Unearthed Job Application Stephen Harper 2005

The latest Conservative attack ad to discredit Justin Trudeau is childish at best with a strong scent of desperation.

It's a mock meeting discussing Trudeau's resume as he applies for the job of Prime Minister.

However, going back to 2005, when Stephen Harper himself was applying for the job, what were his credentials?

He quit most things he started.  He was a staffer for Brian Mulroney but quit when Mulroney refused to address cancelling Employment Insurance, or at least making it more difficult to obtain.

He was a Reform Party Member of Parliament but quit when things weren't going his way.

He ran the National Citizens Coalition, a corporate advocacy group initially created to end Public Healthcare in Canada.  He quit that to run for leader of the Reform Party/Canadian Alliance/Canadian Reform Alliance Party (CRAP)/Conservative Party of Canada (They had an identity crisis).

He won that race but when he lost the 2004 election .... he quit.  With a lot of misguided persuasion he got back on the horse, but in 2005 he was hardly Prime Minister material, though he did know how to cheat to win an election, a skill he has only gotten better at.

So what if we put ourselves in that room, with that group, as they determine whether or not Stephen Harper was right for the job.

"Let's talk about Stephen"

"I hope he's not as bad as his hair"

"What does he know about balancing a budget"

"He did study economics so would know that if you grow the economy, the budget will balance itself.  No economist would argue on that point, so let's move on. "

"What does he say about keeping us safe?"

"Well he has been on a celebrity Fox News tour telling anyone who'd listen that we should join George Bush in Iraq."

"That's crazy talk.  Iraq was not involved in the attack on the World Trade Centre.  Besides, even if they defeat Al-Qaeda as they suggest, there will always be another group, perhaps worse, ready to take their place.  Canadians have spoken clearly.  No Iraq War!"

"If his aim is to simply go where the United States goes, what kind of leader will he be?  Sounds more like a follower to me. "

"So what are his priorities, other than making war?"

"He wants to put a stop to same-sex marriage"

"Like that's our biggest problem."

Laughter

"I've read a copy of his speech to the Reform Party Assembly that earned him a round of applause.  In it he wanted to cancel EI, Old Age Security and Canada Pension"

"Yes.  A lot of seniors left the Reform Party after that.  He's not worth the risk.  Our seniors need those safety nets, as do our workers."

"And don't forget that he sued Canadians because he wanted corporations to determine the outcome of elections."

"I'm not saying some day, but I'm saying forever.  This man is not right for this country.

"Who does his hair?  I suppose if he got the job he'd hire a hairdresser. But can't he afford one now?"

"Stephen Harper.  He's just not right for Canada."

Justin Trudeau, Al Qaeda, and Looking for 'To Do About Something'

Recently, the Harper government attacked Justin Trudeau for visiting a mosque, where allegedly, recruitment for members of Al Qaeda had once taken place.

Harper's Reformers are coming out in droves to plant the seed that Trudeau belongs to this terrorist group. Soon they'll be suggesting that it was he who engineered 9/11.

However, Trudeau visited Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiah mosque, in his Montreal riding of Papineau, in 2011; before the U.S. made this assumption and many years after the alleged activity took place.

That didn't stop Harper's latest neutered attack dog (with Baird and Del Mastro yelping somewhere else), Steven Blaney, from stating "It is completely unacceptable that Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau would associate with a group that allegedly radicalizes Canadians to join al-Qaeda and engage in acts of unspeakable violent extremism."

Because of this "lack of judgement" the "trustworthy" Blaney concludes that Justin Trudeau cannot be trusted. You can be sure that this will appear in an attack ad or fundraising letter in the near future.

But let's see who else can't be trusted if the criteria is simply guilt by association.

Conservative MP Maxime Bernier, was dating a girl with ties to Hell's Angels. He even left his "briefs" in her home, both the ones you wear and the ones you should not allow the public to see, although both unacceptable given that he was then our Foreign Minister.

Not only did Harper not care about this girl's obvious exploitation of the hapless Bernier, but they gave her mother a job.

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

When the story broke that former commander of CFB Trenton, Russel Williams, was a serial killer, photos appeared with Williams and Peter MacKay keeping stride, and his face adorned a training manual.

Now of course we know that MacKay was unaware of William's criminal activity, but ...

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

MacKay's credibility did come into question however, with his backing of rebels in Libya, that West Point years earlier confirmed had ties with Al Qaeda. MacKay would only suggest that he didn't know much about them. But.....

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

Jason Kenney spoke at a rally of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, then banned as a terrorist group. He claimed not to know, but ....

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

In Ukraine recently, John Baird had his photo taken with Oleh Tyahnybok, the anti-Semite head of the Svoboda Party. Does that mean that Baird himself is anti-Semitic? Of course not. But ...

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

Peter Kent associated himself with the Jewish Defense League, to appeal to Jewish voters, until it was reported that they were on the U.S. FBI Terrorist watch list. He eventually distanced himself from the group, but not so Jason Kenney who allowed them to influence his decision to ban British MP George Galloway.

In fact, JDL appear to be stronger than ever, with the help of Sun Media, Harper's personal accomplishment.

Yves Engler wrote recently of the rise of their racist militarism in Toronto, aimed at those opposed to the genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza.

New to pro-Palestinian activism in Toronto, I was unaware of just how aggressive and organized the JDL had become. It's reached the point where some Palestinian solidarity groups avoid publicizing pickets out of fear they might disrupt them.

In the U.S., the JDL has been outlawed since 2001. Its members have been convicted in a series of acts of terror, including the killing of the regional director of the American Arab Anti-discrimination Committee and a plot to assassinate a Congressman. A member of the JDL's sister organization in Israel killed 29 Palestinian Muslim worshipers in the Cave of the Patriarchs Massacre 20 years ago. In 2011 the RCMP launched an investigation against a number of JDL members who were thought to be plotting to bomb Palestine House in Mississauga.

Leader of the JDL, Meir Weinstein, has a twitter account, and though he has only 18 followers, two of them are Israel's PMO (JDL also banned in Israel) and Harper's Sun TV. Recently a Sun follower tweeted a video to Ezra Levant suggesting that five minutes of running a day could improve your health. He quipped that this was good news for the Palestinians running from Israeli gunfire.

This is the kind of Canada the Harper government is creating when they harvest hate for political support. I seem to remember the leader of a different nation, during different times, who did that, and the results were catastrophic.

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

When Stephen Harper was helping to organize the Reform Party (now called the Conservative Party of Canada), he allowed several far-right groups (at the time Harper himself was always described as being from the far-right), to set up recruitment tables at Reform Party conventions.

One of these groups was well known White Supremacist Paul Fromm's
Canadians for Foreign Aid Reform. In turn, these groups sold memberships to Harper's Reform Party.

