Wisely, Brian Mulroney never trusted me enough to take into his confidence. Still, we got along. The prime minister tolerated me doing iconoclastic things as a Parliamentary committee chairman, and even encouraged me when I ran to be leader after he threw in the towel. Minutes following my speech to the leadership convention, that mellifluous voice was on the phone telling me I had a great future in politics. Five months later, I lost my seat.
Mulroney was a charmer, as you know. The perfect PM for the showy Eighties, with a perfect wife and a totally outgoing gregarious personality. In caucus he had the ability to paper over the dramatic cracks which would shatter the Progressive Conservative party after he left . As politicians go, he was the original smoothie.
But he was also a policy pioneer, giving the country free trade and the GST – still two economic guideposts which stand firm. Some say his failure to achieve the Meech Lake accord led to the rise of the Bloc and the near-collapse of Canada under Jean Chrtien’s watch. Could be. But I remember that at the time the entire political class of Canada was with him, at least until the fateful Charlottetown national referendum.
As for the man personally, allegations of impropriety have dogged him for almost two decades. Thus far he has weathered Stevie Cameron’s bite, massive legal challenges and even an assault by the Government of Canada. Now he faces a new threat, in the wake of more allegations from an incarcerated former business associate, and a CBC docudrama. This time the allegation is he pocketed $300,000 in tainted funds, failed to report it in a timely fashion and lied about the whole thing.
I have no idea if there is substance here. I do find it strange that a man of Brian Mulroney’s wealth would risk his image for that kind of money. And it’s passing strange this is all coming to light years and years later, yet within days of the man’s biography hitting bookstores. But, what do I know?
So, my Liberal colleagues are after his ass. I guess the hunt is made more exciting by the fact Stephen Harper likes to drop Mr. Mulroney’s name broadly. It is widely believed the current PM is taking guidance from the former one, so any tarnish on one might sully the other.
My seatmate, Robert Thibault, has been leading the charge during Question Period and in the scrums. The other day, as we sat together, he was reading a letter from Mr. Mulroney’s lawyer telling him to back off. But that’s not likely. I know Robert, and this is going all the way. The Liberals are calling for a public inquiry into Brian Mulroney’s activities and that cash. Stephen Harper is warning he might retaliate by investigating Paul Martin’s shipping deals or Jean Chretien’s small business loans. The whole thing is spiraling downwards at a fierce clip.
Like I said, I have no idea if Mr. Mulroney took money, if he earned it, or when it happened. And I don’t care. If this is the way Liberal strategists think Stephen Harper should be damaged, then we need new strategists. Mr. Harper has enough real shortcomings of his own to do him in.
Besides, nobody asked me to go to Ottawa and spend time chewing up old politicians. It may be great fun, especially in the libel-free atmosphere of QP, but it accomplishes nothing for the citizens of the country. Screwing Brian Mulroney will not stop climate change, bring back lost manufacturing jobs, lower mortgage rates, give families income-splitting or create child care spaces.
This is not what Parliament’s for. But it’s why there is TV.
211 comments ↓
I don’t normally agree with you these days but your are absolutely right.
I have no interest in spending millions of dollars on public inquiries to chase political vendettas. This applies for past Liberal or Conservative PM’s.
Thank you Garth .. and as I have said before, I have nothing against you but I think the Dion Liberal party is so desperate to find an issue on which to survive, it is now grasping at straws.
That Dion should allow this to happen is just another example of his small-mindedness and lack of understanding what a leader must do.
I hope you can be the one in the Liberal party to make a stand against this stupidity and utter utter display of desperation.
If you end up as an independent candidate in Halton, I will be proud to send you the money that I almost sent you before the mistake.
Stand your ground Garth, because once a public person loses their principles and dignity, they are mire. Stay out of the cesspool that is being created by certain Liberals. You are too unique a politician.
Can’t agree with you on this, Mr. Turner. If Mr. Mulroney accepted this cash, followed with accepting the money of the taxpayers for his legal fees, Canadians have the right to know.
The Throne Speech spoke of offering a ‘clean’ gov’t. If Mr. Mulroney is part of that, they should come clean in a truthful manner.
Wisely, Brian Mulroney never trusted me enough to take into his confidence.
A rather interesting admission indeed. If Mulroney couldn’t trust you, why should Halton voters?
Thanks for the insight, Garth.
Another one bites the dust, and another’s gone: “A former Conservative candidate said Sunday that the party muzzled him and kept him from freely engaging in public discourse.
Gary Caldwell, who will now run for the Green Party in the Quebec riding of Compton-Stanstead, claimed he had to ignore Tory rules to speak openly with reporters.”
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071104/green_candidate_071104/20071104?hub=QPeriod
We got Cons (too many to my mind) in the Libs and we got Cons in the Greens, Cons cons everywhere cons. At this rate I might have to vote for a Dipper.
. . . If this is the way Liberal strategists think Stephen Harper should be damaged, then we need new strategists. Mr. Harper has enough real shortcomings of his own to do him in.
———————————–
Good journalism. The past is water under the bridge, so let the dead bury the dead. The truth will eventually come out, but long after Mulroney’s gone.
Harper can write his own epitaph as well. He doesn’t need any help from anyone — he’s doing a first-class job anyway, and it’s free advertising for the Libs!
Instead, focus on the info. you gleaned from all the Town Halls and put it to good use. Show fellow Libs how to communicate and be accessible to their constituents, and be responsive to their questions.
For once and for all time, get rid of these goddamned slimeballs bozos in CRAP!
A very good article on the possibility of the UK losing its’ nationhood — i.e., becoming absorbed into the EU and losing free speech as well as other issues.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/columnists.html?in_article_id=491544&in_page_id=1772&in_author_id=224&in_check=N
Sorry Garth, but on this one I think you are missing/ignoring/overlooking one rather important element, the derailing of the criminal investigation by Mulroney and the settlement of 2.1 million dollars on sworn testimony where it appears now that Mulroney lied grossly by omission regarding Schreiber and ever receiving any money from him under OATH! That this has been an ongoing conspiracy to maintain the status of the claims of total innocence that the settlement is based upon is also relevant and makes this a present day ongoing affair and not merely something from the dim dark murky past of retired politicians. If Mulroney had taken a token dollar instead along with his “exoneration” in the 90s then I might agree with you, but that is not what he did now was it?
There is real cause for concern here, especially given that Mulroney played a role in the transitional period setting up this government and has apparently been giving advice on how to govern to our current PM who has his own scandals and issues with honesty, especially in terms of omissions. That may make it into a partisan football as well, but the underlying basis I laid out in the first paragraph is sufficient grounds for further inquiry given the contemporaneous documentary evidence and Mulroney’s own public statements and actions regarding the 300,000 in question and how it affects the lawsuit he settled to derail the investigation and pocket millions of taxpayer dollars and whether he did so under fraudulent pretenses/means.
Sorry Garth, on this one I think you are missing the boat, perhaps out of old loyalty, perhaps out of simply wanting to believe the best of the man, I don’t know. We all have our blind spots and I have to say I think in this case this is one of yours for you to take this attitude about it given what is now in the public record/domain on this matter.
Posts like these are the reason I have you bookmarked. You’re a very focused man, Garth.
I presume Dion knows your opinion regarding this matter? Why is he bothering to go after Mulroney when there’s so much real policy work to be done? If he really wants to impress Canadians, he should stay away from politics-as-usual moves like this. In my opinion, of course.
I would like to hear instead what the plan is for addressing the sorry sorry state of Canada’s homeless. Or how about the state of the working poor and their kids, Canadians all. Health Care wait times is oh so last list of 5 I know but there it is.
And any thinking person knows that the GST was just an emotional ploy because we all love to hate the GST… and the man who brought it in. For that alone he will always be the most hated PM always, tho Steve is working on that title and he is sooo close.
I guess what I am saying is that there are real problems that need real solutions. Including all the more Ontario centric ones like manufacturing, the Maritimes have theirs, BC is floating in a sea of lies and corporate sell outs. Our Rivers are now being sold and we are not learning til afterwards and the press says nothing. BC Rail/ CN Rail, has is crashed or fallen of the rails in your neighbourhood lately? I’d love to know about it. It’s maybe going to trial soon. It’s our “big sell out to foreign interests and lie to the people” story that again is never in the press.
