Ok MPs, You Can Run, But You Cannot Hide

MPs think they can turn the Auditor General down from wanting to audit their expenses to make sure taxpayers are getting value for our money but I think they have another thing a coming. I, like Tasha Kheiriddian think it's absolutely disgraceful that they are resisting Sheila Fraser.
. Don Martin says that if MPs have following their guidebook and the checks they have nothing to fear.

It should be stressed that MPs face 100 pages of bylaws governing what they can pay for hospitality, housing, supplies, staff salaries, and airport lounge fees.
If federal MPs actually follow their guidebook to the letter and the checks on how they spend public money function as intended, MPs would have nothing to fear from the icy blue eyes of the auditor general peering through steel-rimmed spectacles at their detailed budgets.
That’s why she should intensify the come-clean pressure on Parliament. Sooner or later, MPs must accept that Sheila Fraser has made them an audit offer they cannot politically refuse.

They think this is will be forgotten about and will go away. It's NOT going to go away and it shouldn't. It sure did not go away in Britain. MPs resisted over there too and look what happened. Expense were finally exposed and it was revealed that some MPs had spend taxpayers money inappropriately. Are our MPs scared of some similar inappropriate things getting out? Who knows but the optics just does not look good.

The Nova Scotia expense scandal I think is spooking them too. Now the RCMP is investigating.

The funds our MPs are using for their expenses are taxpayers money. We have a right to know if they are being good stewards or not. They tend to forget we are their employers. They work for us. Not the other way around. We should not stand for the blatant refusal and accuses they are giving for not opening their books.

I urge MPs to please stop the stonewalling and allow Sheila Fraser to have a look. If everything is on the up and up, what are they afraid of?

Conservative MPs, you can take the high ground here and voluntarily invite the AG to come and see what you have. Set the example. You talk about openness and transparency, practice what you preach. The public will honor it if you do.

It's up to us, the citizens to put the pressure on and keep it up until they change their tune and allow the AG to conduct that audit. Phone, email, visit your MP and demand they open their expense accounts to scrutiny.

Update: Maybe the AG could start with Mr. Ziffy. h/t wilson

Personalities

Colin Mochrie, Shirley Douglas, Michael Ignatieff, Jill Barber (manicure), Rex Harrington, Sophie Milman, Liane Balaban, Arsinee Khanjian, Joe Flaherty, Sheila McCarthy, David Julian Hirsch, Mark Breslin, Andy Kim, Patrick McKenna, Phil Nimmons, Dan Redican, Isobel Bassett, Paul Gross, Sharon Hampson, Michael Lee-Chin, Daniel Liebskind, Justin Louis, Jeff Seymour, Miriam Toews, Michael Bonacini, Ashley Legatt, Michael Seater, Ralph Benmergui, Jaymz Bee, Larry Green, Danny Marks, Glen Woodcock, Walter Venafro, Heather Bambrick, Rosemary Dunsmore, Tie Domi, Jamie Sale, Shae-Lynn Bourne, Craig Simpson, Ken Daneyko, Stephane Richer

Oh,oh, Is the NDP Faction of the Liberal Party Causing a Rift?

Looks like some in the Liberal party are not happy with  former NDPers Ujjal Dosanjh and Bob Rae concerning the Afghan detainee transfer issue.  They seem to be causing a rift within the party over the issue.  It apparently started last week after former  Liberal Defence Minister Bill Graham testified in front of the Special Committee on Afghanistan.

Some senior Liberals are unhappy over the manner in which party defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh and foreign affairs critic Bob Rae have been pursuing the Afghan-detainee issue. They fear this relentless pursuit of possible wrongdoing will undermine public confidence in the Canadian Forces and create a major rift between Canadians and their military.

Well duh, isn't that what we on the Conservative side been saying all the time concerning this major non scandal? They're just seeing the light now after Bill Graham testified last week?  Ujjal and Bob clearly didn't get what they wanted in Bill's testimony.  He more or less said much of the same as others had testified to.

The split between at least two very senior Liberals was apparent last week when Bill Graham, the minister of national defence in 2005, appeared before the House of Commons committee probing the detainee matter. At one point, Mr. Graham clashed with Mr. Dosanjh when the defence critic, in effect, implied that the former minister ought to have known that transfers of detainees by Canadian troops had made Canada “responsible as a country” for their welfare – in other words, responsible for their alleged torture. Mr. Graham replied that Mr. Dosanjh “has totally jumbled up what international lawyers make of the law of war and the law in war.”

That must have gotten Ujjal's back up.

Reflect on Mr. Graham’s words. He and his government did the best they could at the time, in a chaotic situation. They had no intention to break any laws of war. And there is still no evidence that they or their successors did.

David Bercuson, author of the article wonders where Mr. Ziffy is on these two  former NDP members.

Where, then, is Mr. Ignatieff on this issue, now that he is the only real alternative to Prime Minister Stephen Harper? His failure to rein in Mr. Rae and Mr. Dosanjh is a major lapse in leadership. There is simply no significant advantage to be gained by the Liberal Party, let alone the nation, by encouraging those who continue to seek evidence of crimes committed by Canadian troops in a war in which tragic ambiguity is an ever-present reality.
There ought to be plenty of room between the Liberals and Tories to debate all sorts of issues touching on Canada’s defence, starting with the basic question of how much defence the country actually needs. But there also ought to be a basic consensus on defence and foreign policy.
When Liberals begin to argue among themselves about a gut-wrenching issue such as this, it is time for Mr. Ignatieff to quit flirting with his party’s left wing and restore sense to Liberal defence policies.

