cybercoma Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Parliamentary Budget Officer alleges that the CPC are not providing him with all of the information that he needs to do his job. Tonight on Power & Politics, Andrew Saxton claimed that the CPC has given the PBO all the information that the Conservatives feel he needs to do his job. Is the Conservative government being transparent? They created the role of the Parliamentary Budget Officer and it appears that they are contravening their own law. The legislation states the PBO is entitled to "free and timely access to any information" that he needs. Those are the words as written in the legislation. It seems that PBO Kevin Page is supported by at least one legal expert in his quest for more information on the cuts contained in C-38. Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page released a legal opinion Monday by a prominent constitutional lawyer that concluded Canada’s top bureaucrat and the deputy ministers of 64 departments are breaching the Parliament of Canada Act by refusing to release information on the spending cuts, including their impact on jobs and service levels to Canadians.Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Legal+expert+backs+parliamentary+budget+officer+fight+data+cuts/6799433/story.html#ixzz1yCBzm8EK Are the Conservatives trying to muzzle the watchdog that they instituted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Contempt of Parliament Round 2. Crooks who get away with a crime once, always repeat it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch 27 Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Check your fackts leftist... Check you facts.... Contempt of Parliament Round 2. Crooks who get away with a crime once, always repeat it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) If Mr Page took his “case” to court, it would be laughed out under the following exceptions added to the Act that created his office: Parliament of Canada Act 79.3 (1) Except as provided by any other Act of Parliament that expressly refers to this subsection, the Parliamentary Budget Officer is entitled, by request made to the deputy head of a department within the meaning of any of paragraphs (a), (a.1) and (d) of the definition “department” in section 2 of the Financial Administration Act, or to any other person designated by that deputy head for the purpose of this section, to free and timely access to any financial or economic data in the possession of the department that are required for the performance of his or her mandate.Exception (2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of any financial or economic data (a) that are information the disclosure of which is restricted under section 19 of the Access to Information Act or any provision set out in Schedule II to that Act; or (B ) that are contained in a confidence of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada described in subsection 69(1) of that Act, unless the data are also contained in any other record, within the meaning of section 3 of that Act, and are not information referred to in paragraph (a). Edited June 19, 2012 by Derek L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Check your fackts leftist... Check you facts.... What part of contempt of parliament round 2 did you not understand.Factual Finding. Round 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 What part of contempt of parliament round 2 did you not understand. Factual Finding. Round 1 Care to point to the associated law(s) that you’ll build your “case” around? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Care to point to the associated law(s) that you’ll build your “case” around? If YOU were an MP and if you didn't have all the info. on the budget and the cost to the cuts and other info. to help you do your job, would you ask for that info. or would you just vote to pass it? In other words, if you don't know what you are voting on, how could you do your job as MP? I believe that if we had electonic voting in the House and the leaders didn't know how MP's voted, Harper wouldn't get the budget passed. There are A/T's who don't like this budget bill and it may cost them thir seats in 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Care to point to the associated law(s) that you’ll build your “case” around? Contempt of Parliament is defined as the act of blocking the House or any Member of Parliament from performing their duties. Lying to a committee or House of Parliament Refusing to testify before a committee or produce documents necessary to an investigation Influencing a Member of Parliament (MP) through means such as bribery and threats. Which is clearly the case here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 If YOU were an MP and if you didn't have all the info. on the budget and the cost to the cuts and other info. to help you do your job, would you ask for that info. or would you just vote to pass it? In other words, if you don't know what you are voting on, how could you do your job as MP? I believe that if we had electonic voting in the House and the leaders didn't know how MP's voted, Harper wouldn't get the budget passed. There are A/T's who don't like this budget bill and it may cost them thir seats in 2015. But none of your statement suggests the Conservatives are “breaking the law”……….If as stated by the top Privy Counsel clerk, the release of said requested information would breech collective agreements with unions representing federal workers that are about to get the chop……………If the Tories released said information, then the headlines would read “Tories release personal information of union members prior to laying them off”……Or something to that effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Contempt of Parliament is defined as the act of blocking the House or any Member of Parliament from performing their duties. Lying to a committee or House of Parliament Refusing to testify before a committee or produce documents necessary to an investigation Influencing a Member of Parliament (MP) through means such as bribery and threats. Which is clearly the case here. You have not a clue of what you speak, unless you can refute the above exception to the amendment made to the Parliament of Canada act that I’ve quoted above………Do you have any game or are you just a troll? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 If Mr Page took his “case” to court, it would be laughed out under the following exceptions added to the Act that created his office: Parliament of Canada Act The problem here is that youre trying to get the Harper government off by painting them as extremely stupid. Who on earth would create a "budget officer" that was supposed to have access to financial information? Roofus the stunt-bum? If they arent gonna let the guy do his job, then for god sakes shut the fluffy ass position down and stop wasting money on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 The problem here is that youre trying to get the Harper government off by painting them as extremely stupid. Who on earth would create a "budget officer" that was supposed to have access to financial information? Roofus the stunt-bum? If they arent gonna let the guy do his job, then for god sakes shut the fluffy ass position down and stop wasting money on it. I’d expect more from you dre………The mandate of the PBO is to conduct analyse of finances/data released to the Senate and House finance committees by the Privy Council………Not to formulate or shape public policy……….. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 You have not a clue of what you speak, unless you can refute the above exception to the amendment made to the Parliament of Canada act that I’ve quoted above………Do you have any game or are you just a troll? Pfft...I'll take the word of noted legal professionals over your arrogant claims that there was no laws broken. "The information is financial or economic data, in the possession of department heads, necessary for discharging the PBO's mandate, and not subject to any of the statutory exemptions listed," Page writes in the cover letter to Privy Council Clerk Wayne Wouters."Both your department and the other departments that have not complied are in violation of their legal obligations under the [Parliament of Canada Act]." The legal opinion was prepared by Joseph Magnet, a lawyer and professor at the University of Ottawa, and Tolga Yalkin, senior financial adviser to Page and also a professor at the U of O. Magnet and Yalkin write that since the information Page requested falls within his mandate and isn't subject to exemptions for personal information or cabinet confidence, the deputy heads of the departments "are required to comply with the PBO's request." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 But none of your statement suggests the Conservatives are “breaking the law”……….If as stated by the top Privy Counsel clerk, the release of said requested information would breech collective agreements with unions representing federal workers that are about to get the chop……………If the Tories released said information, then the headlines would read “Tories release personal information of union members prior to laying them off”……Or something to that effect. This is the red-herring talking point that the Conservatives have been using. There is no personally identifiable information that is being requested nor is it necessary to answer the questions the PBO asked. They can say generally that 21000 public service positions will be cut without providing personal information about whom will be losing their jobs. But what I want to know is why even have a PBO if you're not going to give him the information he needs to do his job? Why make these things his mandate, if you can't provide the information he needs to accomplish it? If the PBO can't find out about the nature of the cuts and the fiscal plans of the government, then how the hell do the MPs decide upon it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Pfft... I'll take the word of noted legal professionals over your arrogant claims that there was no laws broken. That’s exactly what I’ve been saying…….no laws broken……..As demonstrated by the very exception , highlighted and provided by myself, to the Act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 This is the red-herring talking point that the Conservatives have been using. There is no personally identifiable information that is being requested nor is it necessary to answer the questions the PBO asked. They can say generally that 21000 public service positions will be cut without providing personal information about whom will be losing their jobs. But what I want to know is why even have a PBO if you're not going to give him the information he needs to do his job? Why make these things his mandate, if you can't provide the information he needs to accomplish it? If the PBO can't find out about the nature of the cuts and the fiscal plans of the government, then how the hell do the MPs decide upon it? It's not his mandate though: Parliament of Canada Act 79.2 The mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer is to(a) provide independent analysis to the Senate and to the House of Commons about the state of the nation’s finances, the estimates of the government and trends in the national economy; (b ) when requested to do so by any of the following committees, undertake research for that committee into the nation’s finances and economy: (i) the Standing Committee on National Finance of the Senate or, in the event that there is not a Standing Committee on National Finance, the appropriate committee of the Senate, (ii) the Standing Committee on Finance of the House of Commons or, in the event that there is not a Standing Committee on Finance, the appropriate committee of the House of Commons, or (iii) the Standing Committee on Public Accounts of the House of Commons or, in the event that there is not a Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the appropriate committee of the House of Commons; © when requested to do so by a committee of the Senate or of the House of Commons, or a committee of both Houses, that is mandated to consider the estimates of the government, undertake research for that committee into those estimates; and (d) when requested to do so by a member of either House or by a committee of the Senate or of the House of Commons, or a committee of both Houses, estimate the financial cost of any proposal that relates to a matter over which Parliament has jurisdiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 That’s exactly what I’ve been saying…….no laws broken……..As demonstrated by the very exception , highlighted and provided by myself, to the Act. And you're a noted legal expert? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 The mandate of the PBO is to conduct analyse of finances/data released to the Senate and House finance committees by the Privy Council………Not to formulate or shape public policy……….. I've wondered how come Page has so much face time on political shows like Power Play and, Power and Politics. What is he? An officer of the Library of Parliament or some type of ombudsman on financial/economic issues? As I understand, he doesn't report directly to Parliament. He reports to someone but I looked and can't find who exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 That’s exactly what I’ve been saying…….no laws broken……..As demonstrated by the very exception , highlighted and provided by myself, to the Act. No wonder waldo gets so damn frustrated with you. You say no laws were broken because the information Page requested is subject to exemptions. Legal professionals say "the information Page requested ... isn't subject to exemptions," as quoted above. When it's your opinion against two separate legal professionals, who's opinion do you think is more valid on the matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I've wondered how come Page has so much face time on political shows like Power Play and, Power and Politics. What is he? An officer of the Library of Parliament or some type of ombudsman on financial/economic issues? As I understand, he doesn't report directly to Parliament. He reports to someone but I looked and can't find who exactly. Harper personally appointed him to do this job.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 It's not his mandate though: Parliament of Canada Act You say it's not in his mandate, then quote the exact section that shows that it's in his mandate. This is the federal budget implementation we're talking about here. Seriously, are you just trolling to see how frustrated you can get people right now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 And you're a noted legal expert? Clearly my ability to read the law is greater then yours or the lawyer giving Mr Page advice……That is unless, as mentioned, this is solely a tactic to try the Government in the court of public opinion……Which, if that is the case, I find it unnerving that an appointed official’s agenda bears any weight over that of the elected Government of Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 No wonder waldo gets so damn frustrated with you. You say no laws were broken because the information Page requested is subject to exemptions. Legal professionals say "the information Page requested ... isn't subject to exemptions," as quoted above. When it's your opinion against two separate legal professionals, who's opinion do you think is more valid on the matter? Hey……The very law in question was posted by myself on the previous page……read it, it’s only a couple of sentences……….Have the legal “experts” pointed to the part(s) of the law being broken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Hey……The very law in question was posted by myself on the previous page……read it, it’s only a couple of sentences……….Have the legal “experts” pointed to the part(s) of the law being broken? Yeah. The part where it says the government has to give him the info he requests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 You say it's not in his mandate, then quote the exact section that shows that it's in his mandate. This is the federal budget implementation we're talking about here. Seriously, are you just trolling to see how frustrated you can get people right now? As I’ve quoted, prior to his mandate, there are exceptions……..read them, give it a whirl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.