Bribery or Breach of Ethics???

LUCAS OLENIUK/TORONTO STAR

PM Harper has a lot of explaining to do about this Affair..

Update: March 4 10 am: PM Harper give notice to the Liberals and Party Leader Spephan Dion that he will sue for Libel if the Liberals would not retract from their Website their post claiming that the PM had knowledge of the supposed Bribery and it did took Place..Cadman widow in a subsequent interview, said that Harper, then an opposition Leader met with her after the vote and assured her that no offer was made..here is the details of the Update..

A biography of Cadman, to be published this month, charges that two Conservative party officials offered Cadman, who was critically ill with cancer, a $1 million life insurance policy if he voted against the then-Liberal minority government in a confidence vote on May 19, 2005. If he had voted with the Conservatives, the government would have fallen, forcing an election.

Background: Chuck Cadman was a British Columbia MP who remained Independent after the Re-Uniting of the Conservatives, who split up into splinter Parties after the debacles of Elections past. During the Confidence vote in Paul Martin minority Liberal Government in May 2005, his vote was crucial for the survival of the Government, thus arising to the Scandal that the Conservatives, in the opposition at that Time was trying to lure the Independent MP to their side to defeat the Government triggering an Election with an alleged Offer of a $1 Million in Life Insurance Policy. Cadman voted for the Liberal, thereby assuring the survival of the Government for another few months..Cadman died July 9. 2005, less than two months after the vote.

Now the Liberal Party, the main opposition, who have been propping up the Minority Conservative government to avoid an early Election nobody wants, is re-examining it’s strategy of supporting the Government and instead openly musing of toppling it as the Members find it hard to support the Government after the allegation.

The allegation was supported by Cadman’s widow, who herself now is a candidate for the Conservative Party and was also echoed by his daughter, which also followed her Mother’s statement that her father told her of the same before he died and added that she so proud he didn’t not take the offer...

Confronted with the allegation PM Harper, who had an Interview with the Author of the Book which script been released in Advance, even suggested that he knew of the offer but has this to say:

And an interview with the book's author, Vancouver journalist Tom Zytaruk, Harper, who was opposition leader at the time, even suggests he knew of the offer.
Asked about the insurance policy, Harper said, "it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election, okay? That's my understanding of what they were talking about."

All personalities involved in the allegation do not deny that they had been meeting with the MP, but denied about the offer of Life Insurance Policy or any monetary incentives..(pls note that according to the experts in the field of insurance, Chuck Cadman at the time was uninsurable for having terminal cancer)

It is considered an offence under the Criminal Code to offer a politician an inducement, financial or otherwise, to influence him or her.

The Opposition Liberals already written the RCMP to look after the allegations and the Force will review the contents of the letter and will make up the decision to proceed with the investigation or not...

For more of the Brewing Scandals check the pages of the Toronto Star

And for those who may have doubts that the tale maybe too good to be True how about this column by tom walkom

Tackling Official Corruptions...the Canadian Way..

Federal Auditor General Sheila Fraser..started the ball rolling after an article in a Daily Paper Globe and Mail questioned the Government in what it suspected as "fraud" in Sponsorship Program...




Tackling Official Corruptions, the Canadian Way..

Corruptions by Elected Officials and Public Servants are happening in almost Every Government and Country anywhere. It is endemic to most countries where Governments are weak and to some where Poverty and Widespread Inequity are the realities of everyday existence. But First World countries are not exempt, not even in our case to which a few years ago the now famous Sponsorship Programs Scandal was exposed and made every Canadian wondering why such corruptions of the scope unimaginable would ever happen in this Country so Proud of its Transparency and Accountability of the people who were elected to led.

What is the Sponsorship Program?

It was the Federal Program set up in the wake of 1995 Quebec Sovereignty to help promote Federalism and the money was supposed to be used to raise Canada’s profile in Quebec.

How the Scandal was exposed?
In 2002 the PM of the day, Jean Chretien was forced to address the issue when the Globe and Mail, a major daily paper, Under the Access of Information Act, tried to find out why the Government paid $550,000 to the advertising firm Groupaction Marketing for a report that could not be found, and no one at the Public Works ministry or the ad firm could answer it.