So what is Ujjal and Rae trying to pull? Looks like Mr. Ziffy is having trouble with his NDP members.  What will he do?  Does he agree the far left faction? Will he placate them or rein them in? 

Is Bob Rae trying to undermine Mr. Ziffy? We all know Rae really wants to be leader and at some point, heaven forbid, the prime minister. Don't forget it's was Bob Rae who brought  forth the abortion motion in the house that so badly backfired on the Mr. Ziffy and the Liberals. Did he know in advance it would fail so it would look bad on Mr. Ziffy's leadership to keep the party on an united front?  Who will win in the end, the NDP faction or the other side?

Either way it's good day for Conservatives when Liberals fight among themselves.  Keep it up Liberals, just don't denigrate our troops in the process.

Liberals Pandering for Votes in Quebec

The Liberals want to grant Quebec 2 or 3 more seats in light of the government granting more seats to BC,Alberta and Ontario.  Why, when their population has been on the decline?  They wouldn't be losing any. They are assured of 75 seats no matter what. They claim it is to ensure equal representation. I don't think so. It's all about currying favor with Quebec.  For the Liberals it's all about votes and getting back into power.

The Liberal Party wants Quebec to get two or three extra seats if the House of Commons passes legislation to increase representation in three other provinces.
The Liberal plan could trigger a clash with the Conservative Party, which is proposing to add 30 new House seats in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia, but none in Quebec.
The Liberals’ Quebec caucus is pushing to increase seats in their province, and are gaining traction within the party. Their goal is to ensure that Quebec’s share of the seats in the House reflects the fact that the province has 23.1 per cent of the Canadian population. Quebec would be left with 75 seats under the Conservative plan.

 The Conservative government introduced a bill in the HOC to increase the seats in BC, Ontario and Alberta to a total of 30 because the population in those provinces have been increasing.  That's understandable and makes sense.  It would equal out representation. I sure hope the CPC does not cave into the Liberal proposal.

Quebec is not losing any seats or influence, infact they even though the population is declining, their influence would still be pretty substantial.  They get way more attention than they deserve.  It's about time Quebec get the same amount of time, attention, money etc., the other provinces get. 
Quebec should stop acting like spoiled brats and the  political parties should stop pandering for votes!

CBC Bias Goes Waaay Back!

Surprise,surprise!  CBC bias goes way back, back to the time of  Former Tory Prime Minister, Arthur Meighen.

Both "unrevised" and "unrepented," the speaker approached the microphone. The party he had twice served as prime minister was gathered in convention before him. Considered by friend and foe alike to be one of the finest parliamentarians in Canadian history -- on par with only the great Sir Wilfrid Laurier himself -- his address was eagerly awaited.
It was to be his final fare-well to Canadian politics. He had planned a speech to address an urgent national crisis. Shortly before his address, however, he was forced to change his topic. Quite understandably, he was angry. And, like most proud partisans, a slight like this would not be easy to forget. If it ever could be.
"You will observe that the instrument on my left is a loud speaker; it is not a radio," he thundered. "This convention, recognized universally by all classes of the Canadian people as of definite and outstanding significance, has been denied by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ... coverage over their lines -- denied the right to carry its speeches, its arguments and decisions, or any of them, into the homes of our country. It has been forbidden access to millions of Canadian listeners, by an authoritarian Commission appointed by a Government constituted from a single party. ...
"(Our party) were not only refused free use of this radio, which is granted to every cabinet minister on demand, but, after offering to pay regular charges for time, they were again repulsed."
You could be forgiven for thinking this speaker sounds like Preston Manning or Stephen Harper at an early Reform Party convention in the early 1990s. Or Brian Mulroney, Joe Clark, John Diefenbaker, Bob Stanfield or George Drew before that.
In this case, the words came from Tory Arthur Meighen. He later included this address in his famous published collection of debating speeches, Unrevised and Unrepented, which came out to great acclaim -- even from many Liberals -- in 1949. The title of the address to the Conservative Convention of 1942 held in Winnipeg? "The CBC -- A Party Instrument."

CBC to Investigate Itself

How ridiculous is that? They're going to conduct a study to see if they're biased? Come on, what a waste of time and money, our money. Of course they're biased. Ezra has a good post today on that. If they want some outside party to help with their "so called" investigation, how about come to us bloggers. There is plenty instances where bloggers have pointed out bias. CBC, what are you waiting for, we'll point out bias for ya. We will show you specific examples.

We already know what the results will be. It will be a whitewash, a joke. How are Canadians supposed to take that seriously? It would be like Osama Bin Laden investigating 9/11. or the Nazis investigating whether they were anti-semitic.
Time to stop wasting our taxpayer dollars on Mothercorp. Shut 'em down.

Update: What is Rick Salutin at Globe and Mail smokin'?
CBC and Frum: Ships in the ideological night

Counterpoint: Consider the CBC, where David’s late mother reigned, and which Harperites accuse of being left and Liberal. Should leftists defend the CBC? Hell, no, they should attack it – for being so far to the right. Look at CBC’s prestige political panel: two of three members are Andrew Coyne, of hard-right Maclean’s, and Allan Gregg, who polls for Preston Manning to show how right-wing Canada now is. Its chief pundit is Rex Murphy, now also at the National Post. Take former journalists in the Harper government, like minister Peter Kent and senators Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin – they all had serious CBC careers. Is CBC training right-wing media agents? The case is at least as strong as the Pakistani Taliban being behind the Times Square bomber The only Liberal media senator is Jim Munson, who came from CTV! CTV is now where I go for left-wing analysis. CBC management is so daft they may believe they are left because Harperites say so, prompting them to add even more conservative stuff, as they drift ever further to the right, at some point passing David Frum, still standing still, like ships in the ideological night.