According to the anti-racist Shofar:

On June 13, 1991, several Heritage Front members attended a meeting of Paul Fromm's Canadians for Foreign Aid Reform (C-FAR) where [Al] Overfield from the Reform Party set up a table to sign people up for the Party.

... it is interesting to note that the policies of both groups stem from the idea that minorities are receiving unjustifiable special treatment under current Canadian legislation.

... The attraction of Reform for Overfield and like-minded persons, he said was that it was strictly white bread, 100 percent white Canadians, really anti-immigration; there was really no difference between those people and them.

When it was discovered that Neo-Nazis were operating within the Reform Party, Stephen Harper claimed not to know. However, given their very public profile, I find that hard to believe. He was simply harvesting hatred for political gain.

So does this mean that Stephen Harper is or was a Neo-Nazi? Of course not. But ...

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

Steven Blaney, the man who is protecting us from the young Trudeau, while giving the JDL a free pass, was in the news recently for lying about when he knew of an RCMP ban on Swiss Arms rifles. But thank heavens Blaney stood up to those dangerous RCMP thugs, and said that we can now own them. I thought I was going to have to make a lawn ornament out of mine.

Not the first Blaney controversy.

During the 2005/06 federal election campaign, he was one of the candidates who took part in the "In and Out" election financing scheme, where Party central deposited money into his bank account, which he immediately sent back for illegal Party ad buys. (They were already over their spending limit)

Blaney had raised just $13,185.00 for his campaign; $1,275.00 donated by himself.

The federal party, transferred $28,626.34 to him, which he then "spent". His return records show $ 24,641.34 for TV and radio, and $ 3,985.00 for newspaper ads, despite the fact that these were not HIS expenditures.

This meant that he received a rebate of thousands of dollars from taxpayers, that he was not entitled to.

So does this mean that Steven Blaney is a liar and cheat? OK you got me there. But....

WHAT IF THIS HAD BEEN JUSTIN TRUDEAU?

The Harper Government's Eight Years of Standing Up For Canada

I came across the Conservative Party of Canada's 2006 election platform: Standing Up For Canada. Stephen Harper is the first and only leader of this Party that was formed in 2003.

In the introduction, he outlines the CPC's priorities with a list of promises. Let's see how many he kept and how many had a positive impact on our lives.

1. Clean Up Government
Cleaning up government has become the rallying cry of many politicians and political parties, but few, if any, actually clean up anything. We all know that power can corrupt and the temptation of riches or personal "influence" can be seductive.

The list of Conservative scandals is long but what's interesting, is that even while they were flogging this platform, they were engaged in activity that would result in one of their most serious scandals, before their first term was up. The In and Out.

In the last days of the campaign, when an advertising blitz usually occurs, the CPC war room realized that they had already spent the allowable limit. So they came up with a scheme that would allow them to lay out more.

They tapped into candidates who had not reached their own spending caps, transferred large sums of money to their bank accounts, and then immediately took it out to use on national ad buys.

The media focused on the CPC going over their cap, but what they should have focused on, was who paid for it. We did. Individual candidates could claim the amount as their own expense, meaning that they would get 75% of it back, in the form of a rebate from Elections Canada.

$777,000 of the scheme was paid for by the Canadian public.

One Quebec candidate only raised about $1,500.00 and spent a bit less than that, yet received a rebate of almost $15,000.00

The Conservatives dragged this through court, adding to our financial burden, and eventually plead guilty; settling for a much smaller penalty than the actual proceeds from the scam.

In other words, they got away with it.

2. Implement Fixed Election Dates
In 2008, Stephen Harper broke his own fixed election date, dropping the writ a year early to shut down committees, investigating the "In and Out". The Opposition parties thought they had more time for candidate selection, while the CPC had already secretly put all of their candidates in place.

There is some talk that they may do this again, calling for an election perhaps in the Spring.

3. Cut the GST
They did keep their promise on this one, but unfortunately, it was the wrong promise to keep, and most economists agree. We have lost an enormous amount of revenue that could have been put toward healthcare, which is now on life support; infrastructure, etc.

4. Help Parents With Childcare
This one was added to their platform because we were finally going to get a National daycare plan and the Conservatives knew that it was something that most Canadians wanted. Instead they implemented the $100.00 per month Universal Tax Credit which only covers children under six and is taxable.

They created not one single daycare spot, despite also promising 100,000.

5. Cut Patient Wait Time For Medical Procedure
Another empty promise. According to The Canadian Wait Time Alliance's 2014 report card:

For the past two years the Wait Time Alliance (WTA) has reported a worrisome trend of little to no progress in reducing wait times for a range of necessary medical procedures in Canada.

They note that some provinces are making progress, with Ontario leading in the initiative, but clearly the Harper government has not kept its promise.

6. Crack Down on Crime
This promise was for their base, who see a bogeyman around every corner. However, Canada's crime rate was already at the lowest it's ever been and this government's new crime bills will cost Canadians billions of dollars.

7. Strengthen National Unity
The government's latest decision to go ahead with the Northern Gateway Pipeline, will create additional civil unrest, that has come to define our country in the past eight years. The unnecessary attack against a legal Coalition, arbitrary proroguing of Parliament when debates threaten the government and the enormous human rights violations during the G20 in Toronto, will be part of Stephen Harper's legacy.

8. Advance Our Interests on the World Stage
Canada's international reputation has taken a nose dive since Harper came to power in 2006.

Standing up for Canada? Really? I think I'd prefer it if they just sat down

Why are we so Shocked to Learn that the Conservatives Stole the Election?

During the G20 in Toronto, when Canadian citizens were being arrested, beaten and shot with rubber bulletts, simply for engaging in their democratic right to protest, at Charles McVety's Christian College, another event was taking place.

With an election on the horizon, Harper's point man to the Religious Right, was hosting a seminar with none other than Karl Rove, the man who helped to steal two elections for George Bush.

McVety also runs the Canadian chapter of Christians United For Israel, a frightening and Apocalyptic Christian fundamentalist group, that promotes the nuclear annihilation of the Middle East.  Apparently that's what God wants them to do.

The Christian College had previously hosted an election stealing seminar with Ralph Reed, attended by Jim Flaherty and several Conservative operatives.

The fruits of their labour were finally realized in May of 2011, when Stephen Harper got his majority. 

However, it was the manner in which he obtained this goal that is now in question.  Not questionable at all though, given the fact that they learned from the best American democracy thieves:  Rove and Reed. (and for Harper the late Paul Weyrich)

Of course, Harper is again claiming not to know about the bogus phone calls, that have led right back to the Conservative Party.  He is "promising" to get to the bottom of it.