PM Chretien called on federal Auditor General Sheila Fraser to look at the matter. She found out a lot to launch a full investigation and ask the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to get involved as well..

Short of two years later, Fraser released her explosive report, and not shy to use the words such as “appalling”and “scandalous” to describe how the Liberals abused the system.

She found out that money in the amount of $100 millions were paid to various communications agencies in the form of commissions and fees and said the program was basically designed to generate commissions to the said companies than to benefit Canadians.

That Public Works officials “just broke every rule in the book” awarding contracts to the company Groupaction which was paid millions. Details of federal Auditor General Sheila Fraser’s report can be checked here (auditor’s report 2004)

PM Chretien had already resigned after 11 years and Paul Martin replaced him as the Party Leader and PM and Martin promptly called on Justice Gomery to conduct an Inquiry and promised to resign if there was evidence that he knew of the frauds in the program. Final reports didn’t implicate Paul Martin, but he resigned after the Liberal lost the government after the election that was called when the Parliament lost the confidence of the Government due to the Scandal.

Justice Gomery's Reports phase 1 and 2 can also be read here..phase 1 and phase 2 and final report

Important note: Both PM Paul Martin and former PM Chretien appeared before the Inquiry to give testimonies under oath. For PM Martin it was the first time since Canada was Six Years old that a sitting PM appeared before a Public Inquiry.

The RCMP was also involved, investigating allegations of fraud beginning in May 2002.

Aftermath:

Justice Gomery's reports were conclusive and painted the picture clearly of what happened to the program. Who were responsible and also recommended to the Government of measures to strengthened accountability in governance.

RCMP criminal investigations resulted in Criminal Charges and Convictions for the officials and business people involved in frauds and conspiracy.

Former PM Chretien against his strong protestation was implicated lightly as not diligence in his watch, but absolved of any direct knowledge of fraud committed by his party members and officials. He was a Good Prime Minister and still other than this scandal during his Eleven Years as PM, will be remembered as One Great Leader and a very distinguished career for his decades of government service in many other positions.

PM Paul Martin was not implicated as having any knowledge of the ongoing scandal while Finance Minister during the time.

Although he lost the government due to the scandal and resigned as party leader, he came out clean and his reputations untarnished. Another Good Leader who didn’t have much chance to prove himself, but proved it in another capacity as Former Finance Minister, bringing Canada to a healthy budget surplus, that is still enjoyed by the current government, from deficit in previous years. A very successful businessman in his private life, a well respected family man and he has done a good job to his country and people in public and private.

Thus, we have concluded one of the biggest scandals in our history as a nation born some 140 years ago (1867). We may have some in the future, but I believe that if it ever happens again, we have the resolve to face up to it and have the courage to deal with it squarely and in our own way bring each and everyone to proper resolution...

For indepth details and related items you may go tothis site

And for more readings here arethe top 10 scandals in Canadian Political History...some were just scandals and remained scandals while others were later proven more than just scandals, some funny, some serious..

Government Introduces Law banning veiled voting...

Lifting the Veil


Just last month, Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand, challenged the government on the law that requires voters in federal elections to identify themselves and noted that the law does not specify... how? And said that he will allow Muslim women voters wearing veil to vote without uncovering their faces for identification. Threat and counter threats of lawsuits between the Government and the Chief ensued, but during a press conference the Chief challenged the Government if to show faces is what the MPs intended, then change the law and the Government responded by doing just that, introducing the law banning veiled voting". And more debates ensued...funny those politicians..

And here are the Two Cents from some of them:

Peter Van Loan, the minister responsible for democratic reform:

said he hopes the bill will settle the potentially corrosive debate over the accommodation of diverse religious beliefs.

Liberal deputy leader Michael Ignatieff:

I do not want this debate imported into the House of Commons,"
While he supports requiring all voters to identify themselves, he added "What I don't like about this whole project is the idea that we take a bunch of women wearing veils and we make a whole big deal about this . . . Let's not have politicians fishing around and creating divisions between Canadians about this."

