Alleged PMO obstruction in SNC Lavalin case

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Lumber]
3. Reinstated the long-form census (this one resonated particularly with me);[/quote]

How come?

 

[Lumber]

How come?

Lots of reasons, but it mostly  boils down to that I like filling out the census. I the only way to make informed decisions is with good information, and the best way to get real data on the status and makeup of your population is a census.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It's not just one program in your list that's a gong show. Throwing out a undefined program, with a fancy title and outrageous announcements but  without reasonable goals, tossing some money at it and then letting it wither, is not a good thing or an accomplishment. Even if they were able to make some believe it. Fisheries? - scam license to relatives. Middle class taxes? - everyone is paying more and they still haven't stopped making new taxes to take a bigger chunk. Inquiry into Missing women? Natives don't think so and where are the results, recommendation and what action is coming from it? Senate Appointment Reform has proven that there is no Senate Reform. Paris Climate Agreement? It's proven to be a farce with unattainable goals.

Just because these guys tossed out a fancy named initiative, glued it to glossing travel brochures and gave out contract to some questionable sources, doesn't mean they've done good stuff.

It's easy to rhyme off the titles, but where and how are those programs actually doing is the question.


On a separate note, as I have no other way to contact The Head,

Once again, I speak against trudeau and I get an auto dock of -300 milpoints. At least this time, you didn't leave a smarmy, ad hominem statement in my milpoints.

You only lurk and milpoint, your prerogative of course, that's what they are there for. However, after three years of deductions, you'd think you could at least post more than anti Harper/Trump cartoons.

Your 'neutral' stance today was noted for its atypical muted response. I hope you're not ill and just in too much of a hurry to compose one of your silly one liners.

I appreciate that. Thanks.

 

[Jed]

It's not just one program in your list that's a gong show. Throwing out a undefined program, with a fancy title and outrageous announcements but  without reasonable goals, tossing some money at it and then letting it wither, is not a good thing or an accomplishment. Even if they were able to make some believe it. Fisheries? - scam license to relatives. Middle class taxes? - everyone is paying more and they still haven't stopped making new taxes to take a bigger chunk. Inquiry into Missing women? Natives don't think so and where are the results, recommendation and what action is coming from it? Senate Appointment Reform has proven that there is no Senate Reform. Paris Climate Agreement? It's proven to be a farce with unattainable goals.

Just because these guys tossed out a fancy named initiative, glued it to glossing travel brochures and gave out contract to some questionable sources, doesn't mean they've done good stuff.

It's easy to rhyme off the titles, but where and how are those programs actually doing is the question.


On a separate note, as I have no other way to contact The Head,

Once again, I speak against trudeau and I get an auto dock of -300 milpoints. At least this time, you didn't leave a smarmy, ad hominem statement in my milpoints.

You only lurk and milpoint, your prerogative of course, that's what they are there for. However, after three years of deductions, you'd think you could at least post more than anti Harper/Trump cartoons.

Your 'neutral' stance today was noted for its atypical muted response. I hope you're not ill and just in too much of a hurry to compose one of your silly one liners.

I appreciate that. Thanks.

I appreciate the thoughtful way you have dealt with what is a subtle drive by hit.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Can anybody really, really think of one good thing this guy has done for Canada and Canadians since he's been in office?

It's too subjective a question to be properly answered.  Pretty much everything a government does, and every dollar it spends, benefits someone, somewhere.  The beneficiaries inevitably argue that it's "good for Canada and Canadians", without quantifying any sort of qualifying threshold.

 

[Rifleman62]

Fishbone Jones:

On a separate note, as I have no other way to contact The Head.....

Send him a PM. He answered before and we had a couple of conversations.

 

[Journeyman]

Arrogance. Plain and simple.
That and an overwhelming desire to kill Canada.

I completely agree with the highlighted part.

What about the second part?  op:

 

[Journeyman]

Fishbone Jones:
Send him a PM. He answered before and we had a couple of conversations.

Apparently a PM will not go through to someone who has you on IGNORE.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yes... yes I can. Such as:
1. The Canada Child Benefit;
2. Lowered taxes for middle class;
3. Reinstated the long-form census (this one resonated particularly with me);
4. Revitalized federal ocean science programs by hiring 135 new aquatic scientists for new reasearch;
5. Returned OAS eligibility to 65 (I'm personally not for this one, but I'm not going to say this one was a mistake, but simply choosing someone else's priorities over my own);
6. Launched National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Inquiry (which has been a gong show no doubt, but the intention is nothing but good);
7. Legalized medical assistance in dying;
8. Senate-appointment reform;
9. Re-opened numerous veterans affairs offices;
10. Signed Paris Climate Change Agreement;
11. Increased Canada Student Grants;
12. Bill C-59 (National Security Act);
13. Bill C-68 (Fisheries Act);
14. Bill C-45 (Cannabis Act).

There's lots of good the LPC has done for Canada.

Is there lots of bad? Sure.

Is there more bad than good... I think that's more a matter of preference and opinion than it is a matter of facts, but then I also acknowledge that the veracity of this very statement is also matter of opinion as well...so...

But you didn't ask for a comparison, you asked if he'd done ANYTHING good, and well, there you are.

