Showing posts with label Cadman scandal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cadman scandal. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Top 10 Canadian News Stories of 2008

Every year has its big stories, but this year had many that I think Canadians will still be talking about years from now. You may not agree with the top 10 Canadian stories I’ve chosen, but it’s hard to say each of these weren’t major stories when they hit and that most of these don’t still resonate. I’ve reflected on each one (some “reflections” I guess could be posts in themselves) and they are listed in rough chronological order rather than importance.

1) Chuck Cadman Scandal: You don’t hear about it as much now, but you can’t say it’s not huge news when you hear allegations (which seem to be backed up on tape) that the Conservatives tried to literally bribe an MP to vote with them. And don’t forget Harper’s libel case against the Liberals over this is still before the courts, but given how that’s fared of late I’m thinking Harper’s hoping we do forget about that one.

2) In and Out Scandal: The RCMP raiding the governing party HQ and the ensuing frantic (and failed) attempt to control the media spin over the Conservatives apparent over-spending and shady dealings with local ridings during the 2006 election was certainly a sight to see. Conservatives are STILL spending millions fighting this in court so obviously they realize how bad it will reflect on them when Elections Canada does finally rule officially AGAINST them

3) Maxime Bernier's Bungled Foreign Affairs Tenure: I’m someone who believes it’s extremely important for Canada to maintain a positive reputation in the world and so it’s big news to me that this year we came to fully realize that Stephen Harper had appointed among the worst (if not the worst) foreign affairs ministers in Canadian history. From not knowing who the President of Haiti was, to blowing private negotiations to get a troublesome Afghan governor to step down, to promising C-17s that didn’t exist for deployment, it was clear the guy was just not up to the job. Amazingly enough it took him leaving confidential documents at his girlfriend’s place to bring him down, but even then Harper wouldn’t fire him, Bernier instead resigned. This was also the first and only cabinet resignation I believe we’ve seen so far from this government. That’s not a good thing given how many of Harper’s ministers have done things that should have warranted their dismissal.

4) The Green Shift: Like it or hate it, it was the most bold policy proposal of the year. Sadly the Conservatives AND NDP smeared it with disinformation and the Liberals were unable to successfully combat the onslaught. I’ve still yet to hear one person credibly argue how a cap-and-trade system would be a superior approach to tax shifting for reducing GHG emissions over the next several years when a cap-and-trade system could easily end up being (in the words of Andrew Coyne) "just as costly...twice as complicated… and probably half as effective (as a carbon tax)" and when we know that Europe has had a terrible time getting cap-and-trade off the ground and that the Western Climate Initiative here in North America isn’t scheduled to start till 2012. Yet as of this time an exclusively cap-and-trade approach seems to be the approach all parties (except the Greens) now want us to head in.

I HOPE the Liberals show some courage again and revive the Green Shift policy in a different more saleable form down the line (certainly the Green Shift policy on the whole could stand for some tweaking). After all it was originally Michael Ignatieff’s idea when he was the only leadership candidate in 2006 arguing for it. I understand how given the results of the last election he doesn’t want to touch a tax shift with a ten foot pole and I guess I can’t blame him if he doesn’t go back to it, but to date I’ve seen ZERO evidence in polling or anything that Canadians were voting against us SOLELY BECAUSE of the Green Shift. Is there really more than 1-2% of Canadians who would have said “I definitely would have voted Liberal but didn’t only because they were proposing a carbon tax”?

I think it’s foolish to boil down the election loss to that policy (or just who our leader was for that matter) when people could have voted against us for literally dozens of different reasons (I wouldn't be surprised if some people actually went to the polls thinking the Liberals were going to ban the bible or some other crazy nonsense perpetrated by Conservatives) and such a simplistic view allows us to learn little. I think we lost much more so due to weaker organization and GOTV efforts, the smearing of Stéphane Dion with millions of dollars in ads that we were unable to combat (due to our weaker fundraising abilities) and Harper successfully (falsely) portraying the Liberal platform as planning to spend tens of billions more than was available in the treasury (e.g., the infrastructure policy was portrayed as $70 billion over the short-term rather than over 10 years).