What to do?
But I think I beat the trolls Garth:)
Geo
Apparently Stephen Harper promised a Special Prosecutor role, and this or these case(s) could be investigated at far less cost than a public or judicial inquiry, and it’s win/win all ’round and everything finally gets sorted.
I couldn’t agree more. Liberals: please don’t waste your energy on this.
Your PC roots are showing Garth…
Economically? Whether or not we truly have free trade with the US is a matter of opinion, and arguments can be made whether or not it was a step in the right direction for a country like Canada. But it is not like we can turn back the clock. Canada’s economy adapted and survived. Whether it is better than it could have been without free trade, who can say? Just like the GST. Or blind privatization of state companies before they can accrue their full wealth or at least their return of investment.
But politically? Brian totally made up “the night of long knives”, and it became entrenched in the psyche of the Quebecois in the 80s and 90s. When he introduced Meech and Charlottetown, it came out of nowhere. There was no precedence except for the one that he manufactured. Separatism was dead. They were doomed to failure from the outset. He set the course for the rise of the PQ and the BQ.
And then there were a whole slew of charges against his early cabinet ministers. Oerlikon (sp?) come off the top of my head.
When people first heard about kickback charges against Mulroney (launched by Stevie Cameron), the general attitude was not “it can’t be”, but “figures”.
Yes, there is a lot more to paste Harper and the CPC with than going after Mulroney. And they should be of priority and highlighted. But personally I do think that it is within the rights of the Government of Canada to reconsider its out-of-court settlement with Mulroney since he may have committed perjury.
Also, I don’t doubt that it will and should give the Reform-Alliance component of the CPC pause for second thought given the roles that Mulroney and his gang have in the CPC. The CPC can’t seem to decide whether to protect or distance themselves from him…
Austin
Oh Oh. this lieing brian has just been busted; at the very least brought into the news of the day.
He’d never tell, I’m sure how many Canadians taxpayers he srewed.
I think I’d rater listen to another ‘pecker ad’ than listen to his excuses.
Impotent, incompetent. inadequate?
Who cares Mulroney tried to destroy our country as Devine was trying to destroy our provinhce.
Thanks Garth. Our Canada will come back to us.
I will help in whatever way I can.
Thanks/
But don’t you think taxpayers should get their money back? Mulroney sued for libel, but it seems he was lying. The 300K wasn’t enough to support Mulroney’s lifestyle I’m sure, but does he have to do it on the taxpayers dime? Let him keep Schrebier’s 300K if he can manage it, but Harper should ask for that 2 million back.
Have to agree with Trevor. As an ardent ex-supporter of yours I rarely agree with you on anything anymore but this time you actually sounded (so-to-speak) more like your old self.
Thumbs up on this one, Garth.
Garth, your post is right on. You see this is why I keep telling you that your party and its leadership is not the same as you when it comes to your principals.
You get it, but your party strategists should be fired because they don’t. They are either purposely, or through sheer idiocy leading Dion down a path of great destruction with all of this. My Machiavellian sense tells me it is the former. The political establishment of your party will sacrifice Dion and this country on the altar of their ambitions in order to get back the power they think they deserve. They don’t like or respect the grass roots movement that go t him there. Your current party’s history and views are probably the least democratic, and most led by the right of the ‘educated’ and ‘elite’ to lead.
The Conservatives are happy to coordinate with the Lib establishment because better the devil you know, then the one you don’t. People like Rae, while dangerous, are still a better target with a broader political surface area to attack then Dion. Besides, keeping your party in a constant state of internal strife is the way they will get a majority.
Dion seems to be a good and decent person, but I don’t think the good professor can even begin to comprehend how many Brutuses are out there with their knives. Of course it may just be that he deserves his political defeat because he is listening to bad advice. At the end of the day that is his responsibility and thus he will bear the consequence of it. I just hope for the sake of democracy that he is defeated and ejected quickly if he can’t get it.
Mr. Harper is getting a very easy ride. He is keeping the Libs on the defensive and this latest distraction is only a gift for him because it keeps people’s focus off the facts of today. It also only makes him look like a better statesman and leader.
Most Canadians are over their hate of Mulroney, except the CBC (Communist Broadcasting Company
) which could not suffer any criticisms of their god – Trudeau. We can now appreciate that Mulroney had the right ideas on many issues but was a little ahead of his time politically. He paid for it because of your current party’s shrewd exploitation and outright lies against sound policies. The Libs and Trudeau out of sheer political hate sabotaged what would have been a solution to the Quebec problem and would have saved us from the near disaster of the sovereignty referendum and issuing money laundering scandals of the Libs. The GST was suppose to be eliminated, remember RED BOOK I, and Sheila Copp’s by election? Funny how this stuff all gets forgotten.
I believe you when you say that in caucus you can debate and discuss your ideas, and that is good thing, but it has no effect when these people don’t listen to it and just use you as a thorn. With great deceit they also let you publish your sound policy positions knowing full well they won’t implement them. You are not the same as these people.
Canadians can see right through this political crap, this further diminishes your party’s leadership and only weakens Dion as a leader.
What I continue to see is person that is not willing to stand up to the government but will chase after the ghosts of elections past to try to score some cheap points. I am sorry, but the no backbone weasel rating just went up higher with the Liberal party. I think your party establishment knows Dion is a train heading for a cliff, and they are smiling about it.
Wisely, Brian Mulroney never trusted me enough to take into his confidence.
Finally a true word on this blog in a very long time.
Garth:
Like I said, I have no idea if Mr. Mulroney took money, if he earned it, or when it happened. And I don’t care.
I agree with everything you say in this blog entry, except for the “I don’t care” sentiment. The allegations are significant, material, and highly suspicious. As one bird said to the other while they sat on a perch, “Something smells fishy”
(Think about it). For anyone interested in the matter I would like to interject a recommendation for 2 books by William Kaplan, which should be read in chronological order. IMO the second one especially did not get anything like the publicity it deserved.
Presumed Guilty: Brian Mulroney, the Airbus Affair, and the Government of Canada (1998)
A Secret Trial: Brian Mulroney Stevie Cameron and the Public Trust (2004)
That said, I agree with you that a public enquiry is not warranted. If the RCMP think they have enough evidence to reopen the investigation they should proceed. If and when the Department of Justice thinks it can recover funds paid under the judgment Mulroney won against them they should sue. But holding a public enquiry that would certainly cost $10 million or more is simply not cost effective.
And there are other reasons why strategically I would recommend the Liberals drop the issue.
1. It is completely irrelevant. It has nothing to do with today’s political situation.
2. It’s at least as likely to cost the Liberals support as to win them any.
3. It’s entirely possible that Harper’s comments about Chretien and Martin are more than idle threats.
Regards,
EhBC
Newsflash: Garth Turner finally makes sense!!!…
If this isn’t newsworthy, I don’t know what is: Garth Turner has decided to finally post something factual and truthful on his blog:Wisely, Brian Mulroney never trusted me enough to take into his confidence. But wait, there’s even more:I have…
Mulroney was just another Quebec politician. While many of his policies laid out a good economic framework for Canada (adopted by Chretien), his obsession with Quebec hurt Canada (i.e. 1995 referendum).
I watched the CBC report with Karl. I can’t understand why a man of Mulroney stature desperately needed this 300,000$. 300,000$ seems pittance for those people – especially given he was earning a PM salary and then a PM’s pension AND he was a very successful corporate lawyer before that. But, then, again, look at the Quebec adscam and their rich buddies with those brown envelopes.
BTW, isn’t Mulroney somehow connected with Power Corp and the Demarais family?
I disagree with you, Garth. After reading William Kaplan’s ‘A Secret Trial’, Gomery’s second report and the news any day, it seems to me that the actions of the RCMP, independence of the judiciary and corruption remain systematic problems in Ottawa.