Just like he promised to investigate the election financing scheme that brought him to power in 2006.  Instead, he sued us, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And let's not forget the Cadman affair, when a dying man was bribed for his vote.  Stephen Harper didn't know about that either, and when a tape was produced suggesting otherwise, he claimed that it was doctored.  An FBI forensic lab proved that he was lying.

Again, he sued instead of explaining himself.

For a man with such unprecedented control, it's hard to believe that he wasn't aware of what was happening right under his nose.

This makes him either a first class liar or the stupidest man in the country, neither good attributes for a leader.

I think Elections Canada must determine that the last election was a fraud.  I doubt the NDP would want that, however, so what they should do is simply hold bi-elections in all of the ridings that Conservatives won through voter suppression and bogus telemarketing smear campaigns.

If they get away with this, it means that we will allow them to get away with anything.

The Election Fraud Scheme and Why the Latest Talking Points are Nothing But Hot Air

Harper's latest talking points on the election fraud scheme dubbed the "In and Out" is that he didn't know he was doing anything wrong and once he realized that he was, he stopped the practice. I wonder how far this would get a suspect under this government's "law and order" regime.

"I thought it was OK to rob that bank. There were no signs saying not to, and I promise I won't do it again."

For the prime minister of Canada to suggest that he wasn't aware, that fabricating receipts to get money that you're not entitled to, was illegal, is inexcusable.

And frankly. A lie.

And for the prime minister of Canada to suggest that he didn't know the election laws after spending thousands of dollars to take Elections Canada right to the Supreme Court, so that he could change the election spending laws, in favour of corporations, is inexcusable.

And frankly. A lie.

Harper vs Canada: Practice ‑‑ Stay ‑‑ Federal elections ‑‑ Spending limits ‑‑ Plaintiff granted interlocutory injunction against enforcement of third‑party spending limits pending decision on his constitutional challenge to legislation ‑‑ Whether injunction should be stayed.

The respondent sought a declaration that the provisions in the Canada Elections Act, S.C. 2000, c. 9, imposing limits on third‑party spending on advertising in the course of a federal election campaign are unconstitutional because they unjustifiably limit the right of free expression guaranteed by s. 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

He would probably know the election laws in this country better than almost anyone.

But when he lost an opportunity in court to change those laws, he just decided that when given the chance, he would simply break them.

And he got caught.

And raking Marc Maynard over the coals suggesting that he has a vendetta against Stephen Harper because he referred to his department as "the jackasses at Elections Canada" and took them to court is nonsense. Maynard wasn't even with Elections Canada then.

Which brings us to the fabrication of invoices. Basic law. Everyone knows that if you present fake invoices to get a larger income tax rebate, and get caught, you will be in trouble and probably go to jail. This is what may happen to the four conspirators already charged.

They can't use ignorance as a defense. This was willful and calculated.

Another thing to note, is that when the Conservatives challenged this in court, it was only to get the remaining rebates to the former candidates. Only 17 had slipped through the cracks before auditors became aware of the fraud scheme. The company handling their national campaign, when presented with one of the doctored invoices, said that it wasn't theirs and that it looked as though someone had photocopied their letterhead and then added the figures themselves.

The Conservatives argument was only that Maynard had no authority to investigate the scheme.

Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand overstepped his bounds by probing the Conservative party's 2006 campaign financing before rejecting the expense claims filed by some candidates, the party’s lawyer argued in court Monday. Mayrand’s role in assessing returns filed by candidates is confined by law to approving the documents provided to him and he is not empowered to launch a more detailed audit, Michel Décary told the Federal Court of Canada on the first day of hearings into the party’s legal action against the top election official.

Quite the defense.

And the 17 caught with their hands in our cookie jar, included several MPs, some cabinet ministers:

The MPs who were reimbursed are: Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon (Pontiac), Conservative whip Jay Hill (Prince George-Peace River), former foreign affairs minister Maxime Bernier (Beauce), International Co-operation Minister Josee Verner (Louis St. Laurent), Daniel Petit (Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles), Steven Blaney (Levis-Bellechasse), Jacques Gourde (Lotbiniere-Chutes-de-la-Chaudiere), Luc Harvey (Louis-Hebert), Pat Davidson (Sarnia-Lambton), David Anderson (Cypress Hills-Grasslands), and Colin Mayes (Okanagan-Shuswap).

Someone suggested yesterday that we should stop calling it the "in and out", because it oversimplifies the matter, taming it down. This was a deliberate and wilful attempt to ignore the laws that protect our democracy and cheat the Canadian taxpayers out of a great deal of money.

It's just that simple.

David Marler has been vindicated.

If an Employee in the Auditor Generals' Office Needs a Criminal Lawyer, Should They be Working in the Auditor General's Office?

We have just learned that Susan Kehoe, one of the people behind the election fraud scheme, received a patronage appointment, to of all things, the Auditor Generals Office.

A former Conservative party official charged last week in the "in-and-out" election spending affair is now working in the office of the auditor general of Canada, the government's chief spending watchdog. Susan Kehoe, the party's former chief financial officer, is one of four past or current party workers who could face fines and jail time if convicted of Elections Act violations related to advertising purchases in the 2006 campaign.

Kehoe left her job at the party and now serves as secretary of the Canadian Council of Legislative Auditors, an association of federal and provincial auditors that is run from a secretariat within the federal auditor general's office. Kehoe's name appears on the series of invoices from a media-buying firm that were submitted by Conservative candidates to back up their claims for compensation of election expenses.

All questions are being routed to her criminal lawyer. But he's not talking either. The plot thickens.

Harper's National Citizens Coalition to the Rescue

While Stephen Harper is pretending to respect Elections Canada, suggesting that he didn't know that fabricating invoices and collecting tax credits you're not entitled to, was illegal, his buddies at the NCC are doing his dirty work.

The head of the conservative lobby group Prime Minister Stephen Harper once led, when he mounted a legal battle against election spending limits while he was out of politics, says Elections Canada challenged $1.3-million worth of Conservative ad expenses from the 2006 election in retaliation for Mr. Harper’s court fights against them a decade ago.

What a farce and why would a newspaper quote them? Why not just interview Stephen Harper's mother and ask her if she thinks he did anything wrong?

Our media sucks. I'm sorry, but I can't put it any plainer than that? The National Citizens Coalition? Really? That's the best you could do?

Using them to trash Elections Canada so that Harper doesn't have to get his hands dirty? Give me a break. The implication here is that Stephen Harper has no respect for Elections Canada or any other government body. They just get in his way.

And no AstroTurf, corporate funded, tea party wannabe, will convince us otherwise.

As David Akin says: Tory transparency fails

Harper exploited the Gomery Report, commissioned by the Liberals themselves, using a single line and an unflattering picture of Paul Martin, to convince voters that the Liberals were corrupt.

Unfortunately, he can't do that with Michael Ignatieff. He was "just visiting", remember?

