Topaz Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 WE don't know how corrupt THIS government is because its keep information as tight as they can. As to other countries... I don't care about other countries because WE live in Canada and not other countries. It doesn't matter what party is governing, when they become corrupt, they need to go! WE need more people in government with a higher moral value than we seen now and in the past. Quote
segnosaur Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 Except for all the convictions and charges. and none of this is Harper Conservative corruption? I think the 2 of you are missing the point... I don't think anyone is claiming that the conservatives have been squeaky clean. I think the issue is whether they have been more or less corrupt than the proceeding government. Yes, the government has the problem with the Duffy scandal... But to some of us, that pales in comparison to AdScam (in terms of number of people involved, money involved, and the goal of the scam.) Yes, the government has done things like prorogued parliament and used omnibus bills. But to some of us this pails in comparison to calling elections early to benefit from a divided opposition. (And, it should also be noted, the Liberals Prorogued parliament when they were in power too.) Yes, they were accused of not disclosing 40 year costs of the F35, but that pales in comparison to the HRDC scandal. For pretty much any 'scandal' you can list, someone could list a scandal under the previous Liberal party which was just as bad if not worse. from the non-partisan organization Voices-Voix Coalition, Keep in mind that this "non-partisan" organization has: One member (Lambert) with ties to unions, plus contributes to left-wing sites like Rabble.ca One member (Kerr) who is a member of Greenpeace Not exactly a sign of a "non-partisan" organization. Quote
waldo Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 If they didn't do anything wrong, then why did they agree to pay back even 10%? Answer, because they did do something wrong, and their entire party is corrupt. hey, if you say so! Sometimes, things are offered for expediency sake. But hey now... once again, your reply doesn't address the questions asked of you: here let me make sure you're not just doing a "Chris Woodcock" on my post and selectively gleaning over it! The questions again: "Why do you feel a satellite office closer to actual riding constituents is a... bad thing? Also, you keep chirping about the money yet you refused to answer the question asking you to qualify what money (if any) was 'over-and-above' that which would have been associated with the same support staff costs in Ottawa versus a satellite office?" Quote
waldo Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 I think the 2 of you are missing the point... I don't think anyone is claiming that the conservatives have been squeaky clean. I think the issue is whether they have been more or less corrupt than the proceeding government. really? That's the issue in your mind? That reads like just another, "but the Libs, but the Libs", deflection in order to distract from any Harper Conservative responsibility/accountability... on anything. A decade of, "but the Libs, but the Libs"! Quote
segnosaur Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 WE don't know how corrupt THIS government is because its keep information as tight as they can. Which is true of pretty much every government. The Liberals certainly weren't trumpeting Adscam to the hills before it was found out. And they certainly attempted to minimize the HRDC scandal. Its the nature of the business. I don't care about other countries because WE live in Canada and not other countries. It doesn't matter what party is governing, when they become corrupt, they need to go! WE need more people in government with a higher moral value than we seen now and in the past. Governments are failible. The idea of having a perfectly incorruptible government may sound wonderful, but its a fool's errand. The best we can do is minimize the corruption, and have them bring in policies we like. If your plan is to always toss out governments because of scandals, and scandals are inevitable, you may unfairily punish a government who HAS done good work to clean up things, even if they haven't managed perfection. Quote
waldo Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 Keep in mind that this "non-partisan" organization has: One member (Lambert) with ties to unions, plus contributes to left-wing sites like Rabble.ca One member (Kerr) who is a member of Greenpeace Not exactly a sign of a "non-partisan" organization. if those names are concerning to you, I expect you'll need some air after reviewing the list of 233 registered organizations that are a part of the coalition. Of course, I trust you would recognize the distinction between a member and the organization proper. In any case, I can't find anything on their website that speaks to 'individual members, by name'. A cursory search does bring back both those names as quoted within an article... however, they're both identified as members of their respective associations (Joanna Kerr of Greenpeace Canada; Michel Lambert of the international co-operation organization Alternatives)... they're simply quoted along with others... like someone from Amnesty International, for example. How is it you've ascertained those 2 names you mention are, as you state, "members"? Quote
