A Life, Lived: More Stephen Harper Approved Scandals

It is Thanksgiving weekend here in Canada. It is a time to gather with friends and loved ones and debate the merits of each party running in the election over turkey and stuffing (turkey beingt he approproiate entree for this post). Only two days until the federal election. Harper is still in the lead but the polls have shown a tightening race which promises to deny him and his vile neo-cons a majority in Parliament. Harper has announced he will resign if he is defeated - reason enough to egt out and work the family over dinner!

In order to assist with the fun family discussions you might want to examine previous posts about this man and his despicable band of followers know as the Conservative party of Canada AKA the Reform and Alliance party under a new name. Previous posts are here:

Such a tale of political manipulation and dishonesty.

Let's continue looking at those scandals.

The Allan Riddell Affair

During the last federal election campaign, in November of 2005, Conservative leader Stephen Harper was confronted with allegations that his party had agreed to pay their Ottawa South candidate Alan Riddell to step aside so that star candidate, Allan Cutler, could run in his place. Harper, of course, deined any such deal had been made. In fact, The same day in November 2005 that Stephen Harper was telling reporters there “is no agreement,” Conservative Party Executive Director Mike Donison was sending an e-mail to Mr.Riddell’s lawyer stating precisely the opposite: “there is now a binding agreement between Mr. Riddell and the Conservative Party of Canada.”

In January 2007, Ontario Superior Court Justice Denis Power ruled there had in fact been an agreement between Mr. Riddell and the Conservative Party of Canada. Ordering the Conservatives to pay a fine, Justice Power wrote in his decision: “In my opinion, the crux of the matter between the parties was that Mr. Riddell, the leading contender for the nomination, agreed to voluntarily step aside in favour of Mr. Cutler in exchange for which he was to receive some financial compensation for expenses.” Compensation paid to Mr. Riddell was said to be about $50,000 to recover his nomination expenses. In another court ruling in July 2007 the Conservatives were ordered to pay Riddell $118,000 in legal costs.

Canadians deserve better than to be lied to by their Prime Minister. Some folks might suggest that this is the norm for politicians. I refuse to accept that this behaviour is acceptable.

The Bernier 'Affair"

When he was first elected to the House of Commons in January of 2006, Maxime Bernier was a rising star within the Conservative Party and Quebec politics. His rise came to a sudden stop when, on May 26, 2008, he was forced to resign after violating rules of Cabinet secrecy and mishandling sensitive government documents.

On May 7, 2008, media first reported that Ms. Couillard had ties to the Quebec wing of the Hell’s Angels biker gang, having dated one member and marrying another (from whom she was divorced in 1999). Subsequent reports suggested her ties to the gangs had continued up until as recently as 2005. Opposition parties immediately demanded reassurance from the government that national security had not been compromised by Mr. Bernier’s relationship, but all such demands were rebuffed, particularly by the Prime Minister, who accused the opposition of being “a group of gossipy old busybodies” prying into the personal lives of a federal minister.

The Conservative government continued on this tack even after the Minister handed in his resignation on Monday, May 26, 2008, when he admitted to leaving sensitive briefing materials at Ms. Couillard’s home, where they remained unprotected (and their loss undetected by government officials) for seven weeks.

In spite of numerous inquiries in and out of Parliament, many questions still remain unanswered by the government. When did the Prime Minister know documents had gone missing and when was his office fully informed of Ms. Couillard’s background? How could the government have lost track of the documents, some of which related to Canada’s Afghanistan strategy and our relationship with NATO? Who, other than the Minister and Ms. Couillard saw the documents? What steps has the government taken to ensure no such embarrassing episode happens again?

An investigation initiated by the Clerk of the Privy Council failed to provide answers to these questions. This internal investigation did not even have the authority necessary to question Ms. Couillard. As Parliament prepared to return in the fall of 2008, the Public Safety Committee of the House of Commons resolved to summons Ms. Couillard to give her side of the story when the House resumes. Of course, by calling an election Harper effectively silenced the probe.

Stephen Harper: deny, lie, cover-up, and when things get too hot - call an election.

Flaherty's Gravy Train

It only got a small mention in Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's Budget Speech of February 27, 2008 – a proposal to re-establish passenger rail service between Peterborough and Toronto on an existing rail line - but it caught federal bureaucrats off guard and caught the attention of national media.

