The Federal Accountability Act - A fraud

[Saturn]

The FAA is a complete fraud. It does very little to "clean up government" despite the BIG and LOUD claims that it does so by the PM. It includes only 30 of the promised 52 measures to make government more accountable, it is full of loopholes, AND half of the included measures will not be implemented until the PM decides to approve them (and he hasn't).

Some quotes from a letter by Duff Conacher of Democracy Watch:

Media Helps Prime Minister Mislead Canadians on

so-called "Federal Accountability Act"

If a movie reviewer went to a movie promised to be 100 minutes long and it ended after 60 minutes, the movie would very likely be viciously criticized as a rip-off and its director as a fraud.

If a corporate CEO promised a 100 percent return, but only delivered 60 percent, business reporters would charge her with misleading shareholders.

Yet most political reporters and media outlets have applauded Prime Minister Stephen Harper for successfully keeping his election promise to pass the "Federal Accountability Act" (FAA), and many have repeated (without question or qualification) the PM's claim that "accountability in government is now the law" and Treasury Board John Baird's claim that the Conservatives have delivered "clean government" as a Christmas gift to Canadians, even though:

* the FAA only contains 30 of the 52 measures (60 percent) that Harper and the Conservatives promised;

* the FAA also repeals key ethics rules for the PM, Cabinet ministers, their staff and senior government officials;

* Harper and the Conservatives claimed all 52 measures were needed to clean up the federal government and make it accountable;

* the Conservatives rejected all attempts by opposition parties to add most of the 22 measures and ethics rules that the Conservatives promised to include in the FAA, and;

* despite Parliament passing the FAA into law, the following measures included in the FAA will not even happen unless the federal Cabinet approves them (and the Cabinet is not required to approve them ever):

o measures changing the federal Access to Information Act;

o measures changing the ethics rules and enforcement system for Cabinet ministers, their staff and senior government officials;

o measures changing the federal Lobbyist Registration Act and lobbying enforcement system;

o the establishment of the Public Appointments Commission, and;

o the establishment of the Procurement Ombudsman.

The applauding of the passage of the FAA is only one of many examples that could be cited of political reporters and editors neglecting to point out politicians' false claims and broken promises, which not only encourages politicians to lie to voters and break promises, but also violates the fundamental journalistic principles of accuracy and objectivity.

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/OpEdDec2206.html

In fact despite declaring that clean government is the PM's "Christmas present" to Canadians, the PM has not approved roughly half the measures of the FAA, including the establishment of the Public Appointments Commission, and not surprisingly he has made over 100 appointments in the last month.

Opposition parties who helped shape the Transparency and Accountability Act are accusing the Conservative government of being less than accountable on implementing all parts of a key election pledge.

The act was successfully passed into law exactly one month ago, but not all elements of the act have gone into effect yet.

It's up to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet to put in place roughly half the measures included in the act — or not.

Among the main elements the Tories haven't implemented yet are sections dealing with government ethics and lobbyists.

"You can't keep dining out on the fact that you've cleaned up Ottawa if you're not going to implement the key elements in the Accountability Act that are going to change the way you do things in Ottawa," MP Pat Martin, a New Democrat from Manitoba, told CBC News.

During a press conference last week announcing the shuffling of his cabinet, Harper said passing the act was "done," but added there were still "some implementation phases" that have to worked out.

Critics said at least one of the act's main objectives — the creation of an independent body to oversee appointments — is being ignored.

In December, the Harper government made 118 appointments, including naming former Nova Scotia Conservative premier John Hamm to be co-chair of Canada's reproductive technology board.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/01/12/...bility-act.html

[Canadian Blue]

It can't be that much of a fraud if it was passed into law.

[Ricki Bobbi]

It can't be that much of a fraud if it was passed into law.

The greater fraud is repeated postings from Democracy Watch! Fair and balanced that one...

[Saturn]

It can't be that much of a fraud if it was passed into law.

Yep, a useless law + a lot of big talk about it = fraud. Don't watch what we do, just listen to what we say!