ReeferMadness Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 Technically the scandal did not have the goal of "keeping Quebec in Canada"; it had the goal of diverting funds into Liberal bank accounts. You're splitting hairs. The goal of the program was to keep Quebec in Canada. If it worked, then I think the lost funds were worth it. It was the sponsership program that had the goal of "keeping Quebec in Canada", something that could (in theory) be done without the "scandal" part. Hellen Keller could probably see that it would not have worked. Sponsoring "aren't we great?" messages seems to me to be quite a cheap ploy. Ya think? Before you go praising the Liberals, keep in mind that there was also a commons committee looking into the sponsorship scandal. This committee's work was cut short by the government.Chretien and the Liberals were just as guilty of trying to portray the "clean" guys after the Mulroney government. If you think I've praised the Liberals, you need to point where. I'm not a Liberal and have never voted Liberal. As for Mulroney, there's a name you Conservative apologists would be better off not mentioning. What can be said about a former PM who receives payment in the form of paper bags full of cash for services of dubious value? And then he forgets to declare said payment on his income taxes. Can't be anything wrong with that. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
ReeferMadness Posted August 24, 2015 Report Posted August 24, 2015 huh! You're saying, "The Tyee"... this publication... is the "Liberal Party of Canada"? Really? To some people around here, everything they don't agree with is somehow the work of the Liberal Party of Canada. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Freddy Posted August 25, 2015 Author Report Posted August 25, 2015 Not as much as we need a system for monitoring, auditing and validating government transparency. That the idea our current government is transparent is the punchline. I don't think the indices being used by the sources you provided are adequate to the task of measuring what I think needs to be measured in supposedly advanced democracies like ours. I also think the scope of the definitions of transparency and corruption as they pertain to our governance need to broadened, codified and when used in a official capacity carry a legalistic weight that leaves no ambiguity as to what they mean and describe. Yes , Then let's not call it what it is. Let's say the government is lacking in transparency and stop the BS of calling it corruption. Quote
Bryan Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 That's an interesting take on bribery. Still waiting for any evidence of bribery whatsoever. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Yes , Then let's not call it what it is. Let's say the government is lacking in transparency and stop the BS of calling it corruption. Wow. You think you're the first guy around here to try to put lipstick on this pig of a government? Let's call what it is - corruption. The PM meddled in senate affairs. Then the PMO covered it up and covered up the cover up. Then they capped it by trying to bribe a sitting senator. Do we need transparency? Yeah, to keep an eye on all of the corruption. And this just shows how the government funded PMO is focused on petty Conservative Party business rather than than the business of Canada. But it's far from the worst thing this PM has done. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
ReeferMadness Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Still waiting for any evidence of bribery whatsoever. Maybe you should talk to the Justice Department. They think they have evidence. You guys are all about law and order. Except when it comes to Conservatives. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Bryan Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Maybe you should talk to the Justice Department. They think they have evidence. No they don't. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 No they don't. Huh. So you've prejudged the trial. You think that they charged Duffy with bribery even though there is no evidence. Fascinating. Why do you waste your brilliant mind here? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
PIK Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 The comparison to the sponsorship scandal is specious. The sponsorship scandal did have a worthy goal (keeping Quebec in Canada) and if that's what worked, it would be cheap at 20 times the price. In contrast, the Duffy affair had no goal but to keep the Conservative Party from embarrassment. The independent inquiry into the sponsorship scandal was called by a Liberal PM. And then he went into an election and took his lumps. You can say what you want about the Liberals but they did call an independent inquiry and they took at least some accountability. By contrast, Harper and his PMO had numerous chances to come clean and all they did was pile one cover-up on top of another. Most of the wrongdoing in the sponsorship scandal took place inside the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party. Maybe Chretien and the PMO knew what was going on but it's hard to say. By contrast, in the Duffy affair, the PMO is squarely implicated in the bribery of a sitting senator. And cause of the entire affair is PM Harper personally dictating a ridiculous definition of what constitutes residency. Arguably, the entire affair is his fault as his staff and senate do everything to protect him from the ramifications of his dumb political decision. Finally, I think there is a difference in public perception. To me, Chretien is a career politician who believed in Canada. I think he and those around him believed the ends justified the means. Harper, by contrast, rode into power on this "Mr Clean" image and promised to clean up Ottawa. People are not easily inclined to forgive a raving hypocrite. Chretein was all about him. His many trips to china as PM did not bring back that much business, but he was able to set up his retirement over there on our dime. Something he should have been investigated for. He has spent a lot of his time there since making a shit load of money with his buddy, maurice strong. Rememebr maurice. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Argus Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Wow. You think you're the first guy around here to try to put lipstick on this pig of a government? Let's call what it is - corruption. The PM meddled in senate affairs. Then the PMO covered it up and covered up the cover up. That's called politics, not corruption. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 That's called politics, not corruption. just how far are you prepared to go to attempt to rationalize the failings of this Harper Conservative government?... "just politics, nothing to see here, move along now'! Quote
