More Musings on the Duffy Scandal

It might surprise some, but cats occasionally gnaw on a bone, and I’ve been gnawing on this one for a while.  Or maybe it has been gnawing at me.

I’ve long maintained that certain Senators shouldn’t be in the Senate, that they don’t meet the eligibility requirements set out in the Constitution, the requirement that a Senator shall be resident in the region he represents.  This should surprise no one who knows me, but things said in the Senate recently are making me wonder who else thinks that some Senators might not meet these requirements.

My gnawing took me back to Mike Duffy’s first speech in the Senate on October 22^nd where he was defending himself from the threat of suspension.  The emphasis is added by me.

The PMO piled on the pressure. Some honourable senators called me in P.E.I. One senator in particular left several particularly nasty and menacing messages: Do what the Prime Minister wants. Do it for the PM and for the good of the party. I continued to resist. Finally, the message from the PMO became: Do what we want or else. And what was the "else"? He said the Conservative majority on the steering committee of the Board of Internal Economy, Senator Tkachuk and Senator Stewart Olsen, would issue a press release declaring me unqualified to sit in the Senate. However, if you do what we want, the Prime Minister will publicly confirm that you're entitled to sit as a senator from P.E.I. and you won't lose your seat. Tkachuk and Stewart Olsen are ready to make that press release now. I said: They don't have the power to do that. He said: Agree to what we want right now or else. Hansard, October 22nd.

This was from February, after Duffy had spoken with Harper and Wright about the allegations of his improper expenses, the one where Harper told him to pay the money back.

Mike resisted, saying he had done nothing wrong but in the end he relented, he said that he would pay the money back, but he didn’t have the $90,000.00 to do it and Nigel Wright proposed the gift.

Later in his same speech, Duffy told of how he was directed to leave the Harper Party Caucus.  Again, the emphasis is mine.

Then, in May, after someone leaked selected excerpts of a confidential email I had sent to my lawyer in February, in which I voiced my opposition and concern about the deal, the PMO was back with a vengeance. I was called at home in Cavendish by Ray Novak, senior assistant to the Prime Minister. He had with him Senator LeBreton, Leader of the Government in the Senate. Senator LeBreton was emphatic: The deal was off. If I didn't resign from the Conservative caucus within 90 minutes, I'd be thrown out of the caucus immediately, without a meeting, without a vote. In addition, she said, if I didn't quit the caucus immediately, I'd be sent to the Senate Ethics Committee, with orders from the leadership to throw me out of the Senate. Hansard, October 22nd.

Marjory LeBreton offered her rebuttal a few days later.  The emphasis is mine.

I said the following in order to assure him that sitting as an independent did not impact his position as a senator. "Mike," I said, "this is the only option that can ensure your future livelihood." Hansard, October 24th.

Twice Mike Duffy says he was pushed to do something under threat of losing his Senate Seat and Marjory LeBreton’s response is pretty much a nice way of saying “Do it or you’re out.”  Pretty much the same thing isn’t it?

As we’ve seen lately, it is difficult to do much to a Senator.  The Constitution only lists five reasons that a Senator should lose their seat.

31. The Place of a Senator shall become vacant in any of the following Cases: ·         (1) If for Two consecutive Sessions of the Parliament he fails to give his Attendance in the Senate; ·         (2) If he takes an Oath or makes a Declaration or Acknowledgment of Allegiance, Obedience, or Adherence to a Foreign Power, or does an Act whereby he becomes a Subject or Citizen, or entitled to the Rights or Privileges of a Subject or Citizen, of a Foreign Power; ·         (3) If he is adjudged Bankrupt or Insolvent, or applies for the Benefit of any Law relating to Insolvent Debtors, or becomes a public Defaulter; ·         (4) If he is attainted of Treason or convicted of Felony or of any infamous Crime; ·         (5) If he ceases to be qualified in respect of Property or of Residence; provided, that a Senator shall not be deemed to have ceased to be qualified in respect of Residence by reason only of his residing at the Seat of the Government of Canada while holding an Office under that Government requiring his Presence there.

Of these options, only number 5 stands a chance of being grounds for Duffy’s removal from the Senate.  The only problem is that he’s probably spent more time in PEI since he became a Senator than he had in the previous decade.