Mulroney affair begs attention
Mme Chantal Hébert Mon. Nov. 05, 2007
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/273530#
Great DEDUCTIVE reasoning … DEDUCT $300,000 after FULL DISCLOSURE … and DO NOT STOP AT GO!
Stop that man!
Why?
He stole a loaf of bread!
Gnu CPC … ”Hang the bastard!”
Time to Inquire about an INQUIRY. PMSH should make this a vote of confidence in his leadership.
It’s not the crime, it’s the cover up. Why won’t the government let them do their job and investigate this?
Nobody should be accepting 300k in cash.
‘T’was said of him; ”The man could fall backward[s], unassisted … kiss the stone, and spring upright again in a twinkling of the eye.”
$2.1 Million … some backward fall … See alleged bank account cryptically nameed ‘BRITAN’ … Why was the ‘T’ added?
Why does the gnu CPC curl up in a FECAL POSITION on this travesty?
By Trevor on 11.05.07 12:35 am
Wash your hogs somewhere else.
Public inquiry, no. But we should be somehow getting back our 2 million in taxpayers’ money that was paid out to Mulroney.
Garth:
Putting your words to-gether in a senseable manner makes sense to me. However on issues of honesty and that famous Harper word “Transparety” he should be called out, again however I would suggest now that the heat has been turned up, it might be wise to put it on the back bunner and call out the PM on other issues: His stance on the Death Penilty and should he ever get a majority would he shove it down our throat, along with civil unions and his word is not creditable after Income Trust, Atlantic Accord and Kelown….oh yes then their are all your valid points?
If even a few of the above have substance, Why does this man still have 32% support? (I have my thoughts)
You brought sub prime loans to light some time ago now it getting almost daily coverage. Some people I talk to think it’s the US only, how wrong they are.
http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071104.wcitigroup1104/BNStory/Business/home
You’ve got it so completely wrong. The Brian Mulroney episode affects average Canadians deeply. His case represents the Canadian plutocracy’s (Mulroney, Black, the oilpatch, etc.) inability to play by the normal rules, and the federal government’s constant caving to their behaviour.
I work hard and pay my taxes, but Mulroney thinks he doesn’t have to until he is caught out in a lie. That is a real issue affecting all Canadians: one set of rules for the rich, another for the rest of us. For someone who claims to stand up for the little guy, it should be easy for you to figure out.
Or maybe you just like sucking up to rich people like you did in your so-called journalism career and on your lame-ass television show.
Sorry Garth but as a taxpaying citizen I want an inquest into this.This is a very serious issue. If Mulroney has lied about recieving this money and when he paid taxes on it then he should be punished like every other Canadian who has broken the law.
This is exactly what voters are talking about when it comes to politicians being dirty.They break laws and steal money with no reprocussions .
I hope Harper open cases on Martin and Chretian also and if there has been any wrong doing that it will be dealt with accordingly.
I am sick of politicians thinking they are above the laws of our country .
One would hope such comments as yours can be made by MPs on both sides of the House. Trevor’s statement that he doesn’t agree with you these days is the same thoughts as mine.
However, everyone can have a good day now and again. This must have been one of yours.
James
The split widens , slowly moving west.
Ex-Tory candidate slams party for media restrictions
Updated Sun. Nov. 4 2007 6:13 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071104/green_candidate_071104/20071104?hub=Canada
One more for today.
Conservatives warn organizers to be election-ready
Updated Sun. Nov. 4 2007 2:57 PM ET
The Canadian Press
The entire session, in a meeting room of a Moncton, N.B. hotel, was inadvertently broadcast to a small group of startled journalists holding a workshop in the next room. Reporters huddled around a speaker, notepads and pens in hand, throughout a presentation and the following question-and-answer session.
Part of the closed-door meeting was streamed live to the Canadian Association of Journalist’s blog site
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071104/tories_elxn_071104?s_name=&no_ads=
Garth,
Well said.
Ed the Hun
Trevor said:
:I have no interest in spending millions of dollars on public inquiries to chase political vendettas. This applies for past Liberal or Conservative PM’s.”
So in the absence of action, are we simply to tolerate a culture of corruption? I vote no on that motion of tolerating corruption amongst the political class. Perhaps a culture that does not tolerate corruption would give rise to better representatives in Parliament rather than attracting a large number of ambitious persons for whom a seat in Parliament is just the means to some “greater” ends.
I agree that Dion and the shadow cabinet should focus on the substantive issues.
Thibault and other Liberals should continue to pick away at this issue.
No free ride for BM, he haunts us still as Harper’s ouija board: note the pandering to Quebec nationalists ala Bouchard/BM. They will again likely provoke a constitutional crisis for short term electoral gain.
BTW, while the 300k was unknown when Canada paid BM his 2M settlement, it is by now old news. The recent news just embellishes the case against him.
Hey Garth, I must say, I can hear you speaking independently again for once! (This is great news!) And Garth, how soon do you think the next Federal Election will come? I’m just curious, because some of the pundits in the media says that Liberals are saying they won’t be ready until February 2008.
Would you be able to answer this question?!
Garth:
You nailed it
Steve
Garth says –
“Some say his failure to achieve the Meech Lake accord led to the rise of the Bloc and the near-collapse of Canada under Jean Chretien’s watch.”
As we all know, it was Trudeau and his liberal MP minion, Frank McKenna, who sabotaged Meech.
It was therefore Trudeau’s actions that led to the rise of the block. Not Mulroney’s.
Trudeau, the most hated Canadian. Poll, summer 2007.
Garth,
Let me join in the accolades, a well-reasoned and effective argument. But I’m still as troubled as many others about this $300K payment. I agree that it’s throwing good money after bad to launch another inquiry circus but I do have a suggestion. The media in this country could redeem themselves (somewhat) if they pursue Mr. Mulroney directly for a straight answer on this matter. No more cozy book promotions or fluffy society crap. Everytime the guy raises his nose above ground he should be asked directly why he accepted that money and what he did for it. The onus is on Mulroney to explain himself and the media needs to hold his feet to the fire.
The description you give of Mulroney is that of a classic con artist. Hmmm, oh yes he was a politician and a lawyer wasn’t he?
Come and join us old fellows Gart, in the land of “Eyes wide open”. I warn you though, it’s a lonely place.
You can defend Mr. M if you wish, it’s your blog. You enjoyed it when he told you that you have been a good boy Denny. That’s not so hard to understand.
I think you are missing the point as to what good it might do, but the issue is somewhat speculative. The sabres are coming out of the sheaths, and there will be blood on floor, no doubt. Public confidence and perception will be eroded further, but it may serve to drive Mulroney back into obscurity where he should be. His arrogance is reflected in his need for vindication, and perhaps repayment of a debt he feels he owes the party. May also be his greed and the interests of his long time supporters driving him. His book was a joke. He should have kept quiet and he should keep his nose out of current politics.
When you do business with the Karl Shreibers of world, you had better get up pretty early in the morning. It’s not so easy to con a con, and when you try you often find, it is the con who has conned you.
There is a necessary element that needs to remain constant in dealing with Schreiber types, and that is honor among thieves. When this breaks down, all hell can break loose.
As far as an inquiry is concerned; if there is guilt of perjury or breaching US law governing movement of money, wouldn’t it be the job of those who regulate and enforce these things to pursue them? Why would we need to have an inquiry to get these folks to investigate this? Do they need a green light from above to proceed? If so, is it not further duplicity? Think Conrad Black. Think the little guy who owes a few thousand dollars in taxes. Think the small businessperson or farmer / fisherman who gets hauled into court for trying to survive. Duplicity, think duplicity.
Mulroney should take his pot of gold, and with great haste, return to wherever he has been for the past decade. Be warned, Mr. M, the Wiberals are hunting Weprechauns! And they’re after your lucky charms!!
I notice how the cons revel in the dirt when thrown toward the opposition, but get all touchy feely when it’s thrown the other way.
It’s about time Garth. Those blue socks are showing! If the LPOC keeps pushing this, Mr. Harper will be forced to launch an investigation for ALL perceived corruption. Probably have to start with Power Corp. in Quebec (Rae wouldn’t like that one), then CSL, then the bank, then the hotel-golf course thingy…where would it end? Probably with a lot of suits in jail would be my guess.
