RCMP to probe $50 million G8 legacy fund, after scathing auditor’

[Shwa]

From the Star

RCMP to probe $50 million G8 legacy fund, after scathing auditor’s report

OTTAWA—The RCMP is looking into allegations that the Harper government misappropriated funds in order to lavish $50 million on a cabinet minister’s riding prior to last year’s G8 summit.

The probe comes on the heels of an auditor general’s report earlier this month, which concluded the government “did not clearly or transparently” explain how the money was going to be spent when it sought Parliament’s approval for a G8 legacy fund for Tony Clement’s riding.

Although the opening paragraphs and headline make it sound much worse than it is. Apparently the losing Liberal candidate has asked for a review of the funding allocation.

The Mounties’ involvement was prompted by a complaint from former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings. She was interviewed for an hour last week by three RCMP officers.

[Topaz]

As a taxpayers, wouldn't you want to know the whole truth before deciding? The auditor did say they hadn't seen anything like the way it was handled by the government before, so we'll wait and see.

[GostHacked]

Kind of peanuts compares to the 1 billion it cost for the goons to protect the crooks.

[scribblet]

It wasn't a billion, it was 630 million, too much for even two summits I agree. However, the RCMP is only considering this as they are obligated to assess a complaint, so far the decision has not been made to do so.

Don't forget, these allegations where made by a Liberal MP and considering the AG said there does not seem to be any illegality here, one wonders why the RCMP would bother going ahead with. (if they do).

[Shwa]

It wasn't a billion, it was 630 million, too much for even two summits I agree. However, the RCMP is only considering this as they are obligated to assess a complaint, so far the decision has not been made to do so.

Don't forget, these allegations where made by a Liberal MP and considering the AG said there does not seem to be any illegality here, one wonders why the RCMP would bother going ahead with. (if they do).

Sure, I want the AG and Parliament to know what the deal is and that is what the AG reports are for. But the RCMP weren't called in by the AG, they were acting on a complaint from a defeated Liberal candidate in the riding at issue.

The irony of a Liberal candidate complaining about funds being spent in a riding that may have influenced the outcome of an election is, well, humourous. Has this candidate never heard of the pork barrel? Really, it is embarassing for the Liberals on two counts - the ironic and the satiric; the latter in reference to the "leadership" of Bob Rae on this issue.

The other aspect is that I heard about this on the TV news last night and this morning and am wondering how this story even has any traction in the media. Unless it was a slow news day.

[Keepitsimple]

Keep an eye on The Star. The poor saps at this Liberal rag are floundering around in the dark with the implosion of their raison-d'etre. They paid an inordinate amount of attention to the NDP convention, putting a fairly positive spin on things. Being anti-Conservative is in their blood. The RCMP's role is to determine criminality - this is nothing more than an in-house squabble along the lines of the "contempt" issue. The RCMP will soon make a statement but don't expect The Star to give it the same coverage.

John Wiersema, the acting auditor general, said the word “misinformed” was deleted from the final report because auditors found no evidence the government was trying to deliberately mislead Parliament. Rather, he said it appeared the government had been motivated by “expediency.”

As for dropping any reference to possible illegality, Wiersema initially said he’s “not aware of any specific law that was broken.” He later conceded, however, that the matter is not clear and suggested it’s up to politicians, not the auditor general’s office, to determine whether “anything illegal took place.”

“I think the legal profession could have an interesting, long debate about the wording of the Appropriations Act and whether or not this was inside or outside of the Appropriations Act. We chose not to go there.”

[PIK]

Another liberal mouth peice that can't handle losing. And are just going to do whatever it takes to waste money and feed the lawyers ,just to try and make the goverment look bad. It is time for the liberal to coem to their senses and get on with life and rebuilding thioer party.

[Topaz]

The charge against the Tories is they asked money from Bridges and Border fund, which is only meant to be used for that, which is the law, and they used it on G8 area. Unless Harper has changed the border, Muskoka is a long way from the border.

[scribblet]

Still doesn't make it 'illegal', this is just The Liberals not getting that it's these faux scandals were the reason they lost so many seats in the first place.

[eyeball]

The RCMP is looking into allegations that the Harper government misappropriated funds in order to lavish $50 million on a cabinet minister’s riding prior to last year’s G8 summit.

Didn't the government lavish millions on the RCMP too? And with hundreds of millions more coming down the pipe destined for crackin' down and gettin' tough...I mean c'mon, who are these people trying to kid?

[cybercoma]

the AG said there does not seem to be any illegality here

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the AG say that it was courts' job to determine legality, not the AG office?

[cybercoma]

Also, some of you work with ad hominems the way Jackson Pollock works with paint. None of the details of the person bringing forward the complaint have anything to do with the complaint itself. Here is a boiled down version of most of the arguments in this thread:

Allegation: The Conservatives misappropriated funds.

Response: The Conservatives didn't misappropriate funds because the Liberal candidate lost in the election.

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[scribblet]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the AG say that it was courts' job to determine legality, not the AG office?

Did she? Do you have a link to the actual final document where she says that, the final doc. doesn't have the same hyperbole. I thought it went something like this:

" The evidence that we saw suggests that this was done for matters of expediency. We have no evidence to suggest that it was a deliberate attempt to mislead"

[Molly]

Yeah! They didn't bother to hide it at all!

I guess 'brazen' makes 'right'.

[jacee]

The plot thickensIt seems the NDP has unearthed information that Clement set up his own process to select projects for slush funding, one with little paper trail run out of his constituency office.

Will the slush stick to Clement?

Edited August 16, 2011 by jacee

[Shwa]

The plot thickensIt seems the NDP has unearthed information that Clement set up his own process to select projects for slush funding, one with little paper trail run out of his constituency office.

Will the slush stick to Clement?

The devil is in the details innit?

Clement steered G8 funding in riding, documents show

This sort of thing has a familiar, er, stench to it. What could it be, what could it be?

Oh, yeah, now I remember:

Sponsorship scandal

Tens of millions of dollars funnelled into projects without official oversight while the Minister in question sat as the Minister in charge of that department?? Yeah, I am talking about you Tony Clement.

Let's hope Mr. Clement comes out of this spotless since he went through $50 million in about 2 years, while the Sponsorship Scandal was $100 million over 13.

Of course - and I cannot over-emphasize this enough - OF COURSE every Canadian expects the present CPC government to be completely above board and transparent in their rigorous investigation of this issue.

I wonder if John Gomery is available to take a look...

[cybercoma]

I, for one, sure am glad that Canadians are so enamoured with corrupt politicians that we seem to consistently reward them with majority governments.