An Open Letter to Rob Ford

We’ve been hearing oh so much about Rob Ford lately.  Frankly, I’m tired of him.  I was tired of him before all this nonsense began and now it just keeps getting more tiresome.

Dear Rob:

I see that you and your brother Doug are making the media circus circuit, bemoaning “poor Rob’s fate” at the hands of those horrid people that were elected to represent Toronto at the same time you were elected Mayor. 

You are trying to liken yourself to Kuwait being attacked by the Red Guard of Saddam Hussein, saying that there is a coup d’état being staged at Toronto City Hall.  No Rob, it’s just the people that you bullied have gotten together to whip the bully. 

Not a lot of fun, is it?

You want to try and portray yourself as a victim.  These people are doing these terrible things to you because you like to take a drink now and again.  I think you said everybody drinks until they blackout occasionally.  Teenagers and college kids, you said.

No, most people don’t drink until they blackout Rob.  Most people can keep at least a semblance of control, even when they are drinking to excess. 

But you are not a teenager or a college kid, Rob.  You are a middle aged businessman who was elected to oversee the City of Toronto.  No one expected you to act like you were at Buckingham Palace about to have high tea with the Queen, but a certain amount of decorum is expected.  Things such as flipping the bird at people in the street because they caught you illegally using your cell phone while driving is definitely not a good start, nor are your bouts of public drunkenness a good idea. 

Do you even know what a victim is?  It is someone who is standing, minding their own business when an enraged lunatic bowls her over running around the Council Chamber.  It is someone driving down the street when a drunk ploughs into their car.  A victim is someone who has something happen to them simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

When people rise against you because you are a drunk, because you use crack cocaine, because you bullied them, you’re not a victim.  You can call it justice, or retribution, or even vengeance.  You’re not a victim there.

No, if you are being victimized by anyone, look at your closest supporters.

From where I sit, you have an addiction problem.  You are in denial about this and your brother Doug, and the others rushing to your defence are enablers.  They are more concerned about protecting the Ford name than they are about protecting Rob Ford from himself.

But I do notice the similarities between your treatment by Council and the treatment of three individuals in Ottawa. 

Although you haven’t been charged with anything, the police are treating you like a person of interest in an ongoing investigation.  Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, and Patrick Brazeau have not been charged with anything, but they are under investigation as well.

The Senate took action and suspended these three without pay for the remainder of the session in what amounted to a Kangaroo Court.  The Toronto City Council is doing pretty much the same thing to you.

I wonder if it sticks in your supporters’ collective craw when they rail about these Senators only being suspended and not out and out fired and yet they go on about how poorly you are being treated.

But on the other hand these Senators maintain they were told that their expenses were allowable and that they have done nothing wrong.  You’ve admitted to being a drunk, to using crack, and we’ve seen and heard you bullying others… not quite the same is it?

I’m going to assume that Tim Hudak is a friend of yours, at least an acquaintance.  Tim is distancing himself from you and talking about supporting legal action to remove you from your position as Mayor.

Your fishing buddy up in Ottawa has been rather quiet, his staffer putting out a message expressing their disappointment over this.  Think you’ll get a Christmas card from Stephen this year?

I noted the resemblance of the Toronto Council’s actions to those taken by the Senate.  But you’re not a Senator, are you.  They are political appointees and you’re Rob Effing Ford, Mayor of Toronto.

No, the closest I can think of is that you’re like a CEO of a company and the Council is like the Board of Directors.  What would the Board do to a CEO that was an embarrassment to the Company?

Probably fire his butt out the door, eh?

Council can’t do that, so they’ve stripped you of as much as they can get.  You’re complaints about losing your staff are pretty lame, I imagine the switchboard will send city business to the appropriate office, the one that says Deputy Mayor on the door.

Part of the blame rests with the voters.  Too many people treat municipal elections like they’re voting for Student Council.  There’s not a lot that the Student Government can do, unlike the Mayor and Council.

It should be an honour to be Mayor, it is a position that should be held by honourable people.  So what would an honourable Mayor do if he or she was caught in a position like you are in right now?

Resign?

But I guess it’s too late for that now, isn’t it Rob.

Cheers BC

Stephen Harper’s Senate Woes

It is amazing how things change in Stephen Harper’s Ottawa isn’t it?

Take the curious cases of Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin for example.  Mike and Pam were appointed to the Senate by Stephen Harper.  This was quite a coup for him… two trained Media celebs to carry the good word of Stephen Harper and to fill his purse with coins of silver.

The fact that attendees to the various Harper functions would bypass a chance to meet Stephen for an opportunity to hobnob with celebrities like Mike or Pam didn’t bother Stephen in the least.  They were professional speakers who could carry the message and as I said, people were willing to part with their hard earned money to see real Celebs.

So what happened?  I’m not entirely sure, but what looked to be an attempt to embarrass the Liberals in the Senate turned nasty on the Harper picks instead.  When the Harper dominated Senate turned its guns on Liberal Senator Mac Harb, trying to show that he was milking or bilking the system to line his pockets, someone noticed that a certain Senator “from” PEI had been living in the Ottawa area for decades.

He was doing the same thing!

And when the nets were cast a bit wider, Pam Wallin hit the radar as well for her travel expenses and the fact that she appears to live in Toronto rather than Saskatchewan like everyone was saying.

Now many want to blame the “Liberal Media” for all of this, but the story broke first in the National Post.  Everyone else showed up after that because they smelled blood in the water.

Then we had Stephen Harper defending Pam Wallin, saying that he had reviewed her expenses and that they were similar to other Parliamentarians from Saskatchewan and defending Mike Duffy after he repaid his excess expenses.  He said Mike was honourable and showed leadership in the Senate by repaying the money.  I think we all remember this, don’t we?

When Deloitte finished their reports on Harb, Duffy, and Brazeau, the Senate Internal Economy Committee (Internal) tabled their reports on the matter and washed their hands of it. 

The reports from Internal said that Harb and Brazeau has been cheating, claiming expenses that they were not entitled to, but the report on Duffy had been white washed to say that Good Old Duff had just been confused by the Senate Rules and besides, he had repaid the money.

And the bucket of paint and brushes appear to have come from the PMO as well as a cheque for $90,000.00 for cover Duffy’s debt.

Senators objected to the obvious kid glove treatment of Duffy compared to the stern admonishments for the enemy Liberal Harb and the Senate embarrassment Brazeau.  The matter was handed over to the RCMP to investigate and let the Senate say we can’t do anything until after the RCMP is done.

The issue lay there for a while until the Fund Raising Reports started to come in.  The Harper Party was being hurt, they weren’t getting the money they were used to.  The Party Base was angry and there was one obvious reason why… actually three.

The Harper Party needed to distance themselves from these three Senators.  Brazeau was already out of the Caucus and out of the Senate as well.  Having been charged with crimes, the Senate was able to put Brazeau on a “Leave of Absence” which the Rules of the Senate allowed for.  Duffy and Wallin both needed to be shoved aside.  Both received orders to quit the Harper Party Caucus.

Duffy maintains that he was bullied into leaving the Caucus by threats of expulsion from the Senate, former Harper Party Government Leader in the Senate Marjory Le Breton refutes this by saying the same thing.  Go figure.

Wallin on the other hand says she was trying to negotiate the wording of her statement that she was willing to recuse herself from the Caucus until the matter of her expenses was cleared up except Senator Le Breton beat her to the punch, pre-emptively announcing that Wallin too had resigned from the Caucus.

Things sat quietly simmering until the recent announcement of Senator Claude Carignan, Leader of the Government in the Senate that he was making a motion to have Senators Duffy, Wallin, and Brazeau suspended from the Senate without pay.

And now Stephen Harper is applauding this move by the man that he appointed to the Senate, who that he named as the Senate Government Leader, but says that he and his office had no influence on this.  Whatever.

Embattled Senators Duffy and Wallin have now gone from Harper Party show ponies to being the sacrificial lambs at the Harper Party altar.  It really must hurt to move from being knights and bishops on the board to being mere pawns in the game…

Surprisingly, a fair number of people from across the political spectrum have risen in defence of Senators Duffy, Wallin, and by association, Brazeau.  The latest move of the Harper Party to suspend people who are merely accused of something rankles people in Canada.

The Harper echo boxes are trying to argue this, but Canadians believe in the law and that the rule of law needs to be used fairly.  What Senator Carignan proposes is not fair, and may not even be allowed under the Rules of the Senate.

Those rules outline the use of Leave of Absence (LoA) and Suspensions in the Senate and the Suspension Rules do not apply to any of the three accused as I read it.  If a Senator is charged with a crime, the Senate may place that Senator on a LoA, and if that Senator is convicted and subject to jail time the Senate may place that Senator on Suspension.

The section of the Rules that deals with LoAs and Suspension also state:

For greater certainty, the Senate affirms the right of a Senator charged with a criminal offence to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. No intent to comment on or pass judgment with respect to a Senator shall be imputed to the Senate because of the operation of this rule. Emphasis mine, BC

Stephen, the issue isn’t about the money.  The money is only a part of it.  The issue is of fairness and rule of law.  I suspect these ideas are foreign to you.  Your statements only refer to expenses and return of money, you disregard the other rules.

Senator Segal gets it, Senator Plett gets it too.  There are reports that some of the MPs in your Caucus get it as well and that they have been contacting their counterparts in the Senate urging them to vote against Senator Carignan’s motion.

I’d suggest the Party Base gets it too.

Mike Duffy says that you told him that the problem was that the Party Base didn’t like the appearance of what he had done.  I’m inclined to believe him.  You did not chastise him for the expenses, you only told him to pay them back.

I’m not a fan of Senators Duffy, Wallin, and Brazeau.  I don’t think that they deserve to sit in the Senate, but I also believe they do not deserve the treatment that you and your people are putting them through.

One last question Stephen, if you can ask Senator Carignan for me… Why is Senator Stewart Olsen not sitting beside the others in the Independent’s Corner.  She did the same thing they did, but she’s allowed to sit in judgement?

Could it be that the Party Base is angry with you, Stephen?

Just wondering, BC

Pamela, Mike, and Pat in Wonderland

I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with a Conservative today.

Senator Hugh Segal has stepped up in defence of Senator Pamela Wallin and as much as it bothers me to say it, he’s right.

I haven’t changed my stance on Pam Wallin, I still have doubts whether she should be in the Senate based solely on the residency requirements listed in the Constitution, but I still believe that everyone is entitled to their day in court, even Pam Wallin, even Mike Duffy, and even Pat Brazeau.

The announcement that the Senate was going after these three Senators makes it look like the Harper Party Loyalists has tossed away their Flags and Hockey Sticks for new attire.  Playing Cards with Hearts on them would seem far more appropriate today.

‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’ Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Senator Segal raises a number of points that need to be considered, starting with the fact that the Senate called in the RCMP to look into the affairs of Ms. Wallin et al and that the investigations have not yet been completed.

Another issue that Senator Segal raises is that the rules that Wallin stands accused of breaking, were not rules when they were broken.

Sort of like sending out retroactive speeding tickets when the speed limit is reduced on a certain street.

The travelling to stump for candidates and to fundraise for them was not only allowable when she made those trips, it was encouraged.  It was part of the training for the new Senators brought in under Harper’s reign.  I might not like it and you might not like it, but it was within the rules at the time.

Personally I’d like to see more distance between the Senate and the House politically, but I know that is not likely to happen anytime soon.

Senator Segal is not alone in his stance on the attack on these Senators.

Rob Walsh ‏@toccataprima 18 Oct #cdnpoli Cons. Sens to suspend 3 Sens w/o pay. Suspension within powers of Senate? Yes. Without pay? Don't think so. ....2/

Now who really cares what someone on Twitter has to say on this matter?

I do.  Robert Walsh is a recently retired Law Clerk for the House of Commons.  He is the person that MPs went to when they had legal questions to do with House business.  Maybe that should read the Law Clerk.  The House of Commons may have many lawyers, but only one Law Clerk.

He’s not just another pretty face.

One of the things that Mr. Walsh points out is that the Senate does not have the power or authority to suspend a Senator’s pay.  They do have the ability to suspend a Senator and stop them from being in the Senate Chambers or use their Senate Privileges, but not to stop their pay.  Pat Brazeau is a perfect example.  Most of us were ticked when Brazeau was “punished” by being told to stay home, but that his pay would continue.  It seems hardly fair, but that’s the way the rules work.

But the rules exist for a reason.  Could you imagine what would happen if the mere accusation if improper conduct was enough to get you expelled from the Senate without pay?  The majority party would be able to pick off individuals they didn’t like and have them tossed and their pay withheld for the remainder of the session.

For a wealthy Senator, like Wallin this might not be a horrid thing, but for a Senator who doesn’t have a bag of money to fall back on this could be devastating.  What a useful tool to force your opponents to vote your way.

There are some others who are watching this unfold with interest.

Members in the House of Commons on both sides are waiting to see what happens.  If these Senators are suspended without pay for improper conduct without a trial, it could well set a precedent… and this precedent could be used in the House of Commons as well.  Both the Senate and the House operate under the same rules for many things, this is one of them.

I’m not a betting cat, but if I were, I’d be putting my pennies on the Harper Party wanting Wallin to win out on this one.  Why?  Because he’s about run out of electioneering items and he’s love to go to war on “Cleaning Up the Senate.”  Never mind that He’s the genius who put these people in there in the first place and that he’s appointed just as many, if not more exjournalists, failed politicians, and party bagmen as any other leader in our history.

Look, I think we can all agree that the Senate and the naming of Senators is a question that needs to be looked at, but now is not the time.  The first order of business is to let the RCMP do their investigations and then lay charges if there is evidence of wrongdoing.

And if they’re guilty, fire their butts out of there with my blessing.

Senator Segal is one of the few Conservatives that I have any respect for.  He’s old enough to remember what the Senate is supposed to be and unlike his Harper Party cohorts, he has the chutzpah to stand up for what’s right.  At least when he talks, I know it’s what he wants to say, and not what someone in the PMO handed him. 

I may not agree with his politics, but I can still respect the man.

Kind of nice for a change.

Laters, BC