Anyway, Kudos Garth. This post you should be proud of. Leasa
One question – if Mulroney is innocent this would be the perfect opportunity to clear his name – he doesn’t want to do it – why? Also, if it’s water under the bridge – so is the sponsorship scandal of 12 years ago.
Harper can’t have to both ways – selective witch hunts.
Hey, there’s some nasty things finally oozing out – Gary Lunn – Auditors report of conflict of interest and lobbyists, more about PM shutting up MP’s, death penalty issue – no wonder Harper is anxious to have an election. He doesn’t want this stuff out in the open.
Mulroney handed Canada to the Oligarchy on a silver platter. He was of no use to Canada what-so-ever, and he begat the Bloc as Quebecers want to keep their resources, and the only way is to get out! As he is still alive, I have no regrets calling the arsehole an arsehole, he has no defence other than to whine that charging him ‘would besmirch his fathers name’??? Who cares, he destroyed our Canada, lied in a court of law, and stole $2,000,000 from the Canadian taxpayer. I think Canadians deserve it back!
Nothing against loyalty to your former Party Leader and PM, but it’s bigger than that.
1. A German businessman made money spreading German corporate cash around Canada. Or does anyone think he was here as a tourist and greased his way around the political and corporate establishments because he was a nice guy and liked making friends?
2. A former PM may have accepted bundles of cash, one possibly while still being paid as an MP. If he didn’t accept the amounts mentioned by Schreiber, why the “voluntary disclosure” and payment of tax due years after the fact?
3. Mulroney obtained $2.1 M that he would not have received had he disclosed the information he knew but that is only coming out now.
It’s not partisan, Garth, it’s how we are governed. If bribes greased the skids for purchases of planes, helicopters or whatever, that has got to be investigated and eliminated as a possibility in future. If an MP or PM somehow earned cash gratuities, that has got to be stopped too. And if someone got taxpayer money under false pretences, get the money back and crucify the guy.
German companies used to be able to deduct bribes paid in foreign countries as a legitimate business expense in Germany. Have we followed that track?
Time for an effective inquiry and full disclosure.
Can’t agree with you on this, Mr. Turner. If Mr. Mulroney accepted this cash, followed with accepting the money of the taxpayers for his legal fees, Canadians have the right to know.
The Throne Speech spoke of offering a ‘clean’ gov’t. If Mr. Mulroney is part of that, they should come clean in a truthful manner.
By Catherine, too on 11.05.07 1:04 am
As I said before, Al Capone was not convicted of murder, conspiracy or any of the other stuff he was accused of. He was got by the tax man. Its not for parliament to be doing the work of the RCMP or CRA.
However, why a man of his wealth would do such a thing, I think Conrad Black probably had a little more money than Mulroney, and look what he’s been convicted of.
Sometime people do the stupidest things and noone can understand why. However, in this country the guy is innocent until proven guilty. So its upto the RCMP and CRA to make their case.
Farmer against big oil = disaster. When you hear it from Presto….you are in trouble.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071105.walberta05/BNStory/National/home
Can’t agree with you on this, Mr. Turner. If Mr. Mulroney accepted this cash, followed with accepting the money of the taxpayers for his legal fees, Canadians have the right to know.
The Throne Speech spoke of offering a ‘clean’ gov’t. If Mr. Mulroney is part of that, they should come clean in a truthful manner.
By Catherine, too on 11.05.07 1:04 am
Well stated, and I agree with you (surprised Catherine?).
Scotian, you also, and others.
Garth, the issue is that Canadian taxpayers paid out $2.1 million of THEIR dollars to Mulroney. He LIED, and receiving of the $300,000 seems a moot point because HE claimed it as income.
He committed a serious violation of public trust, and a crime., He is NOT above the law anymore than you or I, and those who look at him and say ‘Hey, Brian got away with it!’ are encouraged that the ‘system’ can be beat with a few smart (highly questionable) moves by some slick lawyer who is a pro at cutting shady deals.
No wonder today’s youth take a ‘Who give a flying f–k?” attitude about politics, politicians, and their never ending gaffs of illegal acts that the others either cover up or attempt to play Crown Prosecutor on.
Read this very well stated article by Carol Goar Good diagnosis, poor prescription and grasp what the ‘system’ represents to the youth of today.
“Youth are not disconnected from politics; it is political institutions, practice and culture that are disconnected from youth,”
Also grasp how mindless solutions by professional BS writers continue to cloud the reality. Pretty much like the 100 car pileup near Fresno California this weekend. One drunk driver, mixed with 18 idiot semi-truck drivers all thinking they were above it all in a fog. Result 100 vehicles destroyed, 2 dead, and lives forever changed because one selfish idiot thought he was ‘above it all!’
Mulroney must be held accountable, and the inquiry should be done by someone like Judge Gomery, not the HoC or a committee. That is like having the wolverine try the fox when it got caught in the hen house. There is $2.1 million in taxpayer money plus interest due from Brian Mulroney. That may be Chump Change to Ottawa, but it is NOT to we taxpayers.
Sorry Garth, but your personal connections to Mulroney are not to be part of the issue. There is a thing called principle involved, and if the highest officer of this nation is excused then so are we and we should act accordingly. BTW, it matters not to me what party is onvolved. The laws of this country have no political tags attached.
BTW, Mulroney’s alleged ‘warmth’ is exactly what I have found with the worst schmooz artists, aka, Flim-Flam men in all my years.
The Mulroney affair demands an enquiry. If Harper thinks that other ex Prime Ministers are guilty of malfeasance while in office and has evidence to support his assertions, then he ought to have those matters matters dealt with as well….justice and fairness demands that it be done.
Harper and his crowd have been buisy playing dirty politics when the country is in dire need of good management and a Govt that demonstrates real leadership based on integrity, morality, respect and the common good.
I fear all politicians will now be labeled as “crooks”. This is not good for our democracy at all.
I’m still not clear if Zaccardelli clearing Mulroney in 2003 was AFTER Mulroney finally declared the $300K payment.
If it was this involves more than Mulroney.
Did I wake up in Chile or Argentina?
Some good thoughts above, on the seondary front in England they are warning of a hugh credit crunch that could have a devistating effect on pound sterling! Couple this with how the goverment shut down the media (sound familiar) on Iraq and the truth has been hidden. And yes Pakistan now has open borders allowing arms and recruits to flow freely to Afghanistan, so, standby for more bad news.
Garth this goverment has dropped the ball big time and reading your posts and many who have enlightened themselves to world events, (not CPC CRAP!) more and more Canadians are searching for the truth. To those who do read here, please continue to do your own research, information is available all the people of world. We must educate ourselves before the neo cons of the world shut us down, and do not think for one moment they are not trying.
By Michael on 11.05.07 9:51 am
I agree. I also don’t understand how what Harper said is a “threat.” It bothers me that Harper says they (The liberals) are corrupt, but yet, won’t launch investigations into it.
The PM’s office should be one that is above reproach. If a man (or woman) sullies that office, they should be brought to task on it.
If the PM has proof of Chreiten, Martin, Mulroney, etc… that they were corrupt, he should launch investigations.
The only reason I can see that he wouldn’t want to is because now it’s his turn at the trough.
Google.de has 391,000 links for Karl-Heinz Schreiber, google.ca 701,000.
We need an investigation, Garth.
Thanks for the insider’s view. Very interesting!
By Leasa on 11.05.07 9:42 am
My my Leasa, just when you were beginning to make sense.
You really are the Fairy Garth Mother, right?
Brian Dondo
The 300k became known AFTER the RCMP gave up and the Chretian gov’t paid BM $2M.
If not a public inquiry … at least re-open the criminal investigation.
Usually, it’s “my party” but today it’s “the Liberals”. This must be sticking in your craw pretty bad. I’m glad that someone is trying to sort things out, but I’m disappointed that its so blatantly politically motivated. “The Liberals” need to hand this off to an apolitical body.
We must educate ourselves before the neo cons of the world shut us down, and do not think for one moment they are not trying.
