother]

Could this turn out to be the game-changer?

That depends on what you mean by "game changer". Will the Liberals be propelled to the top spot? I doubt it. Will it play into the ethical and transparency issues, and in general, the contempt for Parliament that the Tories have shown, yes, I think it will. I think it will likely deprive them of any chance at even a slim majority, and probably pave the way for them to lose government entire when Parliament returns.

[ToadBrother]

Sooner is better than never.

Your tone almost insinuates that you want illegal government embezzlements to be "covered up" and unknown.

Sounds scummy to me, you must be conservative.

William, do you even bother reading my posts? I've spent the better part of the two and half years I've been posting here railing against the Tories' general disdain for Parliament.

The point of the thread title was that I can't think of a worse time than an election for something like this to get leaked, and even worse, when that election was in fact triggered by other accusations of trying to mislead Parliament. This is a substantial amount of ammunition in the Oppositions' guns. If I was a strategist for one of the Opposition parties, I'd be turning on the "ethical and contempt" attacks big time.

Edited April 11, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Harry]

Harper may keep well hidden today.

[ToadBrother]

Harper may keep well hidden today.

If I was Harper's handlers, I'd be more worried about the debates. The AG's draft report just handed the Opposition leaders a bazooka and they're going to spend the evening firing shots at him.

[William Ashley]

William, do you even bother reading my posts?

I read them.

I've spent the better part of the two and half years I've been posting here railing against the Tories' general disdain for Parliament.

The point of the thread title was that I can't think of a worse time than an election for something like this to get leaked,

Sarcasm?

and even worse, when that election was in fact triggered by other accusations of trying to mislead Parliament. This is a substantial amount of ammunition in the Oppositions' guns. If I was a strategist for one of the Opposition parties, I'd be turning on the "ethical and contempt" attacks big time.

If this isn't sarcasm I don't understand your logic. You have to confirm a leak is real to safely rail against it. But the 'g' issue is nothing new, the whole thing was nonsense, if illegal process can be added to the thing then it is a little more authentic. I think though that the whole thing was vastly overkilled over budgetted and poorly located. Have you heard a world leader who showed up say something like, well that was the best g8 or g20 I've ever been too, I thought the NAZI's lost WWII, I never thought I'd get to go to a NAZI amusement park, and this while discusing how to save money - wow 1/250th of their budget spent to beat up peaceful protestors and let people torch cop cars? Canada is clearly a standalone country, you can't get theatre like this in _____ insert country name here ____.

No not one leader is seen saying, it was pleasant. Fact is ---- all Canadians have from it is a tarnished legacy of police abuse, illegal spending, and civil rights violations.... and what exactly did the meeting accomplish other than belittling "the real Canadian" for Harper and his fellow Elitists.

1 Billion dollars is a WHOLE lot of money, and this 50 million is just a drop in the bucket from an otherwise very undemocratic and police state operation. (Both the olympics and G20, used an american security company ---- (perhaps a hidden CIA/SS outfit) along side the masses of police.) It was clearly a funnel to "the militant right" in police, security and other para-military in Canada.

But if this hadn't leaked, it might never be seen in the case of a Tory majority.

Edited April 11, 2011 by William Ashley

[capricorn]

Ignatieff and Layton will be addressing reporters shortly on the portion of the AG's draft report, which is dated January 13, 2011, a copy of which was obtained by the Canadian Press.

What I want to know from the Conservatives is whether the official report, which was to be tabled in Parliament earlier this month, is worded the same as the January draft. If the official version, which has yet to be made public, contains different information and what are those differences.

If Harper doesn't come clean ASAP on this, the opposition will hammer him on this development in the debates, and rightly so.

As for timing, I would say it's very good for the opposition, no?

[Scotty]

If I was Harper's handlers, I'd be more worried about the debates. The AG's draft report just handed the Opposition leaders a bazooka and they're going to spend the evening firing shots at him.

You think so? My response is a big old yawn. And I'm hardly a lifelong Tory loyalist. Now if the allegation was that the money had gone into the pockets of friends of Clements, or some other sign the Tories were secretly profiting campaign donors I'd be more concerned. But look, right in the story it says:

In June, the Conservatives defended the use of the G8 Legacy Fund, admitting some of the money was going to projects unrelated to the summit.

"A limited number of projects (are) designed in the legacy to say, ‘Listen, the folks in this region are going to endure a heck of a lot of security, a heck of a lot of challenges during that G8 summit, and just as a thank you we're supporting some public infrastructure projects,'" said Transport Minister John Baird.

So what exactly is the shock value here? The money was spent on infrastructure. It could as easily have come from their big infrastructure incentive spending program but (shrug) it came from this instead. It's all the same wallet anyway.

[ToadBrother]

Ignatieff and Layton will be addressing reporters shortly on the portion of the AG's draft report, which is dated January 13, 2011, a copy of which was obtained by the Canadian Press.

What I want to know from the Conservatives is whether the official report, which was to be tabled in Parliament earlier this month, is worded the same as the January draft. If the official version, which has yet to be made public, contains different information and what are those differences.

If Harper doesn't come clean ASAP on this, the opposition will hammer him on this development in the debates, and rightly so.

Well, there's the rub. If the final report is better than the draft, then yes, absolutely he should release it. If it's the same or worse, then, strategically, no, it would be madness. But that's where the problem arises. If the final report doesn't get released, then not only does the Opposition have the contents of the draft as ammunition, they also have the fact that the Tories are sitting on it.

Since we're talking about Fraser here, I think it's unlikely that the final report is going to be any better for the Tories. The draft is from January, so it's not like the final report is likely to differ in any great degree. But without seeing it, we would never know, and by sitting on it, people will inevitably assume the worst. I think it's going to ultimately kill any chance of a majority government for the Tories. Not only was the G8 viewed as wasteful, which would anger a lot of social conservative types, but it indicates the extent of the ethical problems the Tories have been demonstrating since 2008. It doesn't get much worse than this, I think.