We Have to Remember That the "In and Out" Was Also About Fraud

The investigation into the election financing scheme of 2006, began after a conversation between Denny Pagtakhan, the son of Elizabeth Pagtakhan, 2006 Conservative candidate for Vancouver East, and Elections Canada auditor, Rani Naoufal.

Naoufal wanted an explanation for the $29,999.70 transfer from the Conservative Canada Fund, into his mother's campaign account on January 18, 2006, that was immediately withdrawn but expensed out as advertising.

Pagtakhan's answer set off a chain of events, that resulted in an RCMP raid on Conservative Party headquarters. "I think we contributed to TV national advertising. There was no way we can spend our limit so we were asked by the Party if we can help contribute."

This was quite a revelation, because what this young man described was illegal under the Elections Canada Act, since it not only meant that the Conservatives could exceed their legal spending limits on advertising, but it also meant that they would be able to receive taxpayer funded credits that they would not and should not be entitled to.

And that is one area where we have to focus. The conbots are out defending the extra one million plus in advertising, suggesting that there should be no spending limits. That is something that Stephen Harper has been fighting for years, even suing the Canadian people, in a challenge aptly called Harper vs Canada.

But let's look at this from the other angle. The rebates.

Jean-Marie Pineault, 2006 Conservative candidate for Drummond PQ, had $45,412.89 deposited into his account by party central and withdrawn the next day. His expense sheet shows this figure under advertising and telephone (cost of wire transfer).

Without this his total campaign expenses were only $8,442.68 and yet he received from Elections Canada a cheque for $11,408.04. Now remember where Elections Canada gets their money. From the taxpayer.

This means that not only did we fund his entire campaign, but we also gave him a bonus of $2,965.36, just for showing up.

Gary Caldwell running in Compton-Stanstead, had 37,238.17 come in, go out, and be recorded as advertising. Without this transaction his campaign expenses were $9,700.32, and yet he received a rebate of 11,014.17.

So again, we funded his entire campaign, and we gave him a bonus of $1,313.85, just for showing up.

These clever little transactions cost the Canadian taxpayer $777,000.00. So do you still think this was just about the party overspending on an election? This was also about defrauding the Canadian taxpayer. Us. The we's.

And they knew exactly what they were doing.

Mark Mayrand, Chief Electoral Officer, told the committee looking into the matter "that the transfer of funds from the Central Campaign to the Riding Associations, is permitted. What is not permitted is the transfer of expenses of the local candidates campaign."

Because this transfer of expenses meant having to make fraudulent claims.

Official agent and candidate both sign off and attest that the expenses occurred in the local campaign and at fair market value. Both the Conservative candidates and their agents who are under investigation apparently signed the required documents even though they knew that the expenses were not incurred locally by their campaigns.

It also meant that receipts had to fabricated, so that the candidate had something on record to "validate" the expenditure. The company handling the national campaign confirmed that they never issued receipts to local ridings, only the Conservative national headquarters.

So if a Conservative supporter tries to tell you that's it's no big deal, stealing money from taxpayers is a very big deal. And that is what happened here.

Ironically, Harper plans to run against the $ 1.95 per vote subsidy, suggesting that taxpayers shouldn't be funding election campaigns. Apparently, he believes otherwise.

If Ignorance is Bliss Pierre Poilievre Must be Down Right Giddy

It would appear that after numerous legal wranglings, court challenges, and enough bluster to fill a stadium, the Conservatives have run out of talking points to justify their 2006 election fraud, so have brought in their most lethal weapon: Pierre Poilievre.

And if you're a fan of the sideshow, he doesn't disappoint. But I don't think he's going to be able spin his party out of this one.

The Federal Appeal Court has ruled against the Conservatives in the so-called "in and out" financing case, in which cash was transferred between local Tory riding associations and the national party during the 2006 election.

Elections Canada says the Conservative Party of Canada violated campaign financing rules by moving $1.3 million in and out of 67 ridings to pay for national ads. The manoeuvres allowed the party to exceed the campaign spending limits and allowed candidates to claim rebates on expenses that weren't actually incurred, the agency said. The ruling Conservatives won a lower court case on the rebates issue last year, but Elections Canada appealed.

This puts into question their validity as a government. Something that many others have questioned since this story first broke over two years ago.

Some media faithfuls are bringing up the sponsorship scandal but there is a big difference. The Liberals themselves called for an investigation, allowing the Conservatives to use the resulting Gomery Report in attack ads. And no elected official was involved, only bureaucrats, many of whom were hired by Brian Mulroney.

By contrast, Stephen Harper himself has continually hindered the investigation, preferring to instead launch an attack on Elections Canada. Yes he sued them when he was with the National Citizens Coalition, because they said corporate funded AstroTurf groups could not spend unlimited amounts of money to engineer an election. It's undemocratic.

And this is not an "accounting" argument as little PP would like us to believe. It was a scam. Or as one Conservative candidate, David Marler, who refused to take part, called it in his book Sixty-Six Said Yes: "money laundering".

This also involved many elected officials including cabinet ministers. The list includes Conservative MPs:

Maxime Bernier: Beauce
Sylvie Boucher: Beauport-Limoilou
Daniel Petit: Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles
Jacques Gourde: Lotbiniere-Chutes-de-la-Chaudiere
Dick Harris: Cariboo-Prince George
Jim Abbott: Kootenay-Columbia
David Anderson: Cypress Hills-Grasslands
Ron Cannan: Kelowna-Lake Country
Colin Mayes: Okanagan-Shuswap
Pat Davidson: Sarnia-Lambton

Cabinet Ministers who took part:

Stockwell Day: Okanagan-Coquihalla
Josee Verner: Louis-Saint-Laurent
Christian Paradis: Megantic-L'Erable
Lawrence Cannon: Pontiac
Jay Hill: Prince George-Peace River (now retired)

And when a committee was established to investigate the "accounting" issue, Stephen Harper told witnesses to ignore subpoenas and then simply shut the committee down.

Later there was a question whether or not the 17 Conservative MPs would be able to vote on the throne speech, but again, Harper abused his power and told them to vote anyway. Elections Canada was powerless until they could first lay charges, something Harper used every trick in the book to avoid happening.

If Elections Canada did exercise that power in this dispute, however, it would mean that as many as 17 MPs – including Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier, Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon and Heritage Minister Josée Verner, as well as chief party whip Jay Hill – would all be ineligible to vote on the throne speech.

The Tories shut down a Commons committee that tried to look into the controversy this month. "We do not respond to false allegations from the Liberal party," spokesperson Ryan Sparrow said yesterday.

Went right to the partisan attack suggesting that the Liberals were behind the whole thing. How insulting to Elections Canada, an agency that is well respected worldwide, even being invited to oversee elections in other countries with fragile democracies. I'm glad they are now being given an opportunity to clear their themselves.