By David Bakody on 11.05.07 10:06 am
Two interesting reads here: one on the “leak” of Con info in NB (was it really accidental?) and the other on M. Paille’s report on polling practises (buried like one done by Wajid Kahn?)
http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dis&eid=48&so=&ps=&sb=
Did I wake up in Chile or Argentina?
By LoH_Numa on 11.05.07 10:01 am
It’s Chile, your name is Augusto Pinochet, and although thousands disappeared during your régime, Maggie Thatcher wants to grant you a knighthood.
I never liked BM but do we really want to spend any more time and tax money on him? Let’s move on. The inquiry that goes down after Harper leaves office in flames will make BM look like a schoolboy who nicked some candy.
Harper and his crowd have been buisy playing dirty politics when the country is in dire need of good management and a Govt that demonstrates real leadership based on integrity, morality, respect and the common good.
By Michael on 11.05.07 9:51 am
It would appear to the casual observer that it is the liberals on the witch hunt. They attacked while in government and had no success. In fact, Mulroney was exonerated and the liberal government had to pay libel damages.
Now the liberal ‘credible source’ is Karl-Heinz. A man being extradited on fraud and corruption charges. Karl has run out of appeals to stay in the solace of Canadian justice. Now he must stand trail in Germany.
What do you suppose he would do in order to stay in Canada? Lie? No, not a liberal source.
If the libs think this will get them elected, they are in for another surprize. Harper is not linked to Mulroney. In fact he was an MP that ran against the PCs.
The inquiry has been held. Mulroney was investigated for 10 years by the liberals. Enough is enough.
I think Mulroney should be strung up by his chins. But seriously, Harper needs to get ahead of the story.
He should appoint a special impartial panel to look into it. The Chair of the panel could be Joe Clark. Other panel members could include Lucien Bouchard, Preston Manning, and Marjorie Le Breton.
Enough is enough.
By Jim on 11.05.07 10:54 am
Nobody could ever accuse you of a willingness to examine the details of the matter. You remind me of a sign-banger I saw working on behalf of the CPC in the last … He used a 5-lb. hammer and the stakes kept splitting. I casually knudged him on the way by, acknowledging he was a real technocrat.
The CPC believes in the Star Chamber Principle … not democracy bound by legal principles … Ask PVL when you next see him at his ‘official’ appearance next February … ‘Will there be 6 more weeks of winter?’
“Some say his failure to achieve the Meech Lake accord led to the rise of the Bloc and the near-collapse of Canada under Jean Chrtien’s watch. Could be.”
No Garth, the reason the Bloc exists and the reason Chretien almost lost Canada is because Chretien and Trudeau brought in a constitution that alienated 25% of Canadians and its second largest populated province.
If you want Quebec as part of Canada and Canadian society, I would suggest there is a better way.
Its the libs that have brought Canada down to near extinction and now, Garth, you are part of them.
To quote another inquiry, the $300K from Karl-Heinz is ‘small town cheap’. But then that is not an inapt description of the displayed attitudes of mind of several of our Prime Ministers in the last 50 years.
I think Joe Clark and Lester Pearson were reasonably honest – the rest ???
As for the libel suit Mulroney won – ask any lawyer and they will tell you that the greater the truth, the greater the libel.
Off Topic but apparently Susan Delacourt at the Toronto Star is saying the ouster of Conservative candidates in Toronto Centre and Guelph will benefit the NDP.
Those on this fine forum who demand an government inquiry into Mulroney’s financial links to Schreiber, should also want government inquiries into:
- Chretien’s financial links to BDB loans to a Shawinigan hotel and golf course transactions, and,
- Chretien’s approval of tax benefits to a certain unnameable Montreal family moving several Billion$$$ from Canada to the USA, and,
- The effectiveness of then Minister of Financed Paul Martin’s blind trust for CSL and some $160+ Million of government grants, and,
- The creation of one tax-free haven in the Barbados so that CSL could register it’s ocean fleet, and,
- Desmarais-Strong and the Food-for-Oil financial irregularities, and,
- Continued governement inquiry into the still missing $40 Million of Sponsorship money.
Each of theses inquiries would take precedence over the measly Mulroney inquiry, because they involve much more of the taxpayer’s money.
So let’s all sign on to political vendettas to waste time and money, while issues of greater concern to Canadians are ignored.
Garth, I have to disagree with you on this one. It is not purely the money in this particular case, but rather the fact that Mulroney could have purgered himself under oath by originally saying that he had no dealings whatsoever with Scheiber. If we cannot hold a former Prime Minister of the country accountable to tell the truth under oath than what has our country become?
Garth,
You’re losing it. You’re getting way too long-winded. In a nutshell, the story is “Parliament is bitchy useless now.” That’s your point but I almost couldn’t see the story for all the words.
Those on this fine forum who demand an government inquiry into Mulroney’s financial links to Schreiber, should also want government inquiries into:
By Harry S on 11.05.07 11:20 am
Yah, so?? Did you get this answer from cheeky Pete?
Ahhh Garth, the neoCON trolls love you today. The fact that they all support not investigating government corruption dispels any doubt that they are in fact paid operatives of the CPC. Taxpayer subsidized CPC pick-pockets all of them.
Can you believe what these trolls are saying? “Do not investigate Mulroney for corruption and Harper promises he will not investigate Chretien / Martin for corruption?”
EXCUSE ME? We should NOT investigate alleged corruption in government? We should let past corruption go without public review?????Don’t investigate our corrupt politicians and we won’t investigate your own?
If Harper also launches inquiries into previous Liberal “scandals”, then great. WHY SHOULD A FEAR OF UNCOVERING PAST LIBERAL MISDEEDS BE AN EXCUSE FOR COVERING UP PAST (or is it present) CONSERVATIVE MISDEEDS?
As to “wasting” tax dollars on an inquiry – rubbish! What better use is their for our tax dollars then to ensure that we root out corruption in government!
As I understand it from what I have read, Brian Mulroney was being investigated for his roll in the Air Bus affair (which alleged that bribes were made for the sale of Air Bus planes to Air Canada). Karl was involved in the sale of those planes. Karl allegedly gave $300,000 CASH to Mulroney. Mulroney was examined (under oath I believe) and claimed to have no business relation with Karl despite having allegedly received $300,000 IN CASH! (who allegedly carries envelopes having hundreds of thousands of dollars? Who allegedly receives $300,000 in CASH? Why not a check?). He also, conveniently, allegedly “forgot” to declare this CASH payment to Revenue Canada. Who “forgets” receiving $300,000 in CASH? Excuse me, but even the dullest idiot can see that there is something very rotten about this deal.
CALL THE PUBLIC INQUIRY. CALL IT NOW! CALL FOR A VOTE DEMANDING THE INQUIRY!
As I have my “Eyes wide open”, I also see the irony in this blog entry.
First rule of political survival. Always distance oneself from bad smells, whilst attempting to appear constant.
I’d say Mulroney represents another significant form of Tax Leakage. Flaherty should go after him with the same vengeance he went after Income Trusts. We can’t have the rich avoiding reporting of revenue any more than we can have the poor do it. We don’t need a double standard for reporting our income any more than we need the double standard of taxation for Gold Plated Pensions versus RRSP’s.
The thought I had is the $300,000 was a gratuity to Mulroney for not ratting on Schreiber. No one gives someone $300K for doing nothing.
Liberals Call for Airbus Inquiry
http://www.liberal.ca — November 1, 2007
In light of recent developments, Prime Minister Stephen Harper must do everything in his power to get to the bottom of allegations implicating former Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in the Airbus scandal, the Liberal Opposition said today.
“New and disturbing information has come to light about a former prime minister of this country,†said Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion. “This information damages the integrity of the Office of the Prime Minister, a key component of our democracy.
“Faced with the information about Mr. Mulroney, will the prime minister set up a public inquiry into this matter?â€
Mr. Dion was referring to recent media reports stating Mr. Mulroney accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash from German-Canadian businessman Karlheinz Schreiber and didn’t pay taxes on the amount for several years after the transactions took place.