[Saturn]

The greater fraud is repeated postings from Democracy Watch! Fair and balanced that one...

Yes, their job is our interests, not the government's.

[Ricki Bobbi]

The greater fraud is repeated postings from Democracy Watch! Fair and balanced that one...

Yes, their job is our interests, not the government's.

*Our* interest if *we* happen to be Liberal or NDP supporters.

[normanchateau]

Here's what Democracy Watch had to say about the Liberals immediately prior to the last election:

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsNov0205.htm

No doubt those who discount what Democracy Watch now has to say about the Federal Accountability Act were equally diligent in discounting what they had to say about the Liberals.

[Fortunata]

How can Steve claim he cleaned up government when many key (and promised) points were not included? Is that lying to the Canadian public? Shouldn't he have said, we have made into law X number of points leaving Y number of points to be addressed at another time, or we have decided to withdraw Y points, even though promised, because they would hinder our government. But we'll be sure to bring them into law just before the next election just in case we don't get in?

Such as political appointments, which I'm sure even the hard-core Stevies remember Steve harping on the Liberals for making. Wasn't there supposed to be a committee formed to determine merit, experience and general qualifications to each appointment? Is it not law, a la the accountabity act, that appointments go through the committee? So the framework is there but there has been no committee formed but over 100 political patronage appointments were made by Harper. Why haven't MPs been appointed to this committee?

Maybe all you Harperites can tell me why the exclusions? Why didn't Harper tell the people there were exclusions and the reasons for them? Why was the appointment committee not formed? and why these patronage appointments made Liberal style? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Here's what Democracy Watch had to say about the Liberals immediately prior to the last election:

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsNov0205.htm

No doubt those who discount what Democracy Watch now has to say about the Federal Accountability Act were equally diligent in discounting what they had to say about the Liberals.

Not Found

The requested URL /camp/RelsNov0205.htm was not found on this server.

[jdobbin]

I think the more telling thing on accountability is Khan not sitting as an independent. Jeffery Simpson's column this past week pretty much summed what he thought democratic reform looked like.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Pag...orce_login=true

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has made the "democratic deficit" one of his signature issues. His government got Parliament to accept something called the Accountability Act.So democracy and accountability are self-described Conservative touchstones. In welcoming former Liberal MP Wajid Khan into Conservative ranks, Mr. Harper's party mocked both democracy and accountability.

http://www.rbcinvest.theglobeandmail.com/s...xComment/3/3/6/

[Catchme]

How can Steve claim he cleaned up government when many key (and promised) points were not included? Is that lying to the Canadian public? Maybe all you Harperites can tell me why the exclusions? Why didn't Harper tell the people there were exclusions and the reasons for them? Why was the appointment committee not formed? and why these patronage appointments made Liberal style? Inquiring minds want to know.

But you know of all the ones he did give authority for passing into law was the; PM, Cabinet Ministers and chief exective staff CANNOT be held accountable. After he said he was not going to put ALL Gomery's recommendation points into effect, because he wanted the PM's office to hold final responsibility for accountability. I guess what he meant was the PMO would decide who would and would not be held accountable no matter where the order originated from.

[Saturn]

Steve broke many of his promises on cleaning up government as soon as he got elected. Then he passed an Act that included just over half of what he promised. On top of that, one half of the half included in the Act will become law when and if he decides to approve it. Overall, we got roughly one-quarter of his promises in that pathetic Act and he's been advertising it as the solution to all of the accountability problems Canadian governments are prone to. It's nothing unexpected though - it's his turn to steal from the Canadian public. Steve and his Accountability Act are both a fraud!

[Ricki Bobbi]

Steve broke many of his promises on cleaning up government as soon as he got elected. Then he passed an Act that included just over half of what he promised. On top of that, one half of the half included in the Act will become law when and if he decides to approve it. Overall, we got roughly one-quarter of his promises in that pathetic Act and he's been advertising it as the solution to all of the accountability problems Canadian governments are prone to. It's nothing unexpected though - it's his turn to steal from the Canadian public. Steve and his Accountability Act are both a fraud!