Argus Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 just how far are you prepared to go to attempt to rationalize the failings of this Harper Conservative government?... "just politics, nothing to see here, move along now'! <shrug> I care about substance more than style. Clearly you're the reverse. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Shady Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 just how far are you prepared to go to attempt to rationalize the failings of this Harper Conservative government?... "just politics, nothing to see here, move along now'! As far as you? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 As far as you? Oh, have you now seen the light? Quote
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Chretein was all about him. His many trips to china as PM did not bring back that much business, but he was able to set up his retirement over there on our dime. Something he should have been investigated for. He has spent a lot of his time there since making a shit load of money with his buddy, maurice strong. Rememebr maurice. a MLW search shows you've been flogging this for years... even without an exhaustive key search, a dozen hits or so! I see I bit on a couple; in 2012 where I pointedly challenged you to support your claim about "Chretien's retirement, a carbon credit business and Strong" - you came back with nothing but a 2 word reply... "common knowledge"! You've also been attempting to claim the Chretien/Liberal trade missions to China resulted in nothing but allowing Chretien to "establish the framework for his retirement"... while at the same time you're touting the gains for Canada from the Harper-China trade deals. In this latter case, you've chosen to completely ignore the critical assessments done (by de' experts) that show Harper "gave the farm away" in this latest deal... in any case, let me remind you, once again: under Chretien: Canada established its four-pillar policy on China: economic partnership; sustainable development; human rights, good governance and the rule of law; and peace and security. Under his leadership, China and Canada signed several bilateral relations agreements. Chretien led four "Team Canada" trade missions to China... resulting in a dramatic trade increase and setting the foundation that now positions China as Canada's second largest trading partner. so... in PIK world, Harper trade with China - good; Chretien trade with China - bad! note to moderator: since it appears the devotees are in their wildly distracting mode (away from Harper Conservatives)... and presuming upon stated/implied corruption of past governments, a response... this response... should not be construed as "off-topic, thread derail". Quote
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 <shrug> I care about substance more than style. Clearly you're the reverse. so... in your substantive assessment, you take the view that any form of corruption... is just politics! Now that's substance! Quote
PIK Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 a MLW search shows you've been flogging this for years... even without an exhaustive key search, a dozen hits or so! I see I bit on a couple; in 2012 where I pointedly challenged you to support your claim about "Chretien's retirement, a carbon credit business and Strong" - you came back with nothing but a 2 word reply... "common knowledge"! You've also been attempting to claim the Chretien/Liberal trade missions to China resulted in nothing but allowing Chretien to "establish the framework for his retirement"... while at the same time you're touting the gains for Canada from the Harper-China trade deals. In this latter case, you've chosen to completely ignore the critical assessments done (by de' experts) that show Harper "gave the farm away" in this latest deal... in any case, let me remind you, once again: under Chretien: Canada established its four-pillar policy on China: economic partnership; sustainable development; human rights, good governance and the rule of law; and peace and security. Under his leadership, China and Canada signed several bilateral relations agreements. Chretien led four "Team Canada" trade missions to China... resulting in a dramatic trade increase and setting the foundation that now positions China as Canada's second largest trading partner. so... in PIK world, Harper trade with China - good; Chretien trade with China - bad! note to moderator: since it appears the devotees are in their wildly distracting mode (away from Harper Conservatives)... and presuming upon stated/implied corruption of past governments, a response... this response... should not be construed as "off-topic, thread derail". How much, what I remember it was in the low millions .But again, did chretien use these trips for his own business . That is wrong. Same as mulroney and the german arms dealer, he was working on the side, IMO so was chretien. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 IMO so was chretien. good on ya for finally declaring your unsubstantiated statements... as your opinion! Good on ya. Quote
PIK Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 good on ya for finally declaring your unsubstantiated statements... as your opinion! Good on ya. Going to answer the question or not. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
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.