Mohamed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress:

the law is unnecessary and will feed discrimination against Muslim Canadians. And he suggested the Tories are hoping to make "political mileage among Islamophobes."

Sameer Zuberi, of the Council on American Islamic Relations-Canada:

the federal Tories are trying to "win over Quebec" by jumping on an issue that is already raging in the province. He questioned the urgency of the matter given that "there are hardly any" women in Canada who choose to wear niqabs or burkas to cover their faces.

The issue of veiled voters first came up during the Quebec provincial election last spring, adding fuel to an already heated debate over how far the province should go in accommodating newcomers. Action démocratique du Québec Leader Mario Dumont's popularity surged after he suggested Quebec has gone too far in catering to immigrants.

Last month, the issue popped up on the national radar during three federal byelections in Quebec. Marc Mayrand, the country's chief electoral officer, opened a political storm when he said the law did not require byelection voters to uncover their faces.

For details and more Two Cents from all parties of interest, you may go to the link in first paragraph, for the background and how it all started here is my previous post on the subject but here is for the sunshines of the week...

Take it or Leave it...

Prime Minister Harper responding to the Liberal Amendment to his Anti-Crime Bill...
Take it or Leave it..Government warns oppositions to pass the Bill without changes

That’s the message of PM Harper Minority Government to the Oppositions in the house for the Omnibus Crime Bill to be introduced after the Throne Speech that outlined the Government Plan of Action during this year’s session of Parliament.

That daring do challenge was the result of Opposition Liberal Leader Stephan Dion announcement that his Party is not ready for an immediate election for not supporting the Throne Speech.

Some of the provision of Tough Crime Legislation is the Automatic Refusal of Bail for Gun Crime and the other contentious one is the Strike Three you’re out Provision for individual convicted of Serious Crimes.

And still the other one is the raising the age of consent of sexual activities from 14 to l6...for details on this proposed change, you may read here the intentions of the ressurected bill , the move that will Bring Canada in line with other countries such as U.S, Britain and Australia.

The proposed bill revives Criminal Code reforms to:
*Automatically refuse bail to those charged with gun crimes.

*Provide longer mandatory minimum jail terms for gun- and gang-related crimes.

*Make it easier for police to detect and charge drivers impaired by drugs.

*Raise the legal age of consent for sexual activity to 16 from 14.

*Make it easier to prosecute and indefinitely jail "dangerous offenders" after three convictions for serious crimes.


With the omnibus bill, and the threat of a confidence vote on it – which could trigger an election if the government doesn't win – the Conservatives are boasting of having boxed in the Liberals.

"If they have a problem with the area on dangerous offenders and that's the hill they want to die on – standing up for dangerous offenders in this country – that's their decision," said Nicholson.

Liberal justice critic Marlene Jennings said the Liberal caucus would have to decide, given the government's threat, "if that's a battle we want to fight."
The Prospect of Election is still with us, if the Liberal do not support the Bill without Changes or do not support the bill at all, as promised by the Government every vote will be a vote of Confidence and the defeat of any bill as outline in the Throne Speech will be a lost of Confidence...

To read the details of this Take it or Leave it offer check the Threats Here..

Something Good for the Health of Womanhood...

Dr. Jenny Blake, chief of obstretics at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, who has treated Cerivical Cancer patients, has already taken daughter Allie DePetrillo, 16, for HPV shots at her expense and she takes issue against those who questions the merits of the vaccine..

Girls to Get Cervical Cancer Vaccine... Gardasil..

Premier to announce $39 million voluntary immunization program for Grade 8 students
Starting this fall Grade 8 girls a cross Ontario will be offered Free Vaccines to prevent them from sexually transmitted virus that cause cervical cancer.

This program was financed by the Federal Government $300 millions voluntary vaccination program across Canada. In Ontario it is expected to immunize up to 84,000 students this year and will continue for at least another 2 years. After that it is not know if the Province will take over the program.