The only threat left is that Duffy was not resident in PEI prior to being named to the Senate.

Both Duffy and Wallin say that when they were named to the Senate, they both wanted assurances that their residency would not be an issue, and they both say they received those assurances.  Duffy mentions a memo that he received that Marjory LeBreton claims does not exist, and then Mike Duffy tabled that same memo 4 days later…

When Stephen Harper appoints Senators, he has them agree to certain things.  They have to agree to term limits, they have to agree to support his Senate “reforms” and I’m sure there are other things he has them agree to as well.  From where I sit, it looks like not only did Harper have Duffy and Wallin agree to his terms, he put a leash on them as well.  Do as we say or you’re out of the Senate, and their residency is the only tool that I can see in his tool kit.

Stephen Harper said something about the letter and intent of the law.  Why does this not apply to him?  He’s putting Senators in that don’t meet the requirements (Duffy, Wallin, Stewart Olsen).  When Duffy came to him in February, he didn’t tell Duffy that he had broken the rules and should resign, he merely told him to pay back the money.

The PMO is front and centre on this as well.  The PMO directed Duffy to pay back the money, the PMO called Duffy to have Senator LeBreton threaten him into leaving the Harper Party Caucus.  The PMO wrote cheques to cover Duffy’s expenses and his legal fees!

Stephen Harper named Senator Claude Carignan Leader of the Government in the Senate and the first thing that Claude does is to hand out pitchforks and torches to the Harper Faithful in the Senate to go on a witch hunt for Duffy, Wallin, and Brazeau… how convenient.

When Mike Duffy made his speeches, he was warning the other Harper appointees in the Senate.  He told them that Harper is a wonderful guy until he doesn’t need you, and then he’ll sic the PMO on you.  Those Senators should take heed.  The time to cut the strings binding you to the PMO and Harper is now.

Again I will quote Mike Duffy…

Are we independent senators or PMO puppets? Hansard, October 28th.

Cut those strings folks, cut those strings.

BC

Let’s Get Rid of Those Unelected Clowns in Ottawa!

I’d like to take a few moments to muse on a subject that irks me to no end.  How we can have unelected, appointed people in Ottawa influencing proposed legislation and even influencing the day to day governance of Canada.

I’m not talking about the Senate.  They have their own issues…

I’m talking about the Prime Minister’s Office, the PMO.

How can it be that a group of people (the Harper Party) who decry the horrors of an unelected body (yes the Senate this time) can gladly take their marching orders from a shadowy cast characters working in the PMO?

I have a joke for you.

Q: What do you call someone on Twitter who endlessly repeats talking points?

A: Troll.

Q: What do you call someone in the House of Commons who endlessly repeats talking points?

A: Minister.

I said it was a joke, not that it was funny.

Look at the last Cabinet shuffle.  Oh look how much new blood was injected into the shiny new Cabinet!  Echo boxes.  Want to get a seat at the big people’s table?  Repeat the talking points issued by the infamous “boys in short pants”.

Seriously these people may be capable representatives for their constituencies, but they are not allowed to represent anything other than what they are told to.  Don’t dance to the tune?  Have a seat in the back, thanks.

How powerful are these people in the PMO?  We don’t really seem to know.

When there was concern about the RCMP taking the firearms from homes following the High River flooding this year, it wasn’t Public Safety Minister Vic Toews telling the RCMP to give them back was it?  It wasn’t Stephen Harper either.  It was the PMO apparently acting on its own to chastise the RCMP in public.

The release did not say it was a statement by Harper, it was a PMO release.

When Brent Rathgeber decided that he could no longer sit as a Harper Party MP and crossed the floor to sit as an Independent, it wasn’t a Minister speaking out against Mr. Rathgeber.  It was the PMO.

And to add hypocrisy to Harpocrisy the PMO said that Mr. Rathgeber should run in a by election to confirm his seat.  They have no such qualms when an NDP member chooses to leave their caucus or when a Liberal chooses to leave their caucus as well.

Now some of the Harper Party apologists might want to go on about the PMO being appointed by the elected PM Stephen Harper.  But this is Canada, we don’t elect a PM.

The party elects as leader, the party that wins the most seats gets to call their leader the PM.  If the Harper Party had chosen someone else, Stephen Harper wouldn’t be PM now would he?

Had the good people of Calgary Southwest decided that they were done with the biggest flippity flopper in Calgary, Stephen Harper, he wouldn’t be the PM either.

Flippity flopper?  Yep.

Stephen Harper voted alongside the Liberals twice on the Long Gun Registry.  Then he flipped to the anti side.  Stephen Harper absolutely detested Communists and then he Okayed the Nexen deal with the Chinese Government run CNOOC.  The only good Commie is the one with oil money I guess.

At least Rob Anders stands firm on his “No Commies” rules.  At least he does when he is awake.

And Stephen Harper famously told Canadians that he would never appoint an unelected Senator.

Well, Mike Duffy wasn’t elected.  Neither were any of the other non-Albertan Senators that Stephen Harper his flipped and flopped into the Red Chamber.

Now when the Duffy hit the fan, no one bothered to tell Stephen Harper what was going on!

When Mike Duffy realized he was in trouble over his “improper” expenses, he ran to everyone and their brother to bail him out.  He ran to the Harper Party money man, Senator Irving Gerstein, who was going to hand Duffy the cash until the stakes ran a bit too high for his liking leaving Mike Duffy to run to Nigel Wright in the PMO.

Funny how when Duffy was running from station to station with his hand out for $90 Grand, no one bothered to tell the Boss.  It’s funnier still that he didn’t run straight to Stephen himself.

Now if we believe the official story, all this happened with Stephen Harper being blissfully unaware of what was occurring and probably just sitting at home stroking his Stanley.

And in the mean time, the RCMP is interested in getting their hands on a certain email that may show details on how the PMO bailed Mike Duffy out and what was promised by whom… and the PMO is not helping the RCMP out at all.

CTV has a copy of this email, but they are protecting their source and not giving the information to the RCMP.  I wonder who the PMO is protecting.

Stephen Harper?  Maybe.

But then again, could it be that Stephen is telling the truth, and the PMO is covering their collective assets by not handing over the email in question?

In either instance Harper could very easily just tell his staffers to hand over the email, but that would only happen if he was in charge of the PMO.  And I’m starting to wonder if he is.

The PMO has become an agency unto itself.  It has the ability to create policy and enforce rules by being the controlling hand behind the scenes.  The PMO issues the talking points.  The Ministers rarely if ever stray from their given talking points.  Even Stephen Harper limits himself to talking points, unless perhaps he is being told to stick to his talking points…

Tinfoil time?  You tell me.

The following nugget is from the Globe and Mail listing the PMO staff who were informed by Nigel Wright that he was going to pay for Duffy’s expenses.

These PMO staffers include Chris Woodcock, director of issues management – a job that handles hot political files – as well as legal adviser Benjamin Perrin and David van Hemmen, Mr. Wright’s executive assistant. These three ultimately owed their jobs to Mr. Wright, who as chief of staff would have decided who was hired, promoted or fired in such senior PMO positions. [Emphasis mine] The Globe and Mail

It appears that Stephen doesn’t decide who gets to be in the PMO, his Chief of Staff in the PMO does.

Is Stephen merely the face of the Harper Party?

Again, you tell me.

Cheers! BC

Ethics, the Senate, and Stephen Harper

I read an article from the National Post by Andrew Coyne.  Yes I visited the National Post Site and that in itself could be news.  The article was about whether the Harper Party’s “culture of expediency” was behind the current crop of scandals in Ottawa.

You can read the article here: Andrew Coyne: Conservative government’s culture of expediency behind its multiplying scandals

If you want my comments to Andrew you’ll have to scroll way down the comments list, look for the black cat.

I found myself agreeing with Andrew’s premise that many of the Harper Party Scandals have their roots going into the practice of forcing through legislation that looks good to the party’s supporters but that are not well thought out, political expediency as it were, but I took issue with his idea that

People don’t make ethical choices in isolation. They take their cues from those around and above them.

I believe ethics is what you do when you think no one is watching.

Andrew is of the opinion that even if you are an honest person when you walk into the Senate or the House of Commons that you will soon lose that honesty when you see all the other people grabbing with both hands and not getting caught.  I think he’s wrong.

Look, I know a woman who drove 30 minutes out of her way to go back to a store because they made a mistake and didn’t charge her for an item.  She was free and clear, she wouldn’t have been caught.  So why did she do it?

She felt it was wrong to keep something she didn’t pay for.  She didn’t do anything wrong, the store made an error, but she just didn’t feel right in not paying for it.

She did the right thing because it was the right thing to do.

It’s the same thing as picking up a lost wallet and handing it over to the store or the police unopened because it’s not yours.

Acting ethically can be a choice, but for most of us it seems to be ingrained into us.  We were taught to be honest, to act appropriately, and to be good citizens.  We may choose to be with people of like mind when we are  with our friends, but unfortunately we do not get to choose who were work with.

Stephen Harper is not in a position like most of us.  He has the ability to choose who he has in his inner circle and those who he appoints to various positions including the Senate.  He can check into these people to ensure they are of high moral standing, to ensure they are ethical, but he apparently does not.

We have a number of Senators in Ottawa who don’t appear to live in the regions they represent.  This is a condition for sitting in the Senate stipulated in the Constitution.  If these people took the high moral road, if they acted ethically they would have at least questioned if they were entitled to sit in the Senate.  Instead they just sidled up to the trough and proceeded to gobble all that they could get.

If Stephen Harper were to call me today and say “You want a Senate seat?” I’d say “Thanks, but I can’t.”  I know that I don’t meet the requirements.  Believe me, if I got the call and I could figure out how to make myself eligible I would.  Wouldn’t you? $130,000.00 to start plus the perks would be awfully hard to turn down.

***

One way to judge a person is by looking at the company they choose to keep.  Stephen’s had a disbarred lawyer in his inner circle that later got into trouble for lobbying the Government improperly.  A Cabinet Minister who had a child with a baby sitter while he was still married.  Another Cabinet Minister who sold out his own party to have a seat in Harper’s Cabinet.  And of course the befuddled Senator who doesn’t know where he lives.

This does not reek of ethics folks, it reeks of something else.

Stephen Harper has “daylight ethics”.  Or maybe we can call it “political ethics”.  He tries to look like he’s doing the right thing when the harsh lights of public opinion are on him and his people, but when he thinks no one is looking, well that is an entirely different matter.  He thought that no one would notice if he clawed back danger pay from our Forces in Afghanistan.  He tried to reduce the danger pay for others.  These things were in the works until we noticed, until we turned on the lights and said that it was wrong… Then they went away quietly, “mistakes” they said.

Just today Stephen Harper was asked about Pamela Wallin’s travel expenses.  He said that if there are improper expenses that they should be repaid and that when they were repaid that Ms. Wallin would be welcomed back into caucus.

That’s not ethics.

Just paying back ill gotten gains is not sufficient.  Theft and fraud are not the pastimes of ethical or honourable people.  If Senators are bilking the system then they shouldn’t be in the Senate.  If MPs are bilking the system they should not be in the House.  At the very least they should be fired.  If it is warranted, they should be jailed.

When Stephen Harper isn’t wrapping himself in the flag or flogging his love of watching hockey, he claims to be a Christian.  Well he strikes me as one of those “Sunday Christians.”  You know the ones, Monday through Saturday they’ll lie and cheat and steal, or they’ll be all liquored up and chasing skirts while their family sits at home, but on Sunday, they dress up nice and listen to the preacher for a bit and they’re good to go for another week.

***

You see Andrew, the problem isn’t that these people are losing their ethics when they walk into the Senate or the House.  The problem is that they didn’t have any before they got there.  Of all 105 Senators and 308 MPs, we only hear a few bad eggs.  Maybe the rest are just smart enough to not get caught, I’d like to believe that the few do not necessarily represent the majority.

I believe that Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin are ethically challenged, should I believe that all journalists are like them?  Should I believe that You are like them?

Cheers, BC

Good Lord the Duffy Situation just keeps getting worse.  Now it appears he was demanding a Ministerial position so that he could have a car and driver and even more travel allowance?  I’m sure glad I didn’t appoint this buffoon.