“This is a very serious matter,†said Mr. Dion. “In addition to a person’s reputation, which is serious enough, it’s the institution of the prime minister, the office itself, which is affected.â€
Liberal MP Robert Thibault said that while the new allegations concerning the former prime minister demand immediate action, the Conservative government refuses to take this matter seriously.
“In February 2006, the Justice Department launched an investigation into Mr. Mulroney,†said Mr. Thibault. “But the Minister of Justice has inexplicably shut it down.
“Why is this government not doing anything? What is it afraid of?â€
Given the serious nature of the allegations, even current ministers Peter MacKay and Chuck Strahl had called for a public inquiry into the Airbus affair while in opposition.
It is time for Prime Minister Harper to do the right thing. He has a responsibility to the office he holds to act immediately to clear up this matter once and for all.
After watching the media pundits on the program politics, it left me with a nagging question. If the Liberals knew about the $300,000.00 back in 1998 and when asked by the media what they were going to do about it,they more or less said nothing. If they didn’t want to do anything about it when they had a majority government why are they so eager to persue it now. Dennie
This is just such a sideshow.
Such an irrelevant sideshow.
PYTOR: your comparison to Chile is most apt.
My God, what has politics in CANADA sunk to? Conservatives offering to overlook Liberal corruption if Liberals agree to overlook Conservative corruption?
I say we root out corruption in Canada once and for all. Gomery was obviously not enough! CALL INQUIRIES INTO ALL THE PRIME MINISTERS IF NECESSARY! Let the chips fall where they may.
By wd on 11.05.07 9:45 am
I would argue that Trudeau ‘begat’ Separtism, the Bloc, and all that, with a Constitution that did not include the signature of Quebec.
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
Navel gaysing on things of long ago will not help Canadians now and in the future. If there anything let the Tax man deal/look into it quietly.
History is also a good thing to study to try and keep from repeating the bad things from repeating. Mankind seem to be good at doing that. But keep looking ahead and us critical thinking and knowlege to guide the chooses, I hope.
I don’t want our Canadian Government leaders going as low as PMSH’s is doing. But that’s politics, but it doesn’t have to be. There’s always a choise. I hope the MP’s choose better.
(Then there the saying, fight fire with fire.)
I hope everyone out there had a nice weekend, with freinds and family.:)
How bad tax policy can kill an energy industry – A primer in CONservative economic mismangement
Do you know why civil servants don’t get AIDS? They are taught to keep their mouth shut and their butts covered…Obviously, Mr. Mulroney did a lousy job covering his butt. I am suprised at his ineptness in this matter. I guess, when you stick your hand into the cookie jar it’s hard to let go off the cookie no matter how many cookies you have. And , of course, if one of the players is sitting in jail he is going to sing and keep on singing. This one isn’t going away anytime, soon.
It is disgusting that Harper is trying to tar other honourable men with the same brush..how low is he willing to stoop? Time will tell but nothing this despicable lot does suprises me anymore. Mr. Clean…you got to be kidding!!!Garth, stick to the high road and take the hits from those who wallow in the gutter. Love your enemies…it will confuse the hell out of them and probably drive them nuts.
Garth, good to see you return to a more diplomatic style of writing. You can count me as one of the people that doesn’t really feel like being taxed to wage another war against Mulroney. If there were payments of $300k made to Mulroney after he left office, it’s none of my business. I don’t care what Paul Martin, Jean Chretien, Kim Campbell or Joe Clark are doing now either. Let them enjoy private life like any of us would like to; if they do something criminal we have a justice system that is supposed to handle that.
By Brent Fullard on 11.05.07 8:26 am
“So in the absence of action, are we simply to tolerate a culture of corruption?”
Not at all, if an investigation is warranted then let the RCMP go after them. I’m simply against turning it into a public sideshow that will cost millions of dollars and produce less results. Usually these sort of inquiries have mandates that don’t allow them to assign guilt (Gomery) and are therefore useless.
I can only assume that you’re taking a devil’s advocate position here Garth (it sure has brought out the con-trolls).
In light of the new information, there should be a criminal (not political) investigation because (1) if Mr. Mulroney’s actions were not criminal, then his name should be cleared; (2) if his actions were criminal, then the $2M settlement should be returned and let any criminal charges fall where they may.
The RCMP should do the investigating, not some politicallly appointed committee.
If there is evidence to show that Mr. Chretien or Mr. Martin are guilty of a criminal offence, then they too should be investigated and either charged or have their names cleared. It’s time to put an end to this politcally motivated blame game.
It is not Parliament’s role to initiate criminal proceedings, nor a tax audit. — Garth
By Paul MacPhail on 11.05.07 12:25 pm
I think this is quite well stated.
If our justice system feels that an investigation is warranted, then they should be given free reign to investigate, free of political interference.
Otherwise just let sleeping dogs lie. If everyone wants to get their shorts in a knot about Mulroney in 2007, then the scope of any “inquiry” should cover anything that happened since then as well.
Personally, I think there are more than enough skeletons in Chretien’s closet that will make anything Mulroney has done pale by comparison.
Mr Garth TurnerMP,
I second ‘LOH_NUMA’ thought, see above.
I will however point out that the conservative position on Mulroney is pathetic though:
“Oh yeah, we’re bad?…well…well, you guys were worse!”
Could we please talk about the Canadian dollar bubble now please? It’s been quite a few days and the dollar hasn’t retraced to find support anywhere. Guaranteed it will though.
Indeed, Good Grief makes a good point. Investigate them.
As for Parliament’s role to initiate criminal proceedings or tax audits – you are absolutely correct Garth, that is not parliaments role. But calling a public inquiry certainly is. If we can spend over 7 BILLION on attempting to secure freedom in Afghanistan (perhaps a futile effort in light of recent events in Pakistan), surely we can afford several million to secure it here in Canada. Surely the Canadian people deserve no less.
What greater need do the Canadian people have than ensuring that their government is transparent and honest?
then the $2M settlement should be returned and let any criminal charges fall where they may.
The thing to bear in mind is that this 2 Million dollars was to re-imburse Mulroney for his legal costs, he did not profit by this.
The whole thing smacks of a political vendetta launched by the Liberals (like they did to Beaudoin) to go after Mulroney. Chretien was a hugely partisan bully out for blood, and mistakes were made in the investigation that Canada had to pay for.
I suspect that there was a fair amount of political interference in the process, and that is hardly Mulroney’s fault.
That being said, it would still be nice to get to the bottom of the story, although I am reluctant to suggest spending millions to find the truth of the matter.
I’ll have to excuse myself from most, if not all of this discussion.
Garth, having met me while he was in Vancouver, will know why.
So, all I will say is this.
Brian has been about one thing, and one thing only, his entire life.
And that one thing is Brian.
Make of it what you will.
It is not Parliament’s role to initiate criminal proceedings, nor a tax audit. — Garth
Seems like most of the Harper-haters want Parliament to launch a political vendetta against Mulroney, so why not against Chretien et al ??
Harper-haters are so silent .. so disingenuous .. !!
Ed Brooks,
the question is would the Government have paid Mulroney’s legal expenses if it had been known that Brian in fact had more than a nodding acquaintance with Karl-Heinz?
That’s where the question of perjury and the restitution factor come in.
It is not Parliament’s role to initiate criminal proceedings, nor a tax audit. — Garth
By Good Grief on 11.05.07 12:27 pm
How is it, then, that the RCMP investigated the Liberals based on a complaint from NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis in 2005 on the Income Trust issue?
First it was my guys are better than your guys, now it is your guys are as bad as my guy.In matters of principle degree is of little importance. Dishonesty in Govt cannot be tollerated and perpetrators have to be brought to account. It is about accountability. We are a nation of laws and nobody is above the law or should appear to be above the law. Shine the light into the dark corners…if there is nothing to hide we all benefit…if there is, bring it forth into the light of day and let judgement rule. We have had enough of pernicious mendacity and spin doctoring.