The vaccine, Gardasil, immunizes against the most deadly forms of Human Papillomavirus (HPV), the leading cause of cervical cancer.

It's the second most common cancer for women aged 20 to 44, after breast cancer.
In Ontario, some 550 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer and 150 die every year.
Gardasil is already available in Ontario but OHIP does not cover the $400 per person cost of the vaccine. Some employee benefit plans may cover it.

Health Canada approved Gardasil last summer for use in girls and women aged 9 to 26.
(Anyone under the age group who wish to have the vaccines, talk to your Doctor and check the coverage of your Extended Care, or your parents or guardian, otherwise be ready to fork out $400.)

Note: The Universal Health Care are not the same for every Province. Basic care like Hospital care for all sickness and illness are covered including procedures and medical bills and hospital stays with no limit, including medications during confinement, but maintenance medication and prescription pills are only covered fully under a separate Drug Plan Programs for Senior Citizens, Physically and Mentally disabled, indigents, social assistance recipients, or disabled due to health or accident, minors and basically all those that can not afford or without means. And there are medications and appliances not covered by these Drug Plans, but most often covered by those who are gainfully employed thru the Extended Insurance Plan by Employers. And that could include medication for ED (erectile dysfuncitons) and other lifestyle drugs...

The vaccine protects against infection from four separate strains of HPV, which combined, cause 70 per cent of all cases of cervical cancer.

But a Canadian Medical Association Journal paper, released online yesterday, says there is no "epidemic" of cervical cancer in Canada to warrant a vaccination program for girls
(Can’t understand the contention of the CMA, to me 400 deaths annually is a concern)

Across Canada, cervical cancer kills 400 women each year.
Worldwide, about 250,000 women die from the disease annually.

http://www.thestar.com/living/Health/article/242383

Is this Good or Bad? http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/242910

Eligible expenses for people taking the altruistic step of donating a kidney or part of their liver, whether to a loved one or a stranger, must be pre-approved by officials. Once that approval is obtained, the program will reimburse donors up to $5,500 for any travel, accommodation or meal expenses, or for lost income. August 3, 2:45 PM eastern daylight....

Something Political...

PM Harper with other G-8 Leaders during the

Last summit.

Today received an email from the Conservative Party, after a conversation with volunteer fundraiser that we could have an Election before the year’s end. Being a long-time Card-Carrying Party Member, we are, along with other parties members, the voters and the General Public, time to again participate in our democratic duty of electing our next Government if an election is called.

Since our election campaign expense now has to come from only two sources; from individual contribution of citizens, subject to limits and from the Government, it is imperative that we support the process. But donating to a Candidate or to a Party or to a Party Association, an individual is not only doing his or her share in making Democracy works, but get back part of his contribution from the Government in the form of Tax Refunds of Reduction of Tax Payable..

And here is the formula for Tax Credit of political Contributions.

The refund (or reduction in tax payable) depends only on the amount donated and not on taxable income. One only needs to file a tax return in order to receive it. The 2005 tax credit formula is:

for contributions between 0 and $400, you will get back 75%;
for contributions between $400 and $750, you will get back $300 plus 50% of the amount over $400;
for contributions over $750, you will get back $475 plus 33 1/3% of the amount over $750 up to a maximum of $650 annually.

Maximum individual Limits including Candidates... $5400 annually...

THANK YOU FOR YOUR GENEROUS CONTRIBUTION!

Dear Mr. Vic ... .....

Thank you for your generous contribution of $( amount) when we spoke to you on the phone on Saturday, July 28, 2007.

THANK YOU!

Stéphane Dion and his "new" team are confused, divided and for themselves: they will not get things done for families and taxpayers.

It seems all but inevitable that unwanted and unnecessary election will be forced on Canadians in 2007. Your generous gift is helping us be prepared to stop Stéphane Dion.

As a minority government, we can't prevent an unwanted election. But we can prepare for victory.

Thank you once again for your generous contribution and your on-going support of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Sincerely,
The Fundraising Department
http://www.conservative.ca/