G8 legacy fund used to buy Clement’s re-election, NDP claims

[mentalfloss]

G8 legacy fund used to buy Clement’s re-election, NDP claims

OTTAWA—The NDP is accusing federal Conservative cabinet minister Tony Clement of using a controversial, $50-million G8 legacy fund to buy re-election.

Municipal documents obtained by the New Democrats show Clement met with local mayors and councillors in the midst of the 2008 election campaign. They discussed how to identify projects that could be eligible for the legacy funding.

Twelve days after that meeting, a local news outlet reported that Clement had posted video endorsements from “local townspeople, mayors and council members” on his campaign website.

“It gave him a major advantage over the other candidates,” New Democrat MP Charlie Angus said in an interview Thursday.

“I think the question has to be asked: Was this a $50 million price of an election?”

Clement, who had barely won his Parry Sound-Muskoka riding by a margin of only 28 votes in 2006, easily won re-election two years later with a whopping margin of almost 11,000 votes.

However, a spokesperson for the minister said Clement — as the minister responsible for northern Ontario’s regional development agency at the time — had a duty to be involved in legacy fund deliberations, including during the election.

“You will note that during the writ period ministers of the Crown retain their said duties and are required to continue to carry those duties out,” Heather Hume said in an email. Hume added the meeting was scheduled several months before the election was called. She noted that the legacy fund did not actually exist at that point and said no funding decisions were made by local officials at that meeting, or any other subsequent meetings.

“The local committee was a non-decision making body. . . All decisions were made by the minister of infrastructure and his officials.”

The fund was supposed to help support the G8 summit, held in Huntsville in June 2010, and to provide a legacy for the region. It was spent on 32 projects throughout the riding, including gazebos, public toilets and other municipal beautification initiatives that were often hours away from the summit site and never seen or used by summit leaders and their entourages.

The auditor general has blasted the Harper government for keeping Parliament in the dark about the legacy fund. The money was taken from another fund that Parliament had approved for relieving congestion at border crossings.

The auditor general has also criticized the government for shutting bureaucrats out of the process and for maintaining no paper trail to explain how or why the projects were selected.

However, hundreds of pages of municipal documents obtained by the NDP through provincial freedom of information legislation, show that federal bureaucrats did in fact participate in local meetings about the legacy fund — including the one held during the 2008 campaign.

The documents also show that municipal officials were told to direct all questions and send funding applications to Clement’s constituency office, not the government. “It’s a complete twisting of the role of government and distribution of funds to make it appear as if this was something that was being given out of the back of Tony’s car as his own personal gift to the riding,” Angus said.

Former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings said the latest revelations strengthen her call for an RCMP investigation into the legacy fund. “They created a completely parallel (funding and project selection) system in order to hide what they did,” she said, and that suggests the government “knowingly and wilfully” broke the law.

Jennings asked the Mounties in mid-April to investigate whether the irregular way in which the legacy fund was set up violated the Appropriations Act and the Financial Administration Act. She was interviewed by three Mounties in June and received notification from the force on Thursday that its “review of the matter is continuing.”

Clement has dismissed the police review as a Liberal “PR stunt.” But Jennings said she’s heartened by the fact that the RCMP is still looking into the affair, four months after her initial complaint.

“It means they’re not treating it like it’s a PR stunt,” she said.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1041629--g8-legacy-fund-used-to-buy-clement-s-re-election-ndp-claims

[William Ashley]

I think that it was crafty, but potentially illegal under the new auditing rules. (so much for transparency and accountability)

You might want to cover this up, it was a clearly misallocated fund, or embezzlement - since the fund was allocated to a specific course of "border security", however it wasn't used for that, as far as I'm aware.

It is illegal.

The upside is that the crooks only have another 4 or so years in office before either the public is dumber or an alternative exists.

Of course if the NDP is so certain where are the charges? People can lay an information for an indictable offence.

Parliamentary Right does not include protections against prosecution for indictable offences.

Although you might try to use some of this.

The bottom line is the Conservatives can pool their votes to support illegal conduct (unless reserve powers of the regent/monarch are used...), or they can throw him out of parliament --- or remove him as a minister of the crown. (note that there is a reason the law says that you can't be both a minister and a MP) however people will just go DUH, what that is how its been done since forever. (not true though - MP's use to leave for the executive councils in Canada and in the UK it was the lords)

None the less I doubt the publics heart will even skip a beat over this because they are use to them being crooks. They stood by NOT Oda, so I don't see why they won't stick by deep pockets Tony. (who is now head of the "Treasury Board"

Parliament doesn't sit again until what the 14?