And according to Bruce Cheadle: Tory election allegations ‘illegal’ not administrative, prosecutor says

A spokesman for the Director of Public Prosecutions said the charges relate to allegations of “illegal activity.” The four Conservative Party officials, Dan Brien said, “are not charged under the Criminal Code. They are Elections Act offences that are alleged. It's still illegal activity.”

Illegal activity. Not "administrative". Not an "accounting error". Illegal activity. The MPs, including cabinet ministers, and the two senators should step down. We are still paying their salaries, and they are still voting on important bills that affect Canadians.

They have no validity.

The Conservative Party was Born of Corruption and Will go Down in Corruption

"Bend the rules, you will be punished; break the law, you will be charged; abuse the public trust, you will go to prison.” - Stephen Harper

Fancy words for a man who had just been involved in bending the rules, breaking the law and abusing the public trust, in an election fraud scheme dubbed the "In and Out"

As Scott Reid says:

According to Elections Canada, it's official: The Conservatives cheated in the 2006 federal election campaign. The latest evidence came yesterday when formal charges were laid against the Conservative Party itself and assorted senior officials including former campaign chief and current Senator Doug Finley.

Let's pause to allow the full significance of that statement time to steep. Elections Canada, the national, non-partisan institution charged by statute with overseeing the clean and accountable conduct of national elections, believes the Harper Conservatives incorrectly re-directed $1.3 million to unlawfully amplify its 2006 advertising budget.

Let's forget the almost $800,000.00 that Conservative candidates received that they weren't entitled to. The Conservatives broke the law, bringing their entire 2006 victory into question.

Stephen Harper is calling it an "accounting matter". So was the Enron scandal.

This is a very serious matter, that leaves Jack Layton with a bit of a dilemma. He was contemplating supporting the corporate tax cuts, which would have probably had Tommy Douglas and David Lewis, rise from their graves to slap him upside the head.

But now he has to decide whether or not to prop up a corrupt government. This becomes something else altogether. As Joan Bryden says: Charges against top Tories could trigger spring election.

NDP Leader Jack Layton's price for supporting the upcoming budget might have just gone up, in light of charges laid against four top Conservative officials over an election financing scheme. Layton, the only opposition leader Harper has any real hope of inducing to support next month's federal budget, used strong words to describe the charges. "(Tory officials) may well have been responsible for breaking election laws and causing unfair election results . . . You have a government that you cannot trust with our precious democracy, that's what I would boil it down to," Layton told The Canadian Press.

We can expect the Conservative talking points machine to go into overdrive, but there are some things you can't talk your way out of. They cheated. They stole money. They have to go.

Or as someone once told us:

”Bend the rules, you will be punished; break the law, you will be charged; abuse the public trust, you will go to prison.”

Charges Finally Being Laid Against the Conservative Party for Election Financing Scheme

Good news today, that finally after years of tying this up in the courts, the Conservative Party is having to face charges for the election financing scheme dubbed the "In and Out".

Elections Canada has laid charges against the Conservative Party and four of its members, including two senators, over alleged violations of election spending rules. CBC News has learned from Conservative sources the charges were laid Wednesday. The party members charged are: Senator Doug Finley, the party's campaign director in 2006 and 2008, and the husband of Human Resources Development Minister Diane Finley. Senator Irving Gerstein, a prominent businessman and fundraiser for the party.

Michael Donison, a former national party director. Susan Kehoe, who has served as an interim party executive director. The charges, which were laid under the Canada Elections Act, are regulatory, not criminal, and relate to the so-called "in-and-out" campaign financing case from 2006.

When the RCMP raided the Conservative offices they called it a publicity stunt, engineered by the Liberals. But the fact is that when Elections Canada arrived at their offices with a search warrant, the staff refused to hand over documents, while the shredders could be heard in the back offices. It was only then that Elections Canada was forced to call in the RCMP.

The Liberals arrived two hours after the event, when the news was spreading.

I suspect they will spin this as well, but both those senators must step down, without pay.

The Smoking Gun That Will Help us to Bring Down the Harper Dictatorship?

Canada's former "integrity" officer has been found in Florida. After ignoring a subpoena on the advice no doubt of Harper himself, she's been on the lam.

Ignoring subpoenas is Harper's m.o. When a committee was investigating the alleged election financing fraud, he told witnesses to ignore the subpoenas, then he shut down the committee and called an election, keeping everything tied up in the courts for years.

Taxpayers foot the bill.

When the Afghan Detainee issue was becoming too hot to handle, Harper told witnesses to ignore subpoenas and shut down the committee by proroguing Parliament and has kept that tied up in the courts for months.

Taxpayers foot the bill. (130 million for the prorogation alone.)

So should we be surprised that former, apparently "lack of integrity" commissioner, Christiane Ouimet, has ignored the subpoena and fled the country? And as Lawrence Martin says, Harper will drag this out in the courts, hoping to get an election out of the way before having to answer to over 200 serious fraud related charges?

There’s Bev Oda. Then there is someone who makes Ms. Oda’s actions, judging from a recent Auditor-General’s report, look rather angelic. The elusive former integrity commissioner, Christiane Ouimet, was finally located last week – in Florida. And now that she has been located, the Conservative government may face one of its stiffest tests of damage control. Ms. Ouimet (rhymes with Antoinette) is the public servant who, according to Sheila Fraser’s damning report, did not do her job properly – choosing to investigate just seven of 228 complaints about wrongdoing in the public sector – possibly saving the Harper government multiple embarrassments.

After failing to appear before a parliamentary committee despite being subpoenaed, she sent a rather terse message to the committee through her lawyer
saying she was willing to return March 10 to face interrogators. What a show it promises to be. Given the large number of uninvestigated cases that came before
her, the possibility of smoking guns suddenly appearing on the government’s doorstep can hardly be discarded.

Apparently many are very serious. Could we see some go to jail? I mean the Conservatives claim to be tough on crime. But then if they only stole from taxpayers it doesn't count, right?

Does Stephen Harper Have the Legal Right to Govern?

The 2006 federal election was one of the most bizarre on record. Going in the Liberals had a ten point lead. And in a little Deja Vu, this was the news in July of 2005:

Stephen Harper moved yesterday to revive his political fortunes in the electoral heartland of Ontario even as a new poll shows that 59 per cent of Canadians want him replaced, including more than one-third of his own supporters.

The poll also found that the difficulties of the just-completed sitting of the House of Commons have left Canadians with an increasingly negative image of Mr. Harper, with 41 per cent saying their opinion of the Conservative Leader has worsened .... "The poll, which found that the Liberals continue to maintain a nine-point lead on the Tories in voting intention, came yesterday as Mr. Harper glad-handed in cottage country north of Toronto. The Conservative Leader is touring Canada this summer to build party support in preparation for an election next winter.

