Guest Peeves Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 (edited) OTTAWA — International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda is leaving politics "under a cloud of disgrace", according to NDP critic Charlie Angus. Simply sour grapes? She paid back the excess spending after all. Hypocrisy? I can think of a Svend Robinson. Was she worse than others? MacKay spent $ 2,904.00 last year (2 nights), on a upgrade to a 5 star hotel rather than the Hilton @ $ 239/ a night where his staffers stayed just minutes away. He cost us $ 16,000 on an airlift on a fishing trip.. Then there's the most honorable Tony Clement with his hand out at the G *.. Maybe they're just picking on women, or minorities? Ya think? Any way I hope she enjoys 'our' money. "Under Bev's guidance, Canada has led a significant initiative to save the lives of mothers, children and newborns in the developing world. Bev has also promoted accountability and effectiveness for Canada's aid programs and has championed high-profile efforts to respond to humanitarian tragedies in Haiti, Pakistan and the Horn of Africa," Harper said in a statement. http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/leaves+office+under+cloud+says+critic/6877004/story.html The fact that she will be getting perhaps as much as a quarter million in pension now might cause a bit of scrutiny on the Pension plans our politicians receive. I understand they (she) will get $ 24.00 for every 1$ she invested in a pension. There is no way in my opinion that A) She deserves that for her work history. There is no way politicians should have a retirement plan that's in my opinion, simply outrageously excessive. Maybe her situation will be high profile enough to bring that to a head. Edited July 3, 2012 by Peeves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 I hope angus enjoys our money also when he is gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 Maybe they're just picking on women, or minorities? Ya think?Yeah, because Mackay and Clement are never criticized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 I give her credit for doing the honourable thing. Bev is entitled to around $52,000 a year under the current formula of the average of an MP's best five years of salary multiplied by three per cent of their total years of service, up to a maximum 75 per cent of their salary. Generally speaking in the outside world, the maximum is 70% and is actuarially reduced if collected early, she won't be collecting early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 Generally speaking in the outside world, the maximum is 70% and is actuarially reduced if collected early, she won't be collecting early. So you're saying that if someone was, say, a teacher, and worked for 8 years (say from age 60 to 68), and then retired, that person would collect 70% of the best 5 years of salary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 MP's should only get $1000.00 per year for timed serviced. After all, many of them have a business or other ways of making money. I wonder if they only want to be a MP for the benefits, especially the pensions.They should wait until they are 67 to get their pesnions like most of us have to. Now with the more MP's going to be elected, how much is going to cost the taxpayers and what do we get back in return? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 3, 2012 Report Share Posted July 3, 2012 (edited) leaving politics is usually code for "getting a patronage appointment" ambassadorial, senate or some other lucrative position...and she'll say it was a personal decision about wanting to return to private life or some crap like that...more likely a face saving move so Harper doesn't have to fire her, a constructive dismissal I think it's called... Edited July 3, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 (edited) leaving politics is usually code for "getting a patronage appointment" ambassadorial, senate or some other lucrative position...and she'll say it was a personal decision about wanting to return to private life or some crap like that...more likely a face saving move so Harper doesn't have to fire her, a constructive dismissal I think it's called... I'm telling you. Harper is not stupid enough to appoint her to anything. She's a pox on the party and any appointment will be political suicide. Actually, let me back that up. If he is stupid enough to appoint her to anything, it will be such a banal, unseen position that only political junkies will know about it. He's not putting her in the Senate. Edited July 4, 2012 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I'm telling you. Harper is not stupid enough to appoint her to anything. She's a pox on the party and any appointment will be political suicide. there will be some time allowed to go bye and when the media has forgotten her a nice juicy appointment will fall in her lap...6 figure salary and a huge pension... Actually, let me back that up. If he is stupid enough to appoint her to anything, it will be such a banal, unseen position that only political junkies will know about it. He's not putting her in the Senate.what about the conservative senators Smith and Manning who resigned their Senate seats to run in the 2011 election then regained their senate seats when they lost... ..there is no level too low for Harper... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I hope angus enjoys our money also when he is gone. Not as much as Harper will! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I'm telling you. Harper is not stupid enough to appoint her to anything. Was she not a cabinet minister? Who gave her that?Are you saying it was not Harper? I have to agree with wyly on this one.After the dust settles,Oda will be getting something from someone,directly or indirectly. She must be because she would not leave the house if she was getting el zilcho. If Harper told her your out,she would only sit as an independent for the next three years to fatten her pension,contacts and bank accounts. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Was she not a cabinet minister? Who gave her that?Are you saying it was not Harper? Your silly rhetorical questions are silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Senator Oda. She would fit right in. Harper doesn't care if it is a slap in the face of the plebes.... It's his country! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 You know, I dislike Harper as much as the next person. I think a lot of the things he's doing are dangerous for the country, but some of you show that you don't really pay attention to him and his motives. I will gladly concede that I'm completely wrong about Harper if she is given a Senate appoint. However, here's my point. Stephen Harper is not a radical. He is a pragmatist, especially when it comes to holding power. He has quickly pulled 180s on things that seemed to undermine his position. He cares more about being in power and staying in power than anything else. He will hang onto the reigns by any means necessary. If this means playing the shell game with money and the way it's reported to EC, so be it. If this means lying to parliament about the costs of things, fine. If this means making empty apologies and taking advantage of Canadians' forgiving nature, great. But here's the most important thing. When Vic Toews brought forward legislation on surveillance and Harper realized that it would turn his base against him, he scrapped that legislation (even though they're trying to bring it back in under the radar). When Woodworth got on his horse preaching about abortion, Harper had his cabinet bury that legislation before it even saw the light of day. For all of his distasteful decisions, the man has his finger on the pulse of public opinion. He doesn't care about pleasing everyone. He only cares about not pissing off enough people that he will lose power. Why is this important? Because Bev Oda is poison. She's poison to his clutch on power because the issues she has created for the party piss of the party's own base. Wasting taxpayers' money on $16 OJ? The Canadian version of Tea Party neocons wouldn't stand for that. That's why she needed to be out. Doing it once and it could be smoothed over without very much damage. She repeatedly wasted taxpayers money and abused her expense funds. Harper's base will not let that go. And so, he will not, in my opinion, appoint her to the Senate because he is not a stupid man. He is not going to do something that would undermine his grip on the reigns of power. If he appoints her to anything, it will be ambassador to the Florida Orange Producers Association. But she sure as hell isn't getting anywhere near the Senate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Let me just mention as well more to the point about Harper being a pragmatist. He hasn't gone anywhere near gay marriage, abortion, or capital punishment. If Harper were a radical, he would attack those things immediately with his majority government. He can't be stopped, so there's no point holding back. He hasn't gone there and he won't because he's not an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 (edited) Let me just mention as well more to the point about Harper being a pragmatist. He hasn't gone anywhere near gay marriage, abortion, or capital punishment. If Harper were a radical, he would attack those things immediately with his majority government. He can't be stopped, so there's no point holding back. He hasn't gone there and he won't because he's not an idiot. Oda getting a patronage post even a senate seat wouldn't come close to the firestorm those other issues would cause...if he thinks nothing of giving senate seats back to the election losers Oda in the senate would be easy...more likely an ambassadorial position where she could live the highlife she craves...I'm sure all of the details have been negotiated already... Edited July 4, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peeves Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Let me just mention as well more to the point about Harper being a pragmatist. He hasn't gone anywhere near gay marriage, abortion, or capital punishment. If Harper were a radical, he would attack those things immediately with his majority government. He can't be stopped, so there's no point holding back. He hasn't gone there and he won't because he's not an idiot. Both (your) posts are a pretty good assessment of the man and his agenda. All in all he's been very good for the country whether one likes him personally or not. I don't see how he should be left off the hook for the GH 20-G8 or a few other things I think he messed up on politically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Oda getting a patronage post even a senate seat wouldn't come close to the firestorm those other issues would cause...if he thinks nothing of giving senate seats back to the election losers Oda in the senate would be easy...more likely an ambassadorial position where she could live the highlife she craves...I'm sure all of the details have been negotiated already... So we finally get rid of her and now your inventing hypothetical situations whereby you may have an opportunity to complain about her in the future, so sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 So we finally get rid of her and now your inventing hypothetical situations whereby you may have an opportunity to complain about her in the future, so sad. what's sad is we know it's coming, conservatives lining up at the trough has become so routine...one in four defeated conservatives receiving publicly funded jobs...oda isn't hypothetical, it's as close to a sure thing as it's possible to be... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I agree with the op's overall stance. MP's should be recognized for their public service but the pensions seem quite excessive. Now I do feel a PM is deserving of a nice pension as is any cabinet member imo. It's the sheer size of these pensions that seems really out of whack. They cannot ask us as Canadians to tighten our belts while they get fat feeding off of our tax dollars. Hypocrisy anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 All in all he's been very good for the countryNo. He hasn't. He's done a ton of damage to many different sectors, but I don't want to get into a debate about that here. This thread is about Oda and Harper's next move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Good to see her gone. She was an albatross. By all accounts, sahe was a pretty good business person but not a very effective politician. I'm glad I don't have to see her anymore with a cigarette sticking out of her mouth. It'sGood timing cause it's time for some new blood - Chris Alexander, Kelly Leitch, James Rajotte and others. Some new and younger faces will connect better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mentalfloss Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 If we're going to go by the numbers, then McKay screwed us out of $10 Billion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 I agree with the op's overall stance. MP's should be recognized for their public service but the pensions seem quite excessive. Now I do feel a PM is deserving of a nice pension as is any cabinet member imo. It's the sheer size of these pensions that seems really out of whack. They cannot ask us as Canadians to tighten our belts while they get fat feeding off of our tax dollars. Hypocrisy anyone? They are looking at changing them, but Oda is entitled to her $52,000. per year under the same rules as anyone else. She will not be collecting early as she's over 65 anyway, but their rules are the same as many other place, 75% average of the last 5 years @ 3% It should be dropped to 70% in line with most other plans, and not be paid out before age 65. If paid out early then it should be actuarially reduced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 It'sGood timing cause it's time for some new blood - Chris Alexander, Kelly Leitch, James Rajotte and others. Some new and younger faces will connect better. Oh boy. More lapdogs. 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.