Governance 1: Hansard June 15/05, Whistleblowing, Arar, Gomery-Spin, Blind Trusts, Grewel Tapes, Public Accounts--AG, Inuit, Scandal, Global Warming

Question Period- Hansard excerpts-June 15/05

Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Justice Gomery has written to the government demanding that it reverse its deal with Jean Chrétien. Through his lawyer, Justice Gomery says that the arrangement is not in the public interest. In fact, his lawyer says that “the ability of Justice Gomery to complete his work will be put in jeopardy”. He asked the government directly to either expedite Mr. Chrétien's accusations of bias or have them withdrawn.

Will the government end the arrangement with Mr. Chrétien as Justice Gomery demands, yes or no?

[. . . . ] Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, these answers by the Prime Minister are simply not factually correct. Here is what the Prime Minister is doing. He had an exchange of letters, call it what they will, behind Justice Gomery's back. Justice Gomery was not even informed about this. It was contrary to the undertaking the Attorney General had made.

Now Justice Gomery is demanding, in his correspondence of June 6, very specific action by the government. Is the government willing to take that action or is it going to continue to work hand in hand with Chrétien's lawyers? [. . . . ]

Mr. Stockwell Day (Okanagan—Coquihalla, CPC): Mr. Speaker, a few months ago, when we raised the possibility of Chinese espionage in Canada . . . .

[. . . . ]Ms. Helena Guergis (Simcoe—Grey, CPC): Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government why it was giving aid to China . . . .

[. . . . ] Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, CPC): Mr. Speaker, on May 23, Judge Gomery said that government officials had “leaked” misleading information about the cost of his commission. . . .

What they did was...put together the fees of everyone in the Justice Department that worked on the file, the photocopies...and God knows what other expenses that were totally beyond the commission's control.

Will the public works minister confirm that it was his communications director who phoned the media with this misleading information to discredit Judge Gomery?

Check this one out. Note the empty answers -- e.g. from the PM, one of which includes reference to "The South Beach Diet"

Search: China Feed Industry Centre , the development programs taking place in China , Why did he use his communications director to undermine

Scroll down newsbeat1 and do not miss reading "Whistleblower Legislation" with its links.

Question Period provides few answers but you may find out a few very important aspects of what has been going on.




Mountie wants to be free to tell full Arar story

A senior RCMP officer wants the federal government to waive its national security claims before he testifies next week at the inquiry into Maher Arar's deportation to Syria.

Is this a case of needing effective whistleblower legislation to protect the whistleblower, as opposed to protecting the government?



Judge Gomery: "the word is spin."

Federal lawyers ask Gomery to clear PM -- Attempt to 'exonerate' Martin from sponsorship fallout 'improper,' Tories charge

[. . . . ] The government's written submission, which has yet to be made public, aims to clear Mr. Martin of any involvement in the now-defamed program, arguing he wasn't aware of the problems with the program until 2001.

But lawyers for the Conservative party said the government's claims are tantamount to asking Judge Gomery to "exonerate" Mr. Martin, an "improper" request that goes beyond the commission's mandate. Judge Gomery's mandate does not allow him to lay blame. Rather, his fact-finding report is aimed at chronicling what went wrong and how the sponsorship program went off the rails. [. . . . ]

Search: contract for research work


Chretien, Pelletier, Gagliano lawyers cost taxpayers $1M before clients testified

Lawyers for Jean Chretien, Jean Pelletier and Alfonso Gagliano cost Canadian taxpayers more than $1 million before the trio had even testified before the Gomery commission, documents obtained through the Access to Information Act reveal.

Editorial: How can we trust them? -- on blind trusts

Given the recent controversy surrounding Transportation Minister Harinder Takhar, we'd like Premier Dalton McGuinty to explain to Ontarians exactly what a "blind trust" is.

How is it "blind" when Takhar knows . . . .

How is it "blind" when his wife is . . . .

Are there any other blind trusts that would bear checking?




COMMITTEE URGES GOVERNMENT TO CLARIFY FOUNDATION ACCOUNTING ISSUES; $7.6 BILLION IN ASSETS AT STAKE News Release, Ottawa, June 02, 2005

Mr. John Williams, Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, today tabled a report recommending that the federal government clarify its accounting practices for transfers to foundations. At stake is some $7.6 billion in foundation bank accounts (as of March 31, 2004) that presently is not included in the federal government’s balance sheet.

In its twelfth report, the Committee also praised the government for acting on its longstanding recommendations to allow the Auditor General to conduct performance audits of foundations. Specifically, Part 7 of Bill C-43 amends the Auditor General Act to extend the Auditor General’s audit power to foundations and certain Crown corporations.

If Bill C-43 does receive parliamentary approval, the Committee recommended that the Auditor General immediately conduct a performance audit of the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI). Between 1996-97 and 2003-04, the CFI received some $3.65 billion from the federal government and paid out $1.23 billion in grants, accumulating $740 million in interest on investments in the interim. The CFI’s funding agreement requires the foundation to commit all of its funds by 31 December 2010.

Elsewhere, the Committee recommended that the government amend foundation funding agreements to allow the government to align foundation policy with major policy changes. Presently, the government can only affect foundation policy when it establishes a new foundation or transfers additional money to an existing foundation. [. . . . ]

Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, June 2005, John Williams, MP, Chair




Tories offer deal over same-sex bill -- Won't stall budget bill if Liberals delay controversial legislation Alexander Panetta, CP, Jun. 16, 05

[. . . . ] The Tories have threatened to put up 90 speakers to oppose and delay the budget bill, said sources in another opposition party.

Such a tactic would force the Liberals to make a politically sensitive decision: suspend debate, extend the Commons session into the summer, or delay a budget vote until fall.

[. . . . ] "If we can get that, it'll be worth our while to see (the budget bill) C-48 go. Because eventually they're going to get C-48 anyway."

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Paul Martin seemed to promise the Commons would not rise for the summer until the same-sex bill had passed. [. . . . ]

House clears historic land claims deal -- would give Inuit control of a major portion of northern Labrador-- must now be approved by the Senate CP, June 16, 05



Bloc demands $5.4M Liberal repayment June 16, 05


A Scandal So Immense: An excellent summary of what has been happening in Canada via Western Standard / The Shotgun

[. . . . ] And, if you think the [David] Frum article is just about Gomery then you did not read it. It is about the stench of a corrupt regime that does not respect democracy for YOU as a citizen. If you are not concerned then one would have to surmise that you are somehow part of the payola crowd who defends this mob for the indefensible.

More than 30% of teens fail national science test

I believe NB scored the lowest. Isn't that sad? Check out these kids' self-esteem.




Global Warming

Arctic natives: U.S. warming policy is abuse -- Inuit, who rely on ice, preparing human rights petition -- ice cap has decreased -- 1979 to 2003 photo comparisons Jun. 15, 05

OSLO, Norway - Inuit hunters threatened by a melting of the Arctic ice plan to file a petition accusing the United States of violating their human rights by fuelling global warming, an Inuit leader said on Wednesday. [. . . . ]

Is the Kyoto Accord going to change this or simply allow other countries to use our pollution credits (if that is what this is termed) to pollute from their areas? Check previous posts for scientists' views which present another side of this debate -- views that are not part of our government's "allowable" dialogue nor discussion points. Is there a hidden agenda when certain views are not promoted--or is it not allowed to be promoted--in the MSM and in other ways, film, etc.?


Related: here

---