After losing the 2004 election, and his thwarted attempt to form a coalition with the Bloc and NDP to bring down Paul Martin at the throne speech, we had all but written Harper off. He couldn't be trusted.

But what we couldn't have known was that the Harper team was engaged in political guerrilla warfare. Monopolizing on the Sponsorship Scandal, they were able to paint Paul Martin as a crook, despite the fact that he wasn't involved and it was he who ordered the Gomerey investigation.

And that summer, when Stephen Harper was glad-handing, what he was really doing was mobilizing the Religious Right. Helped along with radio spots, purchased in over a hundred Canadian stations by James Dobson, the American behind the group, Focus on the Family.

Many of Harper's stump speeches regaled against same-sex marriage, while these radio spots did the same.

A foreign country interfering in a Canadian election.

But that was only the tip of the iceberg.

Friends of Science

The Conservative policy on the environment was weak at best, offering only an abstract 'Made in Canada' solution. As a result, a group calling themselves Friends of Science, also began buying up radio spots to sell the Conservative message that Global Warming was a hoax.

An investigation into FOS revealed that the group was actually tied directly to Stephen Harper and the oil and gas industry.

From the Globe and Mail:

Friends of Science has taken undisclosed sums from Alberta oil and gas interests. The money was funneled through the Calgary Foundation, to the University of Calgary and on to the FOS though something called the “Science Education Fund.” All this appears to be orchestrated by Stephen Harper’s long-time political confidante and fishing buddy, U. Calgary Prof Dr. Barry Cooper. It seems the FOS has taken a page right out of the US climate change attack group’s playbook: funnel money through foundations and third party groups to “wipe the oil” off the dollars they receive. (1)

And from the University of Calgary's Gauntlet:

The University of Calgary has discontinued its relationship with the controversial Friends of Science organization and, after the results of an internal audit released Mon., Apr. 14, the U of C will revise policies related to research funding. But the audit did not determine whether funding from two trust funds at the university for an anti-Kyoto ad campaign was in violation of the Canada Elections Act. (2)

It was in fact in violation, but by the time this was made public, Harper had been in office two years, and this possible criminal act was buried in the larger scandal of another election financing scheme.

The RCMP Complicity

At a point when the Liberals were assured victory, former RCMP boss, Giuliano Zaccardelli, appeared to have engineered a smear campaign against Ralph Goodale, suggesting that he and the Liberal Party by association, were involved in a bit of insider trading.

That too got swept under the rug.

Following the election, there was no immediate call for an inquiry. For the defeated Liberals to have demanded one would have appeared self-serving. The NDP had played the role of willing enabler for the RCMP plan, so it was not keen to demand accountability. And Prime Minister Stephen Harper, unlike Paul Martin and his zeal to appoint Judge Gomery to uncover his own party's scandal, had no interest in investigating a scandal that had helped the Conservatives win. (3)

The "In and Out"

In April of 2008, at about the same time as the Friends of Science scandal broke, the RCMP raided the Conservative Party headquarters, as part of an investigation into an election financing scheme.

During the campaign, the Conservative party conducted a series of financial transactions in which it wire-transferred money to Tory candidates, who then returned cash to the party in the form of advertising purchases. One campaign official interviewed by Elections Canada staff referred to these transactions as “in-and-outs.”Many of the ads in question were for the national party and the only reference to the local candidates who paid for them were small tag lines at the end.

This enabled them to spend over a million dollars more than the other parties on advertising, in the final days of the campaign. A direct violation of the election act.

But what this also meant was that local candidates, who would receive rebates of up to 60% of their expenses, were able to claim credits they weren't entitled to on money they themselves never spent. Almost $800,000.00 in tax payer dollars. And while Elections Canada froze rebates after discovering the scheme, many had already been issued.

A Parliamentary committee was organized to look into the affair, but Stephen Harper directed those called, to ignore the subpoenas, closed down the committee, then broke his own law by calling a snap election, putting Canadian taxpayers on the hoof for another 300 million dollars, simply because he didn't want to deal with what could eventually lead to criminal charges.

Undemocratic, given that his was the only party ready for election, since they were the only party aware that he would make such a daring move.

Stephen Harper has kept this tied up in the courts, while he continues to govern like nothing happened. As though he has a legal right to be where he is.

During those five years that he has held office, he has stolen our reputation, our democracy, our money and our sovereignty.

And his entire right to govern may have been the result of a fraud. Or several frauds as it turns out.

But we will take this information into the next election campaign. He can't escape justice forever.




Sources:

1. Oil Companies Funding Friends of Science, Tim Ball takes the brunt, Jim Hoggan, DeSmog Blog, August 12, 2006

2. Friends of Science audit released: University looks into policies regarding research funding, By Jon Roe, Features Editor, The Gauntlet, April 17, 2008

3. Losing Confidence: Power, Politics and Crisis in Canadians Democracy, By Elizabeth May, McClelland & Stewart, 2009, ISBN: 978-0-7710-5760-1, Pg. 132-147

Did the Conservatives Cheat or Are They Guilty of Criminal Activity?

The "In and Out" scandal is hitting the news again and new revelations show that the Conservatives passed off even more national spending to the riding level.

And again they are suing us, instead of finally answering to the Canadian people.

Pierre Poilievre is suggesting that past lawsuits vindicated them, but that is not true.

Pierre Poilievre, parliamentary secretary to Harper, was dismissive. "We disagree with Elections Canada on this matter," he said. He went on to note that "Elections Canada has been wrong in its classification of expenses" in the past.

"In fact, two courts have already ruled against Elections Canada in favour of the Conservative party." Poilievre was referring to a Conservative victory in a civil lawsuit launched by two Tory candidates in the in-and-out advertising case. However, the party is not entirely in the clear on that front yet.

Elections Canada and the party, for different reasons, have both appealed the court ruling. And the commissioner of elections is still conducting a separate criminal investigation into the in-and-out affair and has referred the matter to the director of public prosecutions, who is still considering whether to lay charges.

Many who got involved in the alleged swindle are sitting MPs, and several like Stockwell Day, Christian Paradis and Lawrence Cannon, are in cabinet.

