Shapiro - "I know what I said, BUT..."
Don't let the MSM burry this story! Shapiro just put another nail in his own coffin!
The "Ethics" Commissioner has once again played the role of a political partisan to a "T"; Shapiro has refused to investigate the Martin/Stronach floor crossing... even though his OWN WORDS in his Harper/Emerson report painted him into a corner on the issue. Read all about it here from CTV...
The "Ethics" Commissioner has once again played the role of a political partisan to a "T"; Shapiro has refused to investigate the Martin/Stronach floor crossing... even though his OWN WORDS in his Harper/Emerson report painted him into a corner on the issue. Read all about it here from CTV...
"Shapiro refuses to probe Stronach defectionNow, Shapiro's own words from his Harper/Emerson Report...
Updated Thu. Mar. 30 2006 6:27 AM ET
Canadian Press
OTTAWA — The federal ethics commissioner says he will not investigate former prime minister Paul Martin's role in bringing Belinda Stronach into the Liberal ranks last May.
Bernard Shapiro says there's nothing in the ethics guidelines to stop a prime minister from appointing an opposition member to his cabinet - in fact, he calls it a constitutional right.
Shapiro was responding to a complaint from New Democrat MP Pat Martin, who had complained that the former prime minister may have violated ethics guidelines by offering Stronach a cabinet job.
(Pat) Martin said he's surprised.
He said Shapiro sent a clear message in his report on David Emerson's recent party switch that had the defection been linked to a Commons vote, it would have been a clear violation of the guidelines.
Martin filed his complaint after the Emerson report because he said Stronach, a former Tory, crossed the floor on the eve of a critical Commons vote that threatened to bring down the minority Liberal government."
Clearly, if the Prime Minister were to approach a member with an offer of a Cabinet position with the sole intent and specific purpose of acquiring that member’s vote directly linked to a parliamentary proceeding existing at that time, such conduct would be inappropriate and unacceptable. Conversely, if a member of the House were to approach the Prime Minister indicating that, in exchange for a Cabinet position, his or her vote could be acquired for the sole intent and specific purpose that is directly linked to a parliamentary proceeding existing at that time, that too, would be inappropriate and unacceptable.Yes, clearly, it would be unacceptable. If it were to happen, I suppose someone like the Ethics Commissioner should investigate.
posted by Christian Conservative @ 7:03 p.m.
6 Comments:
At Fri Mar 31, 07:42:00 p.m. EST,
Anonymous said…
And this surprises you how?
At Fri Mar 31, 07:52:00 p.m. EST,
Anonymous said…
Like I've said all along....
What do you do when your ethics commisioner repeatedly shows himself to be unethical, bias, and incompetant?
....You fire him at your nearest conveniece!
At Fri Mar 31, 11:09:00 p.m. EST,
Christian Conservative said…
Isn't a waste of money to go through a formal investigation, have to issue a formal report when he is going to have to, for the same reasons he used in the Emerson case, find that the appointment of Belinda Stronach to PMPM's cabinet was perfectly legit (even if it was horribly unethical)?
In reality, we can't do that, because of the reasons given by Mr. Shapiro himself in his Harper/Emerson report. He clearly said that such a floor-crossing, directly related to a major vote, would be a clear violation of all ethical rules.
How can we possibly allow Mr. Shapiro to remain in his post when he's shown, on more than one occasion, that he is unwilling to apply ethical standards impartially between the various parties?
Doesn't that make him un-Ethical?
And, having proven that he's unethical, since he's responsible for maintaining ethics in Ottawa...
...shouldn't he resign?
I'm waiting to see the text of his response to NDP MP Pat Martin.
At Sat Apr 01, 08:47:00 a.m. EST,
Anonymous said…
As one who really doesn't know a huge deal about the legality of all this, I'll just comment as an observer from the street.
Stronach's defection happened relatively late in her term as a Conservative, whereas Emerson's happened right after he was elected as a Liberal who threatened to be a nightmare to the Conservatives if I recall correctly. No matter how the Conservatives try to paint this, I can't see how anyone could trust Emerson again after this happened. Obviously people still trust Stronach as she was re-elected, but there is no re-vote being allowed for Emerson so we don't know whether he really stands for what the people in his riding actually want or not.
One thing we can say for certainty after all of this though, there is no true democracy in Canada. Although that has always been the case I suppose, Canadian "democracy" truly is a farce run by the rich and powerful, not by the people.
"The Empire never ended." - PKD
At Sat Apr 01, 08:36:00 p.m. EST,
Christian Conservative said…
I dunno... I kinda thought it was funny, but after thinking about it, it is kinda harsh.
However, don't forget how critical those said people have been of him... kinda a tit-for-tat thing, I guess.
At Mon Apr 03, 05:16:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
My absence is due to something called "work". ;-) Busy day today.
Harper's "Accountability Act" will be addressing a wide range of issues, including lobbying, however, he never suggested (in any of his statements, interviews, etc.) that he intended to restrict floor crossing. In fact, he supported the right of an MP to cross the floor even when Belinda did it... what he protested was the methods used by Mr. Martin to influence her... methods that Shapiro himself has said would be unethical. (yet he still refuses to investigate... hummm...) Nor did he suggest that he would eliminate Senate appointments... but HAS suggested that using his powers to appoint would be limted. Yes, Senate reform is important, but it's not one of the FIVE MAJOR priorities right now. Perhaps we can tackle it when we get a majority. ;-)
Besides... one more Tory (TEMPORARILY) in there helps to balance out the Liberal over-dominance due to endless appointing of Liberal "culture of entitlement" cronies.
In regards to lobbying, he will be limiting former staffers being able to lobbying the government... he has no control over the staffers who have recently jumped ship prior to the Act's introduction.
Post a Comment
<< Home