So the fact that everything promised is not in the Accountability Act is 100% Harper's fault despite the challenges he has faced from the oppositon and in the Senate?

[blueblood]

I'd say the act was a pretty clever thing done by the tories

1) He keeps a promise to Canadians

2) He throws a wrench into the Liberal fundraising machine

Pretty clever way of getting votes if you ask me. Underhanded but clever.

I think everyone here knows why the act is watered down. You can't blame the tories for other parties playing politics with this act.

[jdobbin]

I'd say the act was a pretty clever thing done by the tories

1) He keeps a promise to Canadians

2) He throws a wrench into the Liberal fundraising machine

Pretty clever way of getting votes if you ask me. Underhanded but clever.

I think everyone here knows why the act is watered down. You can't blame the tories for other parties playing politics with this act.

The first party caught in the fundraising act was the Tories. One of the first people caught was Stephen Harper.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I'd say the act was a pretty clever thing done by the tories

1) He keeps a promise to Canadians

2) He throws a wrench into the Liberal fundraising machine

Pretty clever way of getting votes if you ask me. Underhanded but clever.

I think everyone here knows why the act is watered down. You can't blame the tories for other parties playing politics with this act.

That's the thing. The only people complaining about it would never even consider voting for Harper.

[Canuck E Stan]

The first party caught in the fundraising act was the Tories. One of the first people caught was Stephen Harper.

IF that were true, how much of the TAXPAYER money was involved?

[Ricki Bobbi]

IF that were true, how much of the TAXPAYER money was involved?

He got *caught* giving too much of his own money to the party....

[stignasty]

IF that were true, how much of the TAXPAYER money was involved?

He got *caught* giving too much of his own money to the party....

So, there are some laws that should be followed and others that shouldn't? If it wasn't important why did the Conservatives put it into the act in the first place?

[jdobbin]

IF that were true, how much of the TAXPAYER money was involved?

You don't need taxpayer money to break the law.

[scribblet]

So the fact that everything promised is not in the Accountability Act is 100% Harper's fault despite the challenges he has faced from the oppositon and in the Senate?

Challenge is an understatement LOL

I doubt that anyone would want to chair the committee after the beating Gwyn M. received at the hands of the opposition. Doubt anyone capable and competent enough to risk his or her reputation to a clearly partisan and vicious committee. Which btw, despite their hatred of all things American the opposition parties seem to have been quick to adopt its caustic and obstructionist appointment process.

Therem are hundreds federal positions that have to be filled quickly which would have to wait - maybe months or years - if the gov't didn't act on them. Untiil vacancies right are filled Canadians are being denied the chance to get a timely resolution to claims and appeals.

If the Liberals suddenly found themselves in power would they immediately proclaim all of the Act and immediately follow it all through from the start - doubt it. Read the act, particularly section 2, its not that easy to proclaim it all.

[normanchateau]

Here's what Democracy Watch had to say about the Liberals immediately prior to the last election:

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsNov0205.htm

No doubt those who discount what Democracy Watch now has to say about the Federal Accountability Act were equally diligent in discounting what they had to say about the Liberals.

Not Found

The requested URL /camp/RelsNov0205.htm was not found on this server.

Try this:

http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsNov0205.html

[Ricki Bobbi]

So, there are some laws that should be followed and others that shouldn't? If it wasn't important why did the Conservatives put it into the act in the first place?

So every law is exactly equal and no matter what law you break you should be seen as a law breaker in the eyes of the public with now examination of what happened?

A jaywalker should be judged to be just as bad, not better not worse, than a murderer?

The particular law involved is the changes to the Election Act enacted by Chretien, not the Accountability Act. No law was broken as the error was caught in an interim filing.

If it is really important to attack the Government over this issue why didn't you research your post a little better?

[normanchateau]

It can't be that much of a fraud if it was passed into law.

The greater fraud is repeated postings from Democracy Watch! Fair and balanced that one...

Are you referring to their attacks on the Liberals as being fair and balanced?

[Higgly]

Where's the access to information piece? Toothless witrhout it, IMHO. The Libs delivered more here.