Candidates who allegedly received disputed funds
The Canadian Press
Apr 21, 2008

QUEBEC
Suzanne Courville: Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel
Marie-Eve Helie-Lambert: Bas-Richelieu-Nicolet-Becancour
Maxime Bernier: Beauce
Sylvie Boucher: Beauport-Limoilou
Daniel Petit: Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles
Gary Caldwell: Compton-Stanstead
Jean-Marie Pineault: Drummond
Patrick Robert: Gatineau
Gilles Poirier: Hull-Aylmer
Andrea Paine: Lac-Saint-Louis
Jean-Serge Beauregard: Laurentides-Labelle
Steven Blaney: Levis-Bellechasse
Jacques Gourde: Lotbiniere-Chutes-de-la-Chaudiere
Luc Harvey: Louis-Hebert
Josee Verner: Louis-Saint-Laurent
Christian Paradis: Megantic-L'Erable
Yves Laberge: Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute Cote Nord
Neil Martin Drabkin: Mount Royal
Allen Mackenzie: Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine
Don Rae: Pierrefonds-Dollard
Lawrence Cannon: Pontiac
Howard Brule: Portneuf-Jacques Cartier
Frederik Boisvert: Quebec
Jean Landry: Richmond-Arthabaska
Ishrat Alam: Saint-Laurent-Cartierville
Jean Lambert: Shefford
Marc Nadeau: Sherbrooke

ONTARIO
Ian West: Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing
Theresa Rodrigues: Davenport
Steven Cage: Kitchener Centre
Dan Mailer: London-Fanshawe
Jurij Klufas: Parkdale-High Park
Pat Davidson: Sarnia-Lambton
Roxanne James: Scarborough Centre
David Leskowski: Thunder Bay-Rainy River
Ken Graham: Timmins-James Bay
Kren Clausen: Toronto-Danforth
Sam Goldstein: Trinity-Spadina
Richard Majkot: Vaughn
Al Teshuba: Windsor West
Steve Halicki: York South-Weston

BRITISH COLUMBIA
George Drazenovic: Burnaby-Douglas
Marc Dalton: Burnaby-New Westminster
Dick Harris: Cariboo-Prince George
Troy DeSouza: Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
Ron Cannan: Kelowna-Lake Country
Jim Abbott: Kootenay-Columbia
Norm Sowden: Nanaimo-Cowichan
Colin Mayes: Okanagan-Shuswap
Stockwell Day: Okanagan-Coquihalla
Jay Hill: Prince George-Peace River
Elizabeth Pagtakhan: Vancouver East
Kanman Wong: Vancouver Kingsway

NEWFOUNDLAND
Aaron Hynes: Bonavista-Gander-Grand Falls-Windsor
Cyril Pelley: Humber-Ste-Barbe-Baie Verte
Joe Goudie: Labrador
Cynthia Downey: Random-Burin-St. George's

NOVA SCOTIA
Robert Campbell: Dartmouth-Cole Harbour
Andrew House: Halifax
Rakesh Khosla: Halifax West
MANITOBA
Helen Sterzer: Winnipeg Centre
Gareth McDonald: Winnipeg North

NEW BRUNSWICK
Omer Leger: Beausejour
Charles Doucet: Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe

SASKATCHEWAN
David Anderson: Cypress Hills-Grasslands
Jeremy Harrison: Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND
George Noble: Malpeque

Dr. Mr. Harper. Please Don't Sue Us Again. "Uncle" Already

Since the RCMP first raided the Conservative Party headquarters, seeking evidence of an election campaign financing scheme, Stephen Harper and his gaggle of lawyers have kept us tied up in the courts.

Instead of just returning the $ 777,000.00 that they weren't entitled to, they closed down committees, and racked up legal bills, that are all being paid for by us.

Forget the attack on our democracy, when they cunningly crafted a plan that allowed them to spend more than a million dollars over the limit allowed, in the crucial final days of the campaign.

Elections Canada has opened a second front in its battle with the Conservative party over what it considers systematic attempts to hide national campaign expenses during the 2006 election. The Canadian Press has learned that chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand has taken the governing party to task for failing to properly report the cost of running two regional campaign offices in Quebec.

“It is clear that the party incurred all expenses related to both the Montreal and Quebec City offices,” Mr. Mayrand wrote in a Sept. 8 letter to Senator Irving Gerstein, chairman of the Conservative Fund. “It also appears clear that the (local) campaigns did not use or benefit from the offices, employees or office equipment.” The letter and related correspondence were uncovered by respected political website PunditsGuide.ca and provided to The Canadian Press.

And yes he's suing us again.

A Deceptive Democracy: The Annihilation of Stéphane Dion and the Media's Complicity

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"For the first time in Canadian political life, attack ads have been launched outside an election cycle. The Conservative "Not a Leader" tag line for Stephane Dion was drummed into voters' heads in January 2007 — mere weeks after Stephane Dion won the Liberal leadership. The increasing prominence of a presidential-style prime minister is steadily denigrating the traditions and institutions of Canadian democracy." - Elizabeth May (1)

From television ads to tax payer funded ten percenters, the Reform-Conservatives hammered the message that Stephane Dion was not a leader, based on nothing more than a fabricated perception of weakness.

And when that wasn't enough, they resorted to lies. The MP from Blackstrap Saskatchewan, Lynne Yelich, used her taxpayer funded handouts to suggest that Mr. Dion was going to end the Universal childcare benefit, when he had never said such a thing. He was only promoting a national child care plan, instead of throwing crumbs at a problem. But that never factored into Yelich's attack. Fear mongering was her only goal.

They also used a soundbite from the leadership convention, when Dion asked Michael Ignatieff "Do you think it's easy to make priorities?", when in fact the translation would have been to "keep". And besides, if we were going to use comments made at leadership conventions or during leadership races, the Conservatives, when they were Reform and then Alliance, were ruthless. You could write a book.

And if the push-poll handouts, TV ads and fabrications weren't enough, they even resorted to spying, using our employee James Murray to run covert operations.



But the worst was yet to come.

The 2008 Undemocratic Election

In their book: The provincial state in Canada, Keith Brownsey and Michael Howlett, referred to the 1999 election campaign of Mike Harris in Ontario as "probably the most undemocratic Electoral campaign that post-war Ontario had witnessed." (2) If that was the most undemocratic in modern Ontario history, the 2008 Conservative federal election campaign, was hands down the most undemocratic in Canadian history.

First off, there should not have been an election at all. Not only did Stephen Harper break his own law to call a snap election, but there was a criminal investigation underway against his party for the "In and Out" election scheme. An investigation in which he was doing everything in his power to squash.

According to Dr. Joan Russow of the Global Compliance Research Project:

There should never have been an election in Canada. The Governor General should have refused to accept the Right Honourable Steven Harper’s request for an election when there was an outstanding investigation into the fraudulent practices of the Conservative Party during the 2006 election. The investigation was underway by the Parliamentary Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. With the calling of the election, the Committee was disbanded. In addition, there was a similar investigation by Elections Canada. (3)

I think that was probably one of the main reasons the election was called. It halted the investigation and gave Harper a chance to get a legal team in place.