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/mr126-e.htm

A really nice prison cell and a well cared for bunkmate?

B. Removal From Office

Once a person is elected to the House of Commons, there are no constitutional provisions and few statutory provisions regarding the ousting of the member. Section 23 of the Parliament of Canada Act states that a member who is elected to a provincial legislature automatically loses his or her seat in the Commons, and section 35 provides that a member’s seat will be vacated and the member’s election declared void, in cases where he or she:

1. accepts [/i]any office or commission[, or is concerned or interested in any contract, agreement, service or work, that, by virtue of this Division, renders a person incapable of being elected to, or of sitting or voting in, the House of Commons[/i], or

Although people once again will say, Commons members should be able to be ministers of the crown -- only senators should because they cannot deal with money bills, contracts etc.. etc...

the convention supports corruption commons raises money and says how it is suppose to be spent the ministers should be senators or members of the public made officers should use the funds as it was suppose to be used.

It is corrupt practice, but sadly becoming a pork barreling norm.. the committee members spent 83% of the 50 million on themselves.

Commons legislatures are not meant to be executive officers.

The idea is that they were suppose to leave the commons and become executive officers. They should only be at the bar when called.. they should not hold seats. They get a finacial penalty for being in seating while an officer of the crown. It is also contempt of parliament.

Edited August 19, 2011 by William Ashley

[Topaz]

I think the NDP could be right and besides that I think, that Tony threw some more money to his area in the last election so, why wouldn't any minister get re-elected by buy votes? When they first broke, I watched Tony hide behind Baird with the fear of God on his face from the media who were asking questions. Baird , naturally, took the questions but Tony looked like he wanted to run. On another note, the G20, did the Tories handle it, the same way or did they ignore what Toronto council wanted?

[Oleg Bach]

The Bay Street boys wanted Clement as prime minister at one time...but had to settle for the hockey star wanna be Harper - Clement is connected - better to have a connection than to be some loser out of the loop - The NDP have no Bay Street connections of any value..so they can shut up - I am with the money boys - idealogs need not apply.

[jacee]

The Bay Street boys wanted Clement as prime minister at one time...but had to settle for the hockey star wanna be Harper - Clement is connected - better to have a connection than to be some loser out of the loop - The NDP have no Bay Street connections of any value..so they can shut up - I am with the money boys - idealogs need not apply.

Lapdog to the anti-democracy corrupt money boys Oleg? I thought better of you. You do realize that to them you are entirely dispensable?

Mulroney went down for a lot less money, Chretien for a bit more.

I'm gonna go to Muskoka for my next holiday. I have 32 stops planned to see every one of the $1.5m projects. I'll dress to the nines as I want to look appropriate when I take a $hit in every damn one of those $1.5m toilets!!

And maybe the gazebos too.

Edited August 19, 2011 by jacee

[Oleg Bach]

Lapdog to the anti-democracy corrupt money boys Oleg? I thought better of you. You do realize that to them you are entirely dispensable?

Mulroney went down for a lot less money, Chretien for a bit more.

I'm gonna go to Muskoka for my next holiday. I have 32 stops planned to see every one of the $1.5m projects. I'll dress to the nines as I want to look appropriate when I take a $hit in every damn one of those $1.5m toilets!!

And maybe the gazebos too.

It's one old should have been brother inlaw - who's father trained the likes of Conrad Black...no I am not a lap dog...I just happened to get involved with the wrong people when I was a stupid kid. You can continue to think better of me...I really don't give this guy the time of day any more - simply because there is no profit in knowing him. He is a cheap self centred son of a bitch - but in the long run he is a friend - and just as poor as I - He may move billions - but I still have more power - because as he said "you are in a very powerful postion" - because I have nothing to loose - he has everything to loose and must keep his mouth shut - He is not a bad man - just an accident of birth.

[Oleg Bach]

Never get out of the city much - last year I spent my birthday - on an island...the head of the family was this young economist...who works in Africa - He is true old Canadian establishment...the big dogs have not been around since 1860 - oh the island was wonderful - and I saw no sign of Tony Clement...cos' he's not establishment - nor are his handlers - sure wish the kid would get back from Africa and invite me up -sure could use a healing break again. BUT - I am stuck in this prison and awaiting rescue. G 8 - G 20 - just chumps..sons and bootleggers and opium runners - big deal...how can I respect that.???

[Oleg Bach]

So what are we going to do - give Clement the boot and put that interm NDP leader in his place? Not likely - So what does the NDP have to gain from this great supposed revelation? Clement seems to be doing a good job..let the horse run - better a fast horse than a stubborn mule brainwashed by a long dead Carl Marx.