I leave the other point for people better versed to respond to.

3. Not everyone agrees
6. Has been political theatre that fell off the rails and for the most part has drowned
13.  I have been involved in this one  (CNWA) and I have major concerns about what all theses Acts promise and the inability of government to create the infrastructure to run them. I also expect they will have a significant damping effect on larger projects in the West, causing an economic downturn. while the CPC swung the pendulum to far one way, this swings them to far the other and if they receive Royal Assent in June-july and then the CPC wins, they will make amendments to reduce the damage early on. Needless to say I pity my former colleagues that will have to live that regulatory nightmare and for the people 30 years from now trying to figure out WTF was going on.
10. yes the world is safer now that Canada has been brought to heel....
14.  Really this was public demand and they just jumped on the bandwagon, I give more credit to the people who did the hardwork to get it there. I give the Libs credit in realizing it was a easy win for them.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So the Speaker ruled that he has no jurisdiction to rule on Jane Philpott’s claim. The argument is that Liberals never opted into the 2015 changes to the Act, but i don't see anything that gives the right to "Opt out" https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/p-1/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/speaker-shuts-down-philpott-s-claim-that-pm-contravened-law-with-caucus-expulsions-1.4375510?fbclid=IwAR1pDnjxyODePcHXZ53BoNcYWVIZN-vTJwgzLSuyrS4qh70YtUX5kkK4Two

 

[MilEME09]

So who does have jurisdiction?

 

[Cloud Cover]

There does appear to be a sense of dereliction of duty, if not outright abdication from it in this one. One would think the Minister for Democratic Institutions would have accountability to ensure creatures of Parliament conform and comply with the letter and spirit of the Parliament of Canada Act, but nowhere is that written.
Edit: https://pm.gc.ca/eng/minister-democratic-institutions-mandate-letter

 

[Furniture]

What about the second part?  op:

I disagree, but wasn't looking to start an argument.

I don't think any major political party, or politician within them truly wants to do harm to Canada. I just think their opinion of what is good, and best for Canada differs from mine from time to time.




Not the reply you expected, was it?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So this is the section that determines whether the party is subject to the vote, the next question is: Did they vote on this and record that as such?

49.8 (1) At its first meeting following a general election, the caucus of every party that has a recognized membership of 12 or more persons in the House of Commons shall conduct a separate vote among the caucus members in respect of each of the following questions:

(a) whether sections 49.2 and 49.3 are to apply in respect of the caucus;

(b) whether section 49.4 is to apply in respect of the caucus;

(c) whether subsections 49.5(1) to (3) are to apply in respect of the caucus; and

(d) whether subsection 49.5(4) and section 49.6 are to apply in respect of the caucus.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

So the Speaker ruled that he has no jurisdiction to rule on Jane Philpott’s claim. The argument is that Liberals never opted into the 2015 changes to the Act, but i don't see anything that gives the right to "Opt out" https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/p-1/

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/speaker-shuts-down-philpott-s-claim-that-pm-contravened-law-with-caucus-expulsions-1.4375510?fbclid=IwAR1pDnjxyODePcHXZ53BoNcYWVIZN-vTJwgzLSuyrS4qh70YtUX5kkK4Two

Attached is the Speakers ruling on Jane Philipott alegations.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

thanks

I wonder if said letter is subject to a FOIA?

members of the Liberal caucus were prevented from
voting on the rules for this decision pursuant to section 49.8 of the
Parliament of Canada Act . She stated explicitly that, in this case, the matter
of privilege is very much about knowing which rules apply for expulsion or
readmission; it is not about a possible caucus expulsion as was the issue
addressed in my ruling on April 8, 2019. In her view, although the Chair
has no role in the interpretation of statutes, it does not relieve the Speaker
of the responsibility to ensure that all members are aware of their rights in
this House.
In response, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Government House
Leader informed the House that the Chair of the National Liberal Caucus
had indeed sent the requisite letter to the Speaker, specifying that the
provisions of the Act regarding the expulsion and readmission of caucus
members would not apply for the 42nd Parliament


Because the Act is explicit in the need for a vote.
49.8 (1) At its first meeting following a general election, the caucus of every party that has a recognized membership of 12 or more persons in the House of Commons shall conduct a separate vote among the caucus members in respect of each of the following questions:

 

[Navy_Pete]

You can request pretty much anything under an FOIA.  Whether you'll actually get it is another story.

If you wait a few days and check what requests have been filed recently, you may find a reporter has already done the work for you, and can just ask for a copy of the same response.

They'll probably black it all out (aside from the header and signature block) and claim cabinet confidence or similar, but would be pretty hard for them to argue there was no record of the letter.

 

[Remius]

FOIA is an American thing. 

In Canada it is ATIP.

 

[FJAG]

FOIA is an American thing. 

In Canada it is ATIP.

It's a bit confusing because in most provinces its "Freedom of Information" as most provincial statutes (but not all) are called "Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act"

:cheers:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Fishbone Jones:
Send him a PM. He answered before and we had a couple of conversations.

Why? I got nothing to hide. I dont lurk and snipe. Lurkers are like their popcorn. Dry and stale and full of air.

Besides, the ignore function is wonderful.