And they had not even dealt with the Chuck Cadman affair, when Stephen Harper was caught on tape admitting that he knew of the one million dollar bribe presented to the dying MP for his vote. (4)

But the Conservatives were confident that they had irrevocably damaged the reputation of the Liberal leader, and were going to ride that to a majority.

The Campaign Hits a Snag

One thing that the 1999 re-election campaign of Mike Harris, and the 2008 re-election campaign of Stephen Harper had in common, was Guy Giorno. He handled them both, but despite leaving nothing to chance and keeping Stephen Harper in a bubble throughout, they still found themselves in trouble.

The environment was becoming an election issue, and Harper's climate change denial was already well known. Then a group of Nobel prize winning environmentalists came out in favour of the carbon tax, which was considered by many to be the best in place to fight global warming.

The Liberals then started to rise in the polls and Stephen Harper was in trouble.

The fallout from the French and English debates shows the previous pre-debate 10 point Conservative margin is now four percentage points. Tracking shows incremental movement in favour of the Liberals and Stephane Dion. Dion registered his highest score as the person Canadians think would make the best Prime Minister. (5)

Enter CTV*, Steve Murphy and Mike Duffy

We probably all remember the airing of the false starts, when Stephane Dion appeared on Steve Murphy's program. False starts that were later made into a Mike Duffy episode, and a rare press conference by Stephen Harper. But what most people may not know, considering that the media buried the story, is that both Steve Murphy and Mike Duffy were charged with ethics violations, as a result of their complicity in influencing the results of an election.

The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) today released two decisions concerning the broadcast of three false starts of an interview by CTV anchor Steve Murphy with Liberal leader Stéphane Dion during the October 2008 federal election campaign. Each restart had been requested by Mr. Dion and granted by Mr. Murphy, CJCH-TV (CTV Atlantic)’s news anchor.

One decision related to the first broadcast of the false starts (which were followed by the broadcast of the full 12-minute interview) on CTV Atlantic’s newscast CTV News at 6 on October 9. The other related to the rebroadcast by CTV Newsnet of the restarts on the public affairs discussion program Mike Duffy Live Prime Time later that same evening. The CBSC concluded that both broadcasts violated certain provisions of the Radio Television News Directors of Canada (RTNDA) Code of (Journalistic) Ethics and the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ (CAB) Code of Ethics. (6)

The CRTC also found that the question asked (I wonder who wrote it?) was convoluted and in violation of media fairness:

The CBSC’s Atlantic Regional Panel examined the CTV Atlantic broadcast, while the National Specialty Services Panel adjudicated the Mike Duffy Live broadcast. The Atlantic Panel reviewed the complaints under the provisions of the RTNDA Code of (Journalistic) Ethics and CAB Code of Ethics relating to accuracy and fairness, as well as an article of the RTNDA Code that requires journalists to treat people with decency and courtesy. The Panel observed that the phrasing of Murphy’s question was “confusing, and not only to a person whose first language is other than English. In the strictest grammatical sense, Steve Murphy’s question mixes not only tenses (present and past), but also moods (subjunctive and indicative),” so “blame for misapprehension cannot simply be laid at the feet of the interviewee.” (6)

They also found that:

In the rest of the full interview, which continued from that point but was not broadcast on the Duffy show, the Liberal leader, in response to Murphy’s several questions, dealt with what he would say “to ease the minds of Canadians”, the Liberal economic plan, the proposed carbon tax, deficits, the green shift, taxes, comparable European national policies, and Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan. The transcript of that interview can be found as Appendix A to the Atlantic Regional Panel’s decision in CJCH-TV (CTV Atlantic) re CTV News at 6 (Stéphane Dion interview) (CBSC Decision 08/09-0196+, January 12, 2009). (7)

And even the airing of the false starts by Murphy raised questions:

As anchor for that newscast, Murphy introduced his full interview session, including all restarts, with Liberal leader Stéphane Dion as follows: "Someone once said that in politics a week is a lifetime. Well, it’s now several weeks since we last spoke with Stéphane Dion and a great many things have changed. The world markets are now in turmoil, interest rates and the dollar are falling and the Liberal Party has seen its popularity rise in the polls after the two leaders debates. Against that backdrop, we sat down this afternoon with Stéphane Dion. I began by asking Mr. Dion about his comments that the prime minister has done nothing to put Canadians’ minds at ease about the current economic problems. I asked him, quote, “If you were prime minister now, what would you have done that Mr. Harper has not done?” After beginning to answer that question, Monsieur Dion asked to start the interview again because he did not understand the question.

After a second false start, a member of Monsieur Dion’s staff explained the question to Monsieur Dion and there was also a third false start. Perhaps we shouldn’t have agreed to restart with the questioning and the Liberal campaign was anxious that this exchange not be broadcast and initially we indicated that it would not be. However, on reflection, CTV News believes we owe it to you to show you everything that happened." CTV Atlantic then proceeded to broadcast the full interview, preceded by the false starts and retakes. The false starts consisted solely of a head shot of Stéphane Dion, Murphy’s voice being heard off-camera. The complete interview reflected the more traditional cutaways to the interviewer. (8)

Two months after the election, on December 22, 2008; Mike Duffy was given a plum senate appointment for his efforts. But considering the fact that he had not only violated ethics, but had grossly interfered in the democratic process, should there not be a parliamentary ethics investigation? Should he not be removed from senate?

I don't think he can simply walk away from this, especially when he's still on our dole. What do you think?



Footnotes:

*Peter MacKay's fiancee is an executive at CTV. (they have since split but were together then)
Sources:

1. Losing Confidence: Power, Politics and Crisis in Canadians Democracy, By Elizabeth May, McClelland & Stewart, 2009, ISBN: 978-0-7710-5760-1, Pg. 8

2. The Provincial State: Politics in Canada's Provinces and Territories, by Keith Brownsey and Michael Howlett, UTP Higher Education, 2001, ISBN-13: 978-155111368, Pg. 193

3. Canadian Election: Perhaps the most absurd in Canadian History, By Joan Russow (PhD), Global Compliance Research Project, October 8, 2008

4. Cadman confided Tory offer, 'hurt' daughter says, By Petti Fong, Toronto Star, February 29, 2008

5. CPAC-Nanos Daily Election Tracking CP 34, LP 30, NDP 19, BQ 10, GP 7, October 4, 2010

6. Airing of Stéphane Dion Interview False Starts Violated Broadcast Codes, Says Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, May 27, 2009

7. CTV Newsnet re an episode of Mike Duffy Live Prime Time (Stéphane Dion Interview), CANADIAN BROADCAST STANDARDS COUNCIL, national specialty services Panel, April 6, 2009

8. CJCH-TV (CTV Atlantic) re CTV News at 6 (Stéphane Dion interview), CANADIAN BROADCAST STANDARDS COUNCIL, Atlantic Regional Panel, January 12, 2009