I hope Ignatieff thinks long and hard about what’s best for the country in the long-term, because the environment may not be top of mind for Canadians now but in 2-3 years it will definitely be back and I fear cap-and-trade alone simply won't be sufficient to make the greenhouse gas reductions we need to make and to avoid being seen as a laggard in the world eye on this issue.

Liberals ought to take a look at Norway, an oil-producing nation with HIGHER GDP per-capita (highest in the world right now), economic productivity and living standards than us and yet who have a dreaded carbon tax (though the Liberal Green Shift was actually a superior approach to what Norway put in place as I believe they had too many exemptions). We can catch up to them or we can fall further behind (the environment isn’t the only issue we can look to Norway on either).

If we KNOW the Green Shift (or an improved adaptation of it) is the best approach for the environment (combined in time with cap-and-trade), how can we as the “natural governing party” just abandon it completely just because of one election? If we used one election as the basis for whether to discard different policies then that really sets a bad precedent for any party to be bold. Trudeau discussed implementing a new Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1979 and lost, it’s a good thing we didn’t abandon it in the next election. I hope we don’t so easily discard tax shifting once and for all.

But alas, I feel this little tirade will fall on deaf ears and tax shifting will not be proposed again by any major party in Canada for a long time to come…So then on to the next news story of the year….

5) 2008 Federal Election: I honestly believe that if the election were held a week before (when polls had it at 33 Cons -30 Libs) or a week after (when Nanos again had it 32 Cons – 30 Libs) October 14 the result would have been dramatically different, but Stephen Harper called the election for when he did for a reason and it paid off. He wanted to avoid by-elections losses while having an e-day before the economic downturn he knew and before Obama could be elected in the US. Harper was clearly going to lose all 4 by-elections (and from what I heard on the ground we were on the verge of winning St. Lambert on the eve of Sept. 8) and he waited till the very last day before the by-elections so he could run ads unopposed outside the writ (to do an end run around election spending limits), wasting the maximum amount of public money possible. That he could do that AND break his promise not to call an election before October 2009 and almost not even release a platform and not be punished at the polls for any of that still bothers me.

As for the campaign itself, it started off slow for us, but I believe we did eventually hit our stride and our platform had the right priorities (I’ve still yet to hear a single Liberal state any specific policy aside from the Green Shift that we shouldn’t keep in the next platform), but perhaps we promised too much (in $ terms at least) or perhaps we didn’t communicate well enough what we were going to do. As I said above on the Green Shift, it’s simplistic to blame that for our loss or to blame just Stéphane Dion. In the debates everyone praised his performances and to me that still represents the real Dion, but in the end he could not overcome the negative caricatures (bought my an unprecedented character assasination campaign by the Cons) that even he recognized had been cemented in Canadians’ minds. That certainly hurt us, but what hurt us more was being outmatched in organizational and GOTV efforts and simply not being in play in many less ridings than the Conservatives. We have a lot of work to do to fix that in time for the next election (I’ll propose some more thoughts on how to do that in the new year). Apart from that, I think a lot of voters by the time e-day arrived were just looking for a steady hand to manage the economy and a plurality for whatever reason thought that would be Stephen Harper. I’m sure he was helped by the strong final weekend he had and the major market rallies that occurred on the final two days of the campaign.

Even so, a MAJORITY voted against Harper and if we had a system of proportional representation then the results would have translated into the Liberals, NDP and Greens having a majority of seats between them without needing any support from the Bloc to have formed a coalition. Only the Conservatives and the Bloc won a greater percentage of seats than their percent of the popular vote and that’s the second election in a row that’s happened. I hope the time will have finally come for the majority of Liberals to realize that electoral reform is not only the right thing to do but is also in our own party’s interests (I’ll also have more to say about that in the new year).