I just love how so many of the Trolletariat are suddenly happy with Garth for this position, telling isn’t it. The problem here is that Mulroney launched a legal action to shut down a criminal investigation and made the taxpayers pay for it when he grossly misled the investigation with his under oath testimony. THAT is what makes this worthy of inquiry. While I have problems with the original 300,000 dollars because he arranged to start this while still sitting as PM and brought Schreiber to him at an official PM residence to set this up and then received the first 100,000 while still sitting as an MP without any declaration to any appropriate authorities, it is the libel suit and his actions there that I believe constitutes the real issue to be investigated these days. In other words the cover-up which is clearly still ongoing.
Mulroney clearly lied about his relationship with Schreiber and omitted information he had to know would have been central/relevant/pertinent when he hid that 300,000 dollars he received from Schreiber from investigators. He under oath lied by omission there and directly when asked about the nature/extent of his relationship with Schreiber and seeing as the central argument for his being paid off was that he was unjustly and without any merit or basis in fact accused of improper dealings with Schreiber that calls into question the settlement’s appropriateness and raises questions about whether Mulroney improperly received tax dollars because he lied under oath.
That is something that should not be excused nor simply shrugged off, period. This is a serious issue regarding corruption and integrity of a former PM both while still in office (last two days is still while in office and it doesn’t matter that he was retiring, if he was smart he would have waited until he was no longer PM, indeed no longer an MP before asking for this money). Had he done it that way I suspect it never would have become the problem for him that it has. However, it is what it is, and that Mulroney used a libel suit to effectively shut down investigations into the matter when Mulroney KNEW he had received 300,000 from Schreiber in less than aboveboard means when he launched the suit to claim no such thing and that any implication of such was a smear on his character/honour cannot be overlooked.
There is also the question as to how politicized the RCMP these days, it was bad enough with Zaccardelli, now that we have a civilian running the RCMP appointed by Harper it raises the question as to whether any investigation would be permitted by Harper’s man there. That is one of the reasons why I think this does need some sort of inquiry, while yes it will almost certainly cost more to reclaim the tax dollars than was claimed by Mulroney, what price the honour, integrity and reputation of the Office of PM of Canada? As others have said already this is about corruption in government and making sure that the powerful are held to the same standard when they act improperly as Joe and Jane Canuck in comparable situations.
Now, I don’t think this should be a sole focus of the Libs, that would be overdoing it certainly. However it should be one line of attack while Harper stalls and refuses to do anything with this, especially when he gives such lame rationalizations/excuses like he did last Friday, especially with his precedent of the Paille polling investigation which was clearly a partisan investigation of the Libs when you appoint an avowed and still actively separatist person to run it and it covers the five years prior to and during the 1995 referendum. Indeed, that arguably is a national security risk the CPC chose to take by giving a separatist that kind of access to that kind of information for the sake of having someone who would clearly have it in for the federal Liberal party and this man clearly does.
This is a real issue and should be treated as such. We all know how Harper prefers to cover things up and claim “no involvement whatsoever†(just like Mulroney did regarding Schreiber in his testimony under oath) like he did in the booting out of Turner despite the clear absurdity of it and the way he covered up and denied the fact that CPCers edited recordings to make false specific criminal charges against a sitting PM and cabinet minister in the Grewal affair despite from the moment of first recording to the supposedly full and complete as sworn by Harper recordings of May 31 05 they were solely in CPC/LOO hands. So what’s one more cover-up for Harper to embark upon, especially given it is a former Conservative PM who just happens to have close links to Harper and his government?
This is not a minor matter/issue and not something to simply be brushed off, and it most certainly is not a witchunt on Mulroney since he himself has already shown by his actions and words to be a liar where this issue is concerned. Otherwise why he did 6 years later suddenly remember to pay the taxes on money he always claimed to that point he never received and claimed any such notion was a base libel against him back in 1995, hmmmmm?
Sorry Garth, but I for once do not agree with you.
If there is chicanery from ANY past politician it MUST be brought to light.
To do less is to cheapen justice in Canada.
If I commit a crime I should be punished.
Just because you are an elected representative of the people you are not above the law.
To not at least investigate and clear or convict wrong doers is a perversion of justice and a dangerous start down that slippery slope to anarchy or despotism.
I personally hold that NO ONE is above the law of the land. And that is what I expect of you.
Spent the morning pondering your conclusions and the comments. Was prepared to let your entry and the comments speak for themselves, which they usually do, but not this time. I respect that you value personal loyalty over party loyalty and that your main objective is doing what you deem is right for Canadians. As well, I do not think Mr. Mulroney was as great a PM as voters hoped he would be, nor as bad as they eventually thought he was. However, there is a cloud over his name that will continue to encumber his legacy. The right thing for him to do is to step forward and clear the air. In the absence of that, is there an alternative to a public inquiry? If indeed he has nothing to hide, which is entirely possible, we will all benefit from learning the truth about those envelopes stuffed with $$$, which he has not recently denied receiving, and on which he has paid income tax. As much as I’d like to see this sleeping dog lie, it just wouldn’t be good for Mr. Mulroney or for Canada. I don’t think the Liberal Party should spend too much time and energy on this, but Canadians should. We all stand to gain by clearing the name of a Right Honourable gentleman.
As I understand it, Chretien’s issues and Martin’s have already been investigated over and over again.
If Harper wants to go that route – then he should be obliged to open his campaign donation books that he’s been hiding.
Curious – why aren’t the sanctimonious NDP (Pat Martin) dwelling on this – they said they want a full enquiry but don’t attack in QP – curious – is the NDP supporting Harper in trying to demolish the Liberals? Looks like it. Layton really is becoming a scumbag.
Ed Brooks:
Mulroney did profit from this settlement, he got the taxpayers to pay for his PR expenses as well as legal to stop an investigation that he clearly misled under oath investigating him for improper receipt of monies from people/lobbyists of Airbus like Schreiber. That is profiting from his actions alright, he was able to use that settlement for several years as “proof” of his total innocence and uninvolvement. That is a valuable consideration for Mulroney and therefore is a profit/value he gains at taxpayer’s expense.
If Mulroney had never received this money from Schreiber and then hidden it and misled the investigation regarding his relationship with Schreiber then I would agree with you. If he absorbed the pr/legal costs and had accepted a token dollar as his repairs for damages and the exoneration the settlement was supposed to be (until more facts came out to show that he misled and lied to it that is) then I would agree with you, but that is not what we have here is it? He claimed the PR expenses because they were used to repair the “damage” done without cause according to Mulroney by the RCMP investigation, when in reality the allegations he was claiming were totally false and without merit turned out to have merit after all. He did know Schreiber much better than he said under oath and he omitted receiving 300,000 while under oath, this while knowing that such information was totally central to that investigation, which seeing he is a lawyer is not something he can pretend he did not know was legally dubious/questionable at the very minimum if not outright illegal.
Being under oath and misleading/lying is a very serious matter, and those charged with writing our laws like our elected officials by rights should be held to the highest standards when they do so and are caught as having been dishonest, which Mulroney has already proven himself to be. Whether it is enough for criminal charges to be successfully laid can only be determined after a proper investigation on the criminal side, and given what Schreiber has said he knows and would be willing to testify to at an inquiry regarding the entire Airbus affair and not just Mulroney’s actions I think it needs doing. To simply say there is no need for any investigation either criminal or political given what is known at this point shows a willingness to give an exception to Mulroney based on his political affiliation and not on the facts actually in the public record at this point on both the original 300,000 AND his possibly fraudulent libel suit settlement IMHO.
Susan Riley says it best: Harper: Spite is right http://tinyurl.com/37jn3z
As well, Harper last week rejected calls for a public inquiry into damaging new revelations about Brian Mulroney – a defensible tack, given the amount of time elapsed and cost of these inquiries. But Harper couldn’t leave it at that: He threatened to retaliate by exhuming shopworn Liberal scandals involving Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin – the focus of exhaustive investigations already. It is always a sign of weakness when your best retort is: you say we’re bad, well, you were worse!
It is also irresponsible to use public money for a witch-hunt aimed at punishing your political rivals. Harper admitted as much: “This suggestion that a government would use its authority to launch politically-driven inquiries is extremely dangerous.” But that is exactly what he did six months ago when he appointed a former Parti Québécois minister, Daniel Paillé, to look into Liberal polling practices before 2003.