As for timing, I would say it's very good for the opposition, no?

Christmas came early for the Libs, NDP and Bloc. I'm wondering how much damage it will do to the Tories in Quebec.

[ToadBrother]

You think so? My response is a big old yawn. And I'm hardly a lifelong Tory loyalist. Now if the allegation was that the money had gone into the pockets of friends of Clements, or some other sign the Tories were secretly profiting campaign donors I'd be more concerned. But look, right in the story it says:

In June, the Conservatives defended the use of the G8 Legacy Fund, admitting some of the money was going to projects unrelated to the summit.

"A limited number of projects (are) designed in the legacy to say, ‘Listen, the folks in this region are going to endure a heck of a lot of security, a heck of a lot of challenges during that G8 summit, and just as a thank you we're supporting some public infrastructure projects,'" said Transport Minister John Baird.

So what exactly is the shock value here? The money was spent on infrastructure. It could as easily have come from their big infrastructure incentive spending program but (shrug) it came from this instead. It's all the same wallet anyway.

Ah yes, the classic defense of Tory ill behavior. "Yeah, no big deal. Lying, misdirecting, it's all alright."

I think you'll find that a fair bunch of fence-sitting voters will view it differently. How many times can you use the "yawn" argument to justify the Tory's ill behavior?

Edited April 11, 2011 by ToadBrother

[guyser]

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18551

[eyeball]

As for timing, I would say it's very good for the opposition, no?

Even better for democracy.

[ToadBrother]

Even better for democracy.

It certainly means we get to experience more minority government, and quite possibly a dreaded coalition of some kind.

[eyeball]

Quite hopefully a coalition.

[ToadBrother]

Quite hopefully a coalition.

I think post-May 2 has got a lot more interesting than pre-May 2, to be honest with you. The Tories are going to have three weeks or so to figure out how to stay in power, and the only way I can see for them to do it is to wave a lot of carrots in front of the NDP. If not a formal coalition, then at least giving a good deal of ground to Layton. Otherwise, they're toast. Even if they somehow manage a slim majority of a few seats (which I think this draft report leak pretty much precludes), the Tories will basically have to live in the House when Parliament is sitting, and no one will be allowed to get sick or die during critical votes.

Edited April 11, 2011 by ToadBrother

[noahbody]

I think it's good for Layton as he can lump the liberals and conservatives together. Whenever the liberals attempt to position themselves as an ethical alternative I roll my eyes.

[eyeball]

I think post-May 2 has got a lot more interesting than pre-May 2, to be honest with you. The Tories are going to have three weeks or so to figure out how to stay in power, and the only way I can see for them to do it is to wave a lot of carrots in from the NDP. If not a formal coalition, then at least giving a good deal of ground to Layton. Otherwise, they're toast. Even if they somehow manage a slim majority of a few seats (which I think this draft report leak pretty much precludes), the Tories will basically have to live in the House when Parliament is sitting, and no one will be allowed to get sick or die during critical votes.

Democracy is probably bound to get more interesting too. It seem to me that the idea of a coalition causes the same sort of fear that PR does, often amongst the same people. I half expect some sort of multi-partisan counter-coalition of anti-coalition partners to develop now.

[capricorn]

Well, there's the rub. If the final report is better than the draft, then yes, absolutely he should release it.

Parliament is not sitting. By what mechanism in our system can Harper release a report addressed to Parliament outside Parliament? And it's out of the question for Fraser to release it. I bet she's keenly interested in knowing how a draft report could be released from her office, especially during an election.

The draft is from January, so it's not like the final report is likely to differ in any great degree. But without seeing it, we would never know, and by sitting on it, people will inevitably assume the worst.

From early on there was plenty of public venting over the G8/G20 spending. My question is whether there is enough new information in the AG's report to rile the public enough to catapult the Liberals to the front. I'm not belittling the fact that the opposition must milk this to the hilt; that's what they must do and forcefully.

I think it's going to ultimately kill any chance of a majority government for the Tories.

Maybe. The next 24 hours should tell the story.

[ToadBrother]

Parliament is not sitting. By what mechanism in our system can Harper release a report addressed to Parliament outside Parliament? And it's out of the question for Fraser to release it. I bet she's keenly interested in knowing how a draft report could be released from her office, especially during an election.

If the draft can be leaked, the final report can be leaked too. The fact is that I doubt the final report is going to be substantially different than the draft.

From early on there was plenty of public venting over the G8/G20 spending. My question is whether there is enough new information in the AG's report to rile the public enough to catapult the Liberals to the front. I'm not belittling the fact that the opposition must milk this to the hilt; that's what they must do and forcefully.

Hard to say. Like I said, I can't imagine it propelling the Liberals past the Tories. I think it has sufficient explosive force to rob the Tories of critical swing ridings, and it was these ridings that the Tories had their best chance of gaining a majority of any kind from.

[eyeball]

Predictably, calls for the head of the hero who leaked the report are crying out.

Mushrooms who lament the light and crave the old familiar stench over that of fresh air I guess.

[Tilter]

Seeing all the money they spent in and around Huntsville and wondering why , I am not entirely surprised in Sheila Fraser's report.

Seems Tony "I saved a drowning girl" and Clod the Mayor of Huntsville were doing some spending!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/972725--tories-misinformed-parliament-on-g8-fund-auditor-general?bn=1

well this is certainly a First---- Imagine an Anti-CPC item in the torstar--- what will we see next? perhaps a Pro Iggy slant to all their political items???

[Harry]

Duceppe scored today demanding Harper release the report.