6) The Economic Crisis: It’s not quite true that no one saw an economic crisis coming (in fact I give Garth Turner credit for making dire predictions well before the bottom fell out on the market), but I think the magnitude of it has taken just about everyone by surprise. If you had said a year ago that Canada would have a $30 Billion deficit in 2009 and that all parties would agree that a fiscal stimulus package getting us to that point would be necessary (not forgetting the fact though that if it weren’t for Harper’s reckless GST cuts the prospective deficit would be MUCH smaller) you’d have been called crazy. Thankfully previous Liberal governments ensured that our banking system was one of the most solid in the world and Stephen Harper has a minority or else Canada would be in a HUGE amount of trouble that might take a decade or more to get out of. Liberals can’t let Canadians forget that the Harper Conservatives brought in 40 year mortgages and other reckless practices (before abandoning them when it was clear how damaging they were) that were the original source of the financial meltdown in the U.S. that dominoed into a global economic crisis and we can't let them forget either how recklessly Harper and Flaherty and Co. frittered away a strong surplus that would be have been enormously useful at a time like this.

These guys don’t know how to manage the economy and the evidence is overwhelming, we just have to make sure Canadians understand just how bad they have been and how disastrous it would be if they got a majority.

7) Fiscal Update/The Liberal-NDP Coalition: Stephen Harper came into Parliament enjoying the good will of the opposition parties. Many people were predicting he would likely get to govern until at least 2010. It’s his fault alone that he squandered that and now has the lowest ratings for “Best PM” than he’s ever had. The fiscal update had no solutions for the economic crisis, proposed bizarre (e.g., a firesale of public assets in a horrible market) and offensive (e.g., weakening pay equity and banning public strikes right after a collective bargaining deal was reached) policies while having the central goal of crushing the Conservatives political opposition through the elimination of the per vote subsidy.

Had the coalition not come about I have no doubt in my mind Harper would have dug in his heels on the update, as without a coalition, voting down the update would have meant an election that the opposition parties weren’t prepared to face. In all likelihood with no coalition one of the opposition parties would have been very likely to cave. Thankfully, because of the deal Dion negotiated with Layton, Stephen Harper had to shelve every negative aspect of that update. But for putting it forth in the midst of a crisis and at a time when the opposition was willing to work with him, Stephen Harper should have lost power. The coalition in turn would definitely have brought in a strong and popular budget by now instead of us having to be the last western country to bring in fiscal stimulus to revive our economy. I’m confident that even though they would have started with only about 40%-45% public support (which is still more than Stephen Harper enjoyed) their policies would have proved popular over the year ahead. Unfortunately, the Governor General was put in the unprecedented situation of being asked to allow Harper to dodge the will of Parliament. Stephen Harper’s head would have exploded if Paul Martin had tried the same thing, but I don’t think there’s any doubt in anyone’s mind now that he will do anything to retain his hold on power.

Now the coalition looks unlikely to happen because Stephen Harper’s scare tactics and disinformation have knocked its popularity down to below what we would have hoped for (though I think it’s disingenuous of this Globe article to call 40%-45% support for the coalition “widely unpopular” without also calling Stephen Harper “widely unpopular” after receiving only 38% support in the last election) and because Harper now desperately wants to survive past January so he can regoup without the threat of any looming coalition (as that threat can't really exist past February).

Though I do hope that if Stephen Harper doesn’t take dramatic steps to show he’s changed (that go beyond just putting out a strong budget) that those worried about voting him down realize that we may live to regret allowing him to live another day and that the Liberals, NDP and Bloc decide to end his career right at budget time in January. If the Harper Conservatives won’t be a responsible government in the worst times our country has faced in decades then there is ample justification for the coalition taking on that role instead and every single precedent that exists would compel the Governor General to allow that.

8) Provincial elections in Alberta and Quebec: The status quo prevailed in Alberta, but it was definitely surprising and disappointing (I’m sure all the more so for any Liberals living in Alberta) just how resounding Ed Stelmach’s victory was. Now that oil is plummeting to lows not seen in years and it seems like Stelmch spent the cupboard and never planned for something like this, I wonder if Albertans will finally see that perhaps they aren’t being best served by Conservative government after all. I’m sure somehow all the problems Alberta is facing for low oil prices will be blamed in Trudeau somehow.