What a very small, petty man this PMSH
Let’s just get Wajid Khan to do a report on this Mulroney Affair so we don’t have to hear or see anything about this any more.
Frank Frink; I’ll have to excuse myself from most, if not all of this discussion.
Oh darn! And we were all just on the edge of our seats waiting for your brilliant insights. Please be sure to alert us again the next time you have nothing to say.
Did I wake up in Chile or Argentina?
By LoH_Numa on 11.05.07 10:01 am
Maybe you have. Maybe you have.
I sure felt that way this AM when I read this. (and sorry for being off topic)
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Marsden_Rachel/2007/11/05/4631834-sun.php
Regarding further inquiries; it seems to me that there is no criminal matter to pursue here unless the Crown pursues a charge of perjury. If the politicians want to put Mulroney on the hotseat (and I certainly agree that he belongs there) then they should call him before a committee and put the question to him.
There is no need for a Public Inquiry because there are only 2 questions that need to be asked; 1) What did Schrieber pay you for? 2) Are there any other undisclosed payments that you received from Schrieber or anyone else?
Bottom line here, I don’t think there is any legal recourse here but Mulroney has -by his evasiveness- written his own political epitaph. He famously blustered that “his father had left him nothing but his good name” well he turned that name into mud for $300K. Can you believe how cheaply some people will sell themselves?
I, and I sincerely hope others, will NEVER BUY Mulroney’s book. BOYCOTT the Liar!
Ah shucks, so sorry to disappoint you Garvin.
NOT!
But do try ‘reading between the lines’. You can do that, can’t you? Good, I knew you could.
Fred Rogers (aka Frank Frink)
Garth, is there a technical problem with the Comments?
It is not Parliament’s role to initiate criminal proceedings, nor a tax audit. — Garth
By Good Grief on 11.05.07 12:27 pm
How is it, then, that the RCMP investigated the Liberals based on a complaint from NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis in 2005 on the Income Trust issue?
By Good Grief on 11.05.07 12:10 pm
The time-stamp on this follow-up post is shown as 12:10 pm. The original post is time-stamped as 12:27 pm. That would mean that the follow-up preceded the original post. Makes it challenging to follow along…
The time stamp just caught up with the time change. — Garth
You really are the Fairy Garth Mother, right?
By Greg on 11.05.07 10:25 am
I signed it with my ‘L’. Just a few minutes to have a little fun.
This post of Garth’s gave me some wholesome (Ontario grown) food for thought. I think Garth has played his cards regarding the LPOC rather brilliantly. This post and a few other comments he has made in the last few weeks is starting to show what had occurred to me this morning is true and that is; Garth has the LPOC and Mr. Dion by the balls. Not only does he have Mr. Dion’s ear (much to the ire of senior liberals I would think), but, he has him in a corner. Garth, when he came to the Liberal fold did so by trumpeting the Liberal’s so called ‘total freedom to speak one’s mind’. Mr. Dion also obviously bought into it. Now, no matter what Garth says regarding his new party or any of his fellow MPs, Mr. Dion cannot take action. If he were to shut this blog down, or boot Garth, he would further look like a hypocrite of the worst order. He would have to admit a) that he made another huge misjudgement in running the party and b) Liberals under him are no more free than in any other party.
Unless Garth slanders and bashes Mr. Dion head on, he’s relatively untouchable.
So now what? Not only are the Liberals reading from different pages, but some have totally different books. For example the raising of the GST, some like Garth are saying ‘no we will not’, some are saying ‘yes we will’ and Dion is saying ‘well, maybe’. LOL
Garth is one sly fox. Leasa
“Sorry Garth, but on this one I think you are missing/ignoring/overlooking one rather important element, the derailing of the criminal investigation by Mulroney and the settlement of 2.1 million dollars on sworn testimony where it appears now that Mulroney lied grossly by omission regarding Schreiber and ever receiving any money from him under OATH!”
It would seem that the “esteemed” mr Scotian needs a quick lesson in regards to what does and what doesn’t qualify as lying under oath (also known as perjury).
In a court of law, anyone offering testimony is addressed a number of questions by whichever counsel is addressing them. They are obligated to answer these questions. However, they are not obligated to volunteer any information not asked for.
Resultingly, should Mulroney testify before a court of law but not be asked about Mr Schreiber or any payments he recieved from Mr Schreiber, for whatever purposes they may be, it doesn’t qualify as perjury. He was not asked the question.
Thus, while a lie by omission may still be a lie, it does not constitute perjury.
Daniel Paillé, to look into Liberal polling practices before 2003.
What a very small, petty man this PMSH
By Emilie on 11.05.07 12:48 pm
That’s different. That is looking at perhaps another scandal of a Canadian elected government. That is not going about trying to screw one man over. Chretien hated Mulroney. It was personal. Mulroney isn’t the only one to have suffered Chretien’s wrath. L
I see a little upside for the LPC if the inquiry finds some significant dirt, not a lot but some because this happened over ten years ago. If they find nothing, the LPC is going to look like total idiots again when MB sues the govt once again. Actually so will Mr.Harper for agreeing to it. By the way, could someone point me to the public inquiry concerning the hotel/golf club mess of former PMJC and the inquiry concerning CSL and PMPM because I sure do not recall it happening.
By Leasa on 11.05.07 2:15 pm
Oh Leasa, you’re such a kidder…
Patric Ross: You have your facts wrong.
As I understand it, Mr. Mulroney was asked while under oath if he had any relationship with Mr. Schreiber. He said he had no dealings with him other than meeting him twice in a hotel (or something to the effect). It is now apparent that he had business dealings with the man previous to being asked the question. He claims it was to help him start a “pasta business”. As I understand it, telling someone you had no dealings (other than meeting twice) when in fact you just allegedly previously received $300,000.00 in “pasta money” constitutes a lie. Perhaps your definition of “lie” is different than mine?
By the way, $300,000.00 buys a lot of pasta…apparently, it also buys a lot of CPC bull.
Garth,
I really respect and enjoy your take on politics, and more importantly your focus on public policy. Having been a long time Liberal I think you bring a much needed focus to both the party and to government in general!
Ever thought of running for Liberal leader one day? I think you’d make a good one!
Ivan
KH, excuse me, this is not about up side vs downside. It’s about right vs wrong.
Leasa: Since when is demanding that someone be held accountable when they lie under oath constitute “screwing them over”? You CPC trolls are morally repulsive. For the tiniest bit of money (MY TAX MONEY no less) you are prepared to say the silliest things.
Do something useful with my tax dollars for a change Leasa, go powder Steven Harper’s nose.
I signed it with my ‘L’. Just a few minutes to have a little fun.
By Leasa on 11.05.07 2:15 pm
Aha, my dear Watson! It was the blue socks that gave you away.
I took a moment after reading it to compose this, but didn’t send it cause I wasn’t sure who the Fairy Garth Mother was.
Twas All Hallows Eve
And all through the house
Not a creature was stirring
Not even a mouse.
Then came a great clamor
Down the chimney she fell
Twas the Fairy Gart Mudder
And she was as hammered as hell
Landed square on her rump
With a resounding thump
Having found the horned devil
On his blog she did revel
Her butt she now leveled
And delivered a clump
The Crackers lament
I, and I sincerely hope others, will NEVER BUY Mulroney’s book. BOYCOTT the Liar!
By Bill-Muskoka on 11.05.07 1:41 pm
Hey Billy, I agree with you. The same goes for Chretien’s book. Won’t waste a cent there either! And when Martin’s book comes out, I will avoid it too.
“Wisely, Brian Mulroney never trusted me enough to take into his confidence.”
Mulroney openly admits that Harper is much much smarter than him….kinda explains things now doesn’t it Ed Brooks…..
Did your parents beat you? — Garth
Curious – why aren’t the sanctimonious NDP (Pat Martin) dwelling on this – they said they want a full enquiry but don’t attack in QP – curious – is the NDP supporting Harper in trying to demolish the Liberals? Looks like it. Layton really is becoming a scumbag.
By slