Author Topic: Politics in 2017  (Read 77893 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 406,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,467
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #75 on: January 16, 2017, 09:59:44 »
It would damn well give him a taste of what the rest of us endure and let him get closer to those he rules over.
Only if he flew steerage coach - and what are the odds of ANY PM flying in the back if that were to happen?

Also, when discussing the need for special transportation for the PM, let's not forget all those arguments about 1)  PM's/officials'  needing to be in secure touch with folks even while enroute, and 2)  it's not that much more expensive than keeping them on the ground or flying empty, as highlighted in great detail here.

« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 10:03:49 by milnews.ca »
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 473,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,934
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #76 on: January 16, 2017, 10:01:50 »
I also don't see the need to vilify him just because he is the head of the LPC.
I, personally, am not vilifying him just  because he's the head of the LPC;  I truly want him to 'do good,' for the good of my country.  No, the negative comments that he draws upon himself are because he repeatedly shows that he is legislatively weak, ethically corrupt, and out of touch with the majority of Canadians who care about more than his hair.


In this one particular debacle -- the Aga Khan vacation (aka - annual vacation #10) -- I'll take a line from the blog of friend and supporter of this site, Ted Campbell:
Quote
That’s it in a nutshell: Team Trudeau knew that the prime minister was going to break his own conflict of interest rules but they didn’t care because he’s “entitled;” they decided to try the dishonest course of action: keeping it a secret.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 167,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,822
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #77 on: January 16, 2017, 10:03:00 »
No, I don't think any of that was happening. But I also don't think he was working to better the position of the Aga Khan or his organization...

Quite simply, "it doesn't matter." 

The concept of "not only do right, but be seen to do right" is not new. 

The Law is not new.

The PM and his close advisors know the 'perception is reality' mantra and whether intentional or not, the actions both of the PM and his family during the visit, and those of he and/or his staff to keep information about activities that, whether ever in a court of law or not, are seen to the common citizen to contravene the Conflict of Interest Act (Ref: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-36.65/FullText.html.

Quote
Travel

12. No minister of the Crown, minister of state or parliamentary secretary, no member of his or her family and no ministerial adviser or ministerial staff shall accept travel on non-commercial chartered or private aircraft for any purpose unless required in his or her capacity as a public office holder or in exceptional circumstances or with the prior approval of the Commissioner.

In my mind, without asking the Commissioner, what would constitute an 'exceptional circumstance'?  If there had been a medical emergency at the Aga Khan's residence, the use of his private helicopter to take the PM or one of his family members to medical facilities beyond the Aga Khan's island would qualify.  Sight seeing around the island to get a bird's eye view of the Aga Khan's opulent abode would not, in my opinion.

Did the PM's RCMP protection detail have the opportunity to survey the Aga Khan's helicopter to ensure that it was safe and had not been tampered with prior to flying Canada's Head of Government?  It goes beyond giving a long-standing family friend an overhead view of an impressive residence.

:2c:

Regards
G2G
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 10:06:13 by Good2Golf »

Online Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,332
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #78 on: January 16, 2017, 10:03:45 »
You know, someone at the office pointed out that the British PM flies commercial on British Airways.  He pondered why the hell if it is good enough and safe enough for the British PM to fly commercial then why couldn't the Sun King or any of his successors do the same on Air Canada.  It would damn well give him a taste of what the rest of us endure and let him get closer to those he rules over.

I'm pretty sure that just happened once, several years ago.  nice gesture but it apparently caused a whole series of logistical and security issues.

Imagine being on that flight.  Delays, extra screening etc.  No thanks.
Optio

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 473,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,934
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #79 on: January 16, 2017, 10:07:41 »
Imagine being on that flight.  Delays, extra screening etc.  No thanks.
....but maybe.....just maybe.... Air Canada might schedule one or two of their less-miserable Flight Attendants (if they have any) for that flight.

/silver lining dreaming

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,442
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,524
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #80 on: January 16, 2017, 10:19:54 »
Only if he flew steerage coach - and what are the odds of ANY PM flying in the back if that were to happen?

Also, when discussing the need for special transportation for the PM, let's not forget all those arguments about 1)  PM's/officials'  needing to be in secure touch with folks even while enroute, and 2)  it's not that much more expensive than keeping them on the ground or flying empty, as highlighted in great detail here.

Yes, I'm sure he wouldn't fly cattle class like the rest of us.  I was impressed with the CDS and his wife in 09 by their flying commercial with me from Quebec City to Ottawa and sitting farther back in cattle class too than I was seated.  BZ. 

Damn certain you wouldn't be able to get the hair that far back in any aircraft as it would no doubt become stuck between rows 3 and 4.
I'm just like the CAF, I seem to have retention issues.

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,840
  • It's all good
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #81 on: January 16, 2017, 12:58:04 »
Yes, I'm sure he wouldn't fly cattle class like the rest of us.  I was impressed with the CDS and his wife in 09 by their flying commercial with me from Quebec City to Ottawa and sitting farther back in cattle class too than I was seated.  BZ. 

Damn certain you wouldn't be able to get the hair that far back in any aircraft as it would no doubt become stuck between rows 3 and 4.

In a previous job, I often found myself flying from Ottawa to Edmonton on the Thursday night flight.  Using my own upgrade points, I sometimes sat in Business Class......where every single time I had a wonderful chat with members of Parliament and Cabinet who took that flight every Thursday, in Business Class.

Any guess which party they were from?
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,442
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,524
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #82 on: January 16, 2017, 13:25:45 »
The Entitlement Party, of which all the denizens of the Hill have connections to regardless of partisanship.  As far as I'm concerned.   You can bet my MP enjoys far more perks working here in Notawa than I ever shall.  Both the current and former incumbent who are from different teams.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 13:29:15 by jollyjacktar »
I'm just like the CAF, I seem to have retention issues.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 167,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,822
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #83 on: January 16, 2017, 13:56:37 »
In a previous job, I often found myself flying from Ottawa to Edmonton on the Thursday night flight.  Using my own upgrade points, I sometimes sat in Business Class......where every single time I had a wonderful chat with members of Parliament and Cabinet who took that flight every Thursday, in Business Class.

Any guess which party they were from?

You used the plural case, so I'm going to go out on a limb and surmise it was not the Hon. Ann McLellan, thus it would make the business class goers most likely from Team Blue.  ???

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,840
  • It's all good
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #84 on: January 16, 2017, 14:55:55 »
You used the plural case, so I'm going to go out on a limb and surmise it was not the Hon. Ann McLellan, thus it would make the business class goers most likely from Team Blue.  ???

Yup.  Just saying.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 430,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,435
  • Crewman
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #85 on: January 16, 2017, 15:05:07 »
Quite simply, "it doesn't matter." 

The concept of "not only do right, but be seen to do right" is not new. 

The Law is not new.

The PM and his close advisors know the 'perception is reality' mantra and whether intentional or not, the actions both of the PM and his family during the visit, and those of he and/or his staff to keep information about activities that, whether ever in a court of law or not, are seen to the common citizen to contravene the Conflict of Interest Act (Ref: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-36.65/FullText.html.


Quote
Travel

12. No minister of the Crown, minister of state or parliamentary secretary, no member of his or her family and no ministerial adviser or ministerial staff shall accept travel on non-commercial chartered or private aircraft for any purpose unless required in his or her capacity as a public office holder or in exceptional circumstances or with the prior approval of the Commissioner.

In my mind, without asking the Commissioner, what would constitute an 'exceptional circumstance'?  If there had been a medical emergency at the Aga Khan's residence, the use of his private helicopter to take the PM or one of his family members to medical facilities beyond the Aga Khan's island would qualify.  Sight seeing around the island to get a bird's eye view of the Aga Khan's opulent abode would not, in my opinion.

Did the PM's RCMP protection detail have the opportunity to survey the Aga Khan's helicopter to ensure that it was safe and had not been tampered with prior to flying Canada's Head of Government?  It goes beyond giving a long-standing family friend an overhead view of an impressive residence.

:2c:

Regards
G2G



Would that not include the use of the RCAF Challenger for holidays?  My interpretation of that is that it would.  Yet another abuse.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 369,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,748
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #86 on: January 16, 2017, 15:23:26 »
No.  GoC aircraft are neither private nor chartered.

This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 167,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,822
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #87 on: January 16, 2017, 15:29:30 »
No.  GoC aircraft are neither private nor chartered.

^ This.  State aircraft are State aircraft, and perhaps arguable to some, but they are the appropriate resource to use for the Head of Government.  As seen in the past, previous PMs have reimbursed the GoC for equivalent airfares had commercial travel been taken (but for which security of the Head of Government could not reasonably be assured).

Regards
G2G

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 430,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,435
  • Crewman
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #88 on: January 16, 2017, 15:49:58 »
My argument is not for using it as "required in his or her capacity as a public office holder" for business of the State, but using it for personal vacation.  [My interpretation of the clause.]
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Spectrum

    sociopath since 2007.

  • I'm from the government; I'm here to help you
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 49,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,260
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #89 on: January 16, 2017, 15:52:54 »
In a previous job, I often found myself flying from Ottawa to Edmonton on the Thursday night flight.  Using my own upgrade points, I sometimes sat in Business Class......where every single time I had a wonderful chat with members of Parliament and Cabinet who took that flight every Thursday, in Business Class.

Any guess which party they were from?

While I vote CPC, this doesn't surprise me at all. Politicians are politicians. The only thing the parties can ever agree on is that they all deserve a raise.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,849
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #90 on: January 16, 2017, 15:59:19 »
With respect to all parties concerned:

There is a bit of difference between paying the upcharge to move to Business Class (not First Class) and commandeering a whole aircraft for personal use.

On the other hand - have none of you hitched a lift with a service aircraft going your way?
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 29,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,399
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #91 on: January 16, 2017, 16:12:36 »
Apparently, in 2011/2012 there was a fair bit of controversy over the Aga Khan's development of Bell Island which happened to be located in an ecological park. There were also allegations of improprieties by government minister's in letting the development go forward.

Quote
Bahamas: Aga Khan's Plan for Bell Island Stirs Eco-Controversy

JANUARY 19TH, 2012

With a controversial development in a national park, a debate is brewing in the Bahamas over whether privilege trumps protecting the environment.

The Bahamas may have a reputation as a laid-back island chain where the world’s elite can come and go with relative anonymity, but an environmental controversy has propelled one billionaire private island owner into the spotlight. The Bahamian government has long taken a strict approach to permitting development in the protected Exumas National Land and Sea Park. Critics of the ruling Free National Movement party, however, say that they have compromised ecological principles when it comes to the development of Bell Island by the Aga Khan, who reportedly purchased it in 2009.

The Aga Khan, a well-known figure in elite social circles, is the 4th of his line to act as head of the world’s Ismaili Muslims, a branch of the Shi’a faith. An inherited title meaning “noble ruler”, the Swiss-born Aga, also known as Prince Karim al-Husseini, is the chair of one of the largest private development networks in the world, funding diverse works relating to the environment, disaster reduction, and the preservation of art and cultural treasures.

Having a sizeable inherited wealth, in addition to receiving tithes from millions of Ismaili Muslims each year, the Aga has no shortage of funding for his charitable works. His personal fortune is said to exceed $1 billion, and his tastes run towards the extravagant; stables of racehorses, a Sardinian yacht club, private planes, and, of course, a certain island in the Bahamas that may be causing him more grief than he bargained for.

Bell Island lies within the Exumas Land and Sea Park, one of the grandfathered private islands from before the Park was established in 1959. The Aga applied to dredge the area of the island to create a marina for his 150-ft super yacht, which, much to the chagrin of environmental groups and local citizens, was approved by Environment Minister Earl Deveaux, who has been widely pilloried in the local press for accepting rides in the Aga’s helicopter. The dredging reportedly began in the summer of 2011, and while government officials claim that no real ecological damage will occur, critics say that the sanctity of the Park has already been compromised.

The destruction to the island, according to a statement by an Opposition party member in the Bahamas Press, has been serious; he described with video footage how dredging has eradicated 13 acres of the surrounding sea bed, once a habitat for conch, lobster and corals. Hills on the island were excavated for their soil, and a pond that once housed protected Bahamas ducks and other wild fowl was now barren. He criticized the Bahamas National Trust, who he said received a $1 million donation by the Aga, and has remained silent on the environmental damage.

However, Neil McKinney, President of the Bahamas National Trust, said that the dredging was only impacting a few acres, and the Aga had acquired all proper permits. A spokesperson at the Aga’s estate in Chantilly, France, also denies the allegations that the Aga’s development has been harmful, or even significant. “It is certainly not true to say that he has harmed the environment in any way,” the employee told the Daily Mail. “On the contrary, he has kept to a strict adherence of environmental standards. The island he bought had two owners before him. It was never pristine and untouched. He is merely renovating a fairly small building that is already there.”

Article link.

My emphasis. The only thing I could find about the Aga Khan's private helicopter is that [in 2011] it was a "12 seat luxury helicopter."

And, if anyone is interested, its approximately 124 km (as the crow flies), from Nassau International Airport to Bell Island. So about a hour or so flight time??
Years ago, fairy tales all began with, "Once upon a time." Now we know they all began with, "If I'm elected."

Carolyn Warner

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,456
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,991
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #92 on: January 16, 2017, 16:33:16 »
Rules and laws don't apply to Canadian royalty.

There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 94,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,821
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #93 on: January 16, 2017, 16:45:21 »
On the other hand - have none of you hitched a lift with a service aircraft going your way?

Are you honestly comparing Master corporal Bloggins hitching a ride as cargo on a Herc from Trenton to Ottawa that is going that way in any event to save a one way bus fare over the week-end with a minister of the state getting a ride for free specifically for him, that is worth thousands of dollars, where the minister may or may not be in a position to favour the provider with large amounts of public funds in return?

Offline Spectrum

    sociopath since 2007.

  • I'm from the government; I'm here to help you
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 49,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,260
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #94 on: January 16, 2017, 16:52:31 »

On the other hand - have none of you hitched a lift with a service aircraft going your way?

No. I'm paid a salary and use my own money to pay for non-duty travel.

(and who would really trust the military with vacation plans? or care to see military people on vacation? - not me)

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 430,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,435
  • Crewman
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #95 on: January 16, 2017, 17:17:23 »

On the other hand - have none of you hitched a lift with a service aircraft going your way?

On non-Duty travel, we used to have to pay a nominal fee ($10 in the 1980's) for insurance purposes.......or so I was told when I traveled non-Duty on a Service Flight.  On the other hand, while on Duty, well then....It was no cost.   :warstory:
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,456
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,991
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #96 on: January 16, 2017, 17:39:37 »
“No minister of the Crown, minister of state or parliamentary secretary, no member of his or her family and no ministerial adviser or ministerial staff shall accept travel on non-commercial chartered or private aircraft for any purpose unless required in his or her capacity as a public office holder or in exceptional circumstances or with the prior approval of the Commissioner.”

Seems pretty clear cut to me.

My bet is the ethics commissioner will find that "he didn't know any better and was just doing what he thought was allowable".
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline cavalryman

    Done with the demented bureaucracy.

  • You can't put a pricetag on patriotism
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 32,585
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #97 on: January 16, 2017, 17:40:38 »
My bet is the ethics commissioner will find that "he didn't know any better and was just doing what he thought was allowable".

It does sound better than the real reason:  "Rules are for the little people."

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 186,527
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,749
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #98 on: January 16, 2017, 17:42:13 »
On non-Duty travel, we used to have to pay a nominal fee ($10 in the 1980's) for insurance purposes.......or so I was told when I traveled non-Duty on a Service Flight.  On the other hand, while on Duty, well then....It was no cost.   :warstory:

It was $5.00 in each direction, to cover the cost of the boxed lunch. That charge was eliminated shortly before the end of the scheduled service flight system.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,456
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,991
Re: Politics in 2017
« Reply #99 on: January 16, 2017, 18:00:03 »
It does sound better than the real reason:  "Rules are for the little people."

C'mon, the guy just wanted to thank Trudeau for the $55 million dollars Canada will be giving him over the next 5 years for children in Afghanistan.
There are no wolves on Fenris