As for Quebec, Jean Charest completed his political comeback with a majority, but Stephen Harper’s Quebec/separatist bashing the final week of the campaign almost blew it for him and definitely has helped revive PQ fortunes. Had Charest only won a minority I think his career in Quebec would have been over (since the only reason he called an early election was to win a majority) and I wonder if he wouldn’t have tried to go back to Ottawa to end Stephen Harper’s. The things will never know since a majority is a majority and I’m guessing Charest will retire at the end of his term (has any Premier ever won 4 consecutive terms in Quebec?), but I won’t be surprised if he tries some bold initiatives in next 4 years to cement his legacy.

9) New Liberal Leader: I was I was sad to see Stephane Dion go and not got the second chance every one of our other past leaders received, but I do believe he played important positive role as our leader and even as interim leader with the creation of the coalition. I think he would have made an excellent PM and still could have grown into the job of party leader (as was evident in the last half of the campaign) , but as he recognized the Conservatives so badly tarnished him that it would been very difficult to reverse that impresssion and thus he felt the mountain would be too high to climb.

While the ensuing Liberal leadership race was much shorter than expected and cut out what likely would have been some valuable debates, Liberals are now able to turn their guns away from each other and squarely on Stephen Harper MUCH sooner than expected.

10) Senate Patronage Spree: Ordinarily Senate appointments by a PM are hardly big news, but that changes when it’s done by a man who’s spent a lifetime campaigning against Senate patronage and who just shut down Parliament to avoid a confidence vote and when it also happens to also be the largest number of appointments in a single day. There being no gender or partisan balance in these appointments and the overwhelming number of hardcore party loyalists being appointed just made all the more cringe inducing. Whether the galling nature of these appointments will turn public opinion against him remains to be seen, but it was a pretty dramatic example of Harper will abandon any principle to hold on to power and use all the perks that come along with it.

Honourable mention: The inevitable end of John Tory’s leadership of the Ontario PC Party, though it comes a lot later than I, and the poll I conducted, had predicted. But since it’s not official yet, technically it can be a story for 2009. My endorsement for their leader still has not changed though: Randy Hillier all the way! And here’s hoping Baird, Flaherty, Clement and/or Van Loan (the more of them better) also race back to try to grab the Ontario PC Party brass ring as well - they will be doing their country a HUGE favour by leaving Ottawa for Queen’s Park and going back to the opposition benches where they belong!

World News Note: Obviously the biggest worldwide story (that eclipsed all Canadian stories) was the was the 2008 Presidential Election and the election of Barack Obama as President, but Canadian politics is still where my heart is so that’s what I stuck to in this list just like I did last year.


Recommend this Post

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Harper Scores Major Victory

Gets fired by his lawyer in the Cadman case! As everyone knows it’s tradition for lawyers to drop their clients when you have such a “rock solid” legal position like he has. I’m sure this is exactly what Harper wanted the day before the House returns. Take that Liberals, your goose is cooked!


Recommend this Post

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Conservatives Dig Themselves in Deeper

James Moore can put on shows for the media all he wants, but as others have noted Conservatives have still completely failed to explain the tape!

Just come clean Mr. Moore and Mr. Harper explain the following transcript:

From CityNews:
Zytaruk: "I mean, there was an insurance policy for a million dollars. Do you know anything about that?"
Harper
: "I don't know the details. I know that there were discussions, uh, this is not for publication?"
Zytaruk: "This (inaudible) for the book. Not for the newspaper. This is for the book."
Harper: "Um, I don't know the details. I can tell you that I had told the individuals, I mean, they wanted to do it. But I told them they were wasting their time. I said Chuck had made up his mind, he was going to vote with the Liberals and I knew why and I respected the decision. But they were just, they were convinced there was, there were financial issues. There may or may not have been, but I said that's not, you know, I mean, I, that's not going to change."
Zytaruk: "You said (inaudible) beforehand and stuff? It wasn't even a party guy, or maybe some friends, if it was people actually in the party?"
Harper: "No, no, they were legitimately representing the party. I said don't press him. I mean, you have this theory that it's, you know, financial insecurity and, you know, just, you know, if that's what you're saying, make that case but don't press it. I don't think, my view was, my view had been for two or three weeks preceding it, was that Chuck was not going to force an election. I just, we had all kinds of our guys were calling him, and trying to persuade him, I mean, but I just had concluded that's where he stood and respected that."
Zytaruk: "Thank you for that. And when (inaudible)."
Harper: "But the, uh, the offer to Chuck was that it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election."
Zytaruk: "Oh, OK."
Harper: "OK? That's my understanding of what they were talking about."
Zytaruk: "But, the thing is, though, you made it clear you weren't big on the idea in the first place?"
Harper: "Well, I just thought Chuck had made up his mind, in my own view ..."
Zytaruk: "Oh, okay. So, it's not like, he's like, (inaudible)."
Harper: "I talked to Chuck myself. I talked to (inaudible). You know, I talked to him, oh, two or three weeks before that, and then several weeks before that. I mean, you know, I kind of had a sense of where he was going."
Zytaruk: "Well, thank you very much." ”


It’s already been admitted this is Mr. Harper’s voice, so if Conservatives are going to allege someone doctored the tape then the onus is on CONSERVATIVES to explain WHERE it was changed and WHO did it? The only people who had the tape that was analyzed were the publishers, the Conservative Party and the two experts the party hired. You can’t say the tape is doctored without saying who did it and what was changed. Oh you can’t answer those questions? Then your accusations can’t be taken seriously.

And you say the Liberals can’t use the tape, but the NDP, the publishers and the media still can? Does that make any sense at all? And the author says the tape was the full interview unchanged and offers an explanation for why the tape starts and stops at one point and the Conservatives aren’t disputing what he says? Even one of their OWN paid experts isn't at all sure any doctoring took place.

Well congratulations Conservatives you’ve just wasted people’s time and resurrected a scandal for yourself.

So yesterday Mr. Moore accomplished nothing in explaining the tape and I would be appalled if any court would take the Conservatives claim seriously.

Meanwhile I am disappointed that the NDP hasn’t helped to move the investigation of this in committee and we had Joe Comartin yesterday dismissing the tape as meaningless. It’s a bizarre point of view since obviously the Conservatives themselves feel the tapes to be quite meaningful as they wouldn’t have paid experts good money to look at them otherwise.

At least I will give Comartin credit though for making the point that if you were really serious about having an injunction go through you don’t apply for it to take effect in September you do it now and that if Conservatives were sure any of the actual relevant parts of the conversation (see the transcript above) were changed then James Moore would have certainly come out and said so. He did not.

So this whole fiasco is just another joke hatched I’m sure by the same people who orchestrated the "secret release" of the RCMP search warrant (for “In and Out”) and escape down the fire escape adventure.

Not only have the Conservatives failed to explain the tape, but it’s curious that not a single Conservative Party member has come forward that I know of to refute this story on the NAFTA memo leak.

“this one(investigation of the NAFTA memo leak) took nearly three months and more than $143,000 in private detective fees only to miss what the Star found in a few phone calls over a single weekend – that the leak was from Harper's inner circle. It wouldn't take much effort now for a determined administration to trace the leak from an official in the Prime Minister's Office to Republicans and then to the Associated Press. The names are known within government, as are the motives."

Why no libel suit against James Travers? Just like James Moore’s refusal to answer the most important questions re: Cadman, I expect no less re: NAFTA.

You would think though that the Conservatives would realize that providing no answers now only allows for these questions to be raised again in the next federal campaign. But I guess it’s too much to expect these guys to figure that out.

UPDATE: Kady O’Malley has more news on the story and more questions that need to be answered.


Recommend this Post

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Cadman Vs. Mulroney/Shreiber

Some time ago the RCMP looked into Mulroney and Shreiber's dealings and decided there was no evidence on which to lay charges against Mr. Mulroney. Yet some people continued to allege impropriety on the part of Mulroney and ALL parties have agreed to the need for a public inquiry into the Mulroney/Shreiber affair because there are still a plethora or answered questions. I agree we need a public inquiry to get to the bottom of the matter.

Yet now the RCMP have similarly decided there is currently no evidence on which to lay charges in the Cadman affair and now we have Conservatives and some other individuals (who are staunch supporters of further investigating the Mulroney/Shreiber scandal mind you) saying we should never discuss this affair again, or even more surprising that the Liberals should apologize before this was even looked at in committee? Do you see the consistency here? I sure don't.

I welcome someone to explain to me how can you support the Mulroney/Shreiber inquiry (which again Stephen Harper said he was firmly committed to holding) when no RCMP evidence was found to charge Mulroney in that case and yet say the Cadman affair should be dropped entirely just because there was not enough evidence (the RCMP does not lay charges unless they have very solid hard evidence that would hold up in court remember) to charge anyone? I wonder if Stephen Harper could explain.

In both cases there are a still a large number of unanswered questions and that I believe Canadians deserve answers to (has Stephen Harper even tried to explain the tape?) and more avenues to be explored and in BOTH the cases of Mulroney/Schreiber and the Cadman affair, I think we need to get to the bottom of them. There is more work to be done on both fronts, not to mention something can still be highly unethical and worth investigating even if it's not criminal, we need to hold our MPs to a higher standard. Many parliamentary committee investigations have proceeded on that basis and I would hope the NDP will finally agree to let the Cadman affair be investigated by the Ethics committee.

One would think though that if those involved with the Cadman affair really have nothing to hide they wouldn't be screamly loudly to have us forget about all this right now just because there is no evidence on which to lay charges at this point.


Recommend this Post

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

The Final Nail in the Coffin of Conservative "Accountability"

With a government that has been so patently dishonest and lacking in transparency from the beginning it was only a matter of time before it came to this. Though when was the last time a party's headquarters’ were raided by the RCMP?

But really this is just another in a long list of lies, stonewalling and troubling secrecy on the part of a Government so unwilling to accept any criticism or have any semblance of accountability.....

- The gutting of their own Accountability Act and breaking their promises on Access to Information.
- Continued misleading of Canadians with regard to the Afghan detainee torture scandal and repeated attempts to block any investigation of this file that carry on to this day.
- Shameful and repeated censoring of Access to Information Requests.
- Censoring Government scientists to ensure only the “party line” gets heard.
- Firing independent regulators (like Linda Keen) for doing their jobs.
- Creating a manual manual on how to disrupt committees which they have used to block any investigation of the Cadman affair (where Conservatives stand accused of bribing Chuck Cadman to vote with them) and the “In and Out” Scandal that has been the source of today’s RCMP raid.
- And a long list of other troubling actions.

This from a government that pledged in the last election to be open, transparent and accountable?

So for those who thought the “In and Out” Scandal involving accusations that the Tories broke the law in allowing local candidates to claim $1.2 million in expenses for ads produced by the national campaign (thus going over the legal spending limit) was no big deal think again. You don’t see the RCMP raiding party HQ over a minor issue. But this should not be seen in isolation and with such a long pattern of shameful behavior on the part of this government if they ever tried to run a campaign claiming they were an honest and accountable government Canadians will either just laugh or turn away in disgust.

Canadians will instead be looking in the next election for a leader that embodies honesty and integrity and there is no federal party leader who has exhibited that more in his career than Stephane Dion.

Even Jack Layton has said that Dion is a “committed Canadian and a man of principle and conviction” as have so many others that have worked with Dion over the years. Canadians will see this clearly come election time as well. In contrast to the scandal prone Conservatives who mislead and stonewall at every turn, Dion will provide an honest government that is open and transparent.

Instead of a one-man show Government with the weakest front bench in Canadian history, a Dion led Government will have the strongest front bench in Canadian history.

Instead of demonizing and silencing our scientists and independent regulators, Dion will listen to them.

Instead of a government that governs at home and abroad based on ideology, Canadians will see in a Dion led Government one that governs based on reason and sound policy.

Instead of a government that is now seen as a pariah on human rights and the environment, under Dion, Canada will be a leader on both fronts.

Instead of a government that stands up for Canadians only when it’s convenient, a Dion government will stand up for all Canadians at home and abroad.

Instead of dividing people, Dion will show his capacity to unite them (like he did here).

Instead of always eyeing which policies will win the most voters or only paying attention to those voters that might vote for his party, a Dion government will provide Canadians with the policies needed to move Canada to the head of pack in the 21st century.

Dion will give Canadians the Government we can trust and the Government we need at this time in our history.

I for one look forward to a Prime Minister Dion so we can put this shameful era in Canadian history behind us and have a government we can proud of again not just at home but across the world itself. Today we move one step closer to that.


Recommend this Post

Saturday, March 1, 2008

Gone Two Days and So Much Changes: On Cadman and Afghanistan

What a week in Canadian in politics! I have to say first of all, I am glad to see so many Liberals who were upset about the budget response back focused on the horrible Tory government we have.

So of course EVERYONE has given their thoughts on the Cadman affair, but this is too big not to pile on with my thoughts, though I also wanted to talk about something I haven't read much about on the Liberal blogs involving Afghanistan.

First of all though the Cadman scandal. For those who don't think this is a big deal, when was the last time that we have been talking about the PMO possibly authorizing breaking the law? If in fact Harper or Doug Finley authorized offering Cadman financial incentives for voting a certain way (whether that be a $1 milllion loan or a $1 million life insurance policy) as I understand it is breaking the law.

So the RCMP must investigate this and while the NDP think this issue doesn't matter, the Liberals have to keep up the heat. I think we need to wait a bit yet to see if we should hold on an election on this issue, but if Harper's stories keep changing this week and they continue

I still think we can win a Spring election, but I think it's not so bad to let this affair play out another month or so so we can have more answers and then voting No Confidence in this terrible government. When we go on our own No Confidence motion in a month or two then we can frame the election how we want. As well, the budget still wouldn't pass (if memory serves me budgets aren't usually up for third reading until April or May and then of course still have to clear the Senate) so for those who believed strongly the Liberals needed to stop it, it would be stopped.

But this is big and it seems so far the only Tory defense is that the Cadman family are all pathological liars! Tell me Tories, what reason do everyone of Cadman's relatives have to lie about this? And what reason do the Conservatives have to lie about it?

You might say the offer of life insurance is implausible, but maybe they just meant "life insurance" (as in Cadman would in some way be compensated for the loss of his parliamentary plan to the equivalent of $1 million) . Again you can't attack this story without calling the Cadman family liars and so far Harper has refused to do so, so maybe he just happens to know they are right. Dance around it all you want but those are the facts of the story so far.

There's enough evidence from Cadman's own words in different interviews and Harper's own words that point to financial offers being made. We don't know for sure yet if the law was broken, but if the RCMP don't investigate that would be wrong.

So then there was another issue this week that I would have liked to have seen much more coverage on it. Scott Tribe talked about it, but I don't remember seeing it on any other Liberal blogs, but I think it's very important nonetheless. So it seems Afghan prisoner transfers have resumed. The issue of prisoners Canadians have handed over being tortured was a huge issue in the past and I am disappointed this issue has been drowned out by the Cadman scandal.

The Liberals have been strong defenders of human rights in the past and were very forceful in keeping on this issue in the past, I just hope they don't let this one slip. There was clear evidence priosoners were tortured in the past. It was bad enough that the Tories even admitted to it and had transfers stopped. So what's changed? Apparently not all that much, so we need to keep their feet to the fire on this.

This is a fundamental human rights issue that the Tories have badly handled and they don't seem to care if Canada is violating international law. They need to be put on the spot over this and the Liberals need to be asking more questions. We also need a clear solution for how to handle this prisoners in the future.

I also agree with Scott that Amnesty and the BC Civil Liberties group should go back to court on this issue. The lawsuit stopped because prisoner transfers stopped, I think the onus is now on the Harper to explain why they have resumed and Liberals ought to do all they can to assure we get answers and that Harper is held to account on his shameful handling of this whole saga.


Recommend this Post