Soon after budget day, reports surface that federal transportation and other government officials were mystified. They had not been consulted on the proposal and the idea ranked among the lowest of priorities. The budget itself gave no details except that the money was to come from $500 million allocated across Canada to public transit capital infrastructure.

Commentators immediately noticed that the rail line happened to pass through Flaherty's Whitby-Oshawa federal riding, the same provincial riding for which Flaherty's wife, Christine Elliott is the Ontario MPP. The rail line would also pass through Peterborough, a city of about 80,000 held by federal Conservative Dean Del Mastro.

Flaherty's rail line announcement also managed to completely surprise officials from GO Transit, Via Rail, Metrolinx (the organization overseeing transit planning in the Greater Toronto Area), and the provincial government. Even Flaherty's own Finance department was unable to provide details, although costs were said to exceed $100 million and they couldn't say who would run it.

A provincial study in 2006 had ranked the Toronto-Peterborough line near the bottom of the priority list. A 2006 study by GO Transit found there wasn't even enough demand to justify GO bus service to Peterborough. (Passenger service on the line was shut down in 1990 due to insufficient ridership.)

Editorial writers and columnists pointed to much more urgent transportation infrastructure projects in southern Ontario, and started calling Flaherty's train such names as "pork-barrel express," "the pork run," "Flaherty's folly," and "Flaherty's gravy train."

As much as my colleague Nancy, who resides in the area, would love a more direct commute home, this just doesn't feel like the right way to do business. This just reminds me of Alaskan Senator's 'Brudge to Nowhere' scheme - before the election of Harper and his cronies this wasn't how we did politics in Canada!

John Baird Cancelling Ottawa LRT During Municipal Election, Helping Ally Larry O'Brien

Here we have the opposite happening - when it is expedient to do so planned public transportation projects can be tossed aside for political purposes.

Former Treasury Board President John Baird (now Environment Minister) has been accused of interfering in the 2006 Ottawa municipal election by cancelling $200 million in federal funding for a light-rail transit (LRT) system in the middle of a hotly contested mayoral campaign. Although Treasury Board and several other federal departments had already approved the funding, Baird was asked to review it by mayoral candidate Larry O'Brien, an opponent of the project and a Baird political ally. The project was strongly supported by former Ottawa Mayor Bob Chiarelli, a political adversary of Baird's.

In spite of the fact that the $1 billion project had been approved by all levels of government, John Baird insisted that the project be approved by the new council that would be put in place after the municipal election.

A senior Treasury Board official told the House of Commons Government Operations and Estimates Committee that he didn't see the contract because Baird handled the file personally. Wayne Wouters claimed it isn't Treasury Board's role to assess the cost-benefits of such a project. Ottawa City Manager Kent Kirkpatrick said Baird's intervention was "unusual," especially given that there had been years of public discussion, environmental assessments and approvals from seven federal government departments. Testimony also showed that approximately 10 projects from other cities had been before Treasury Board during Mr. Baird's tenure, however the Ottawa LRT was the only one to have its funding pulled in the middle of a municipal election.

The LRT issue is believed to have significantly affected the outcome of the Ottawa mayoral election, and after the election the new city council cancelled the project. The consortium that received the contract is now suing the city for $277 million.

Larry O'Brien, who defeated Mr. Chiarelli to become mayor, currently faces criminal charges in a separate matter (also tied to Mr. Baird).

Apparently public policy is dictated by politican expediency, payback, and 'gotcha' politics. This is not how we run Canada Mr. Harper!

There you have today's edition: cover ups, lies, threats, using public transportation as a political tool (no wonder this party denied there was an environmental issue in Canada for two years), manipulation, and involvement with 'seedy' characters. I just can't understand why folks would consider voting for this man and his band of neo-cons. It boggles the mind, it really does. I'd list even more scandals but I have to get the turkey in the oven!

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You go, Jerry!
Maxime Bernier, indeed...among other things.
Shut the door on the media reporting on the deceased soldiers' caskets being brought home from Afghanistan...that's one of the insensitive things that issued forth from this government. The families of those soldiers wanted the press to stand by and show the rest of the country how their loved ones are being returned to them in a box.

Good article, makes complete sense to me!
Ciao,
Brenda

Posted by: Brenda | October 12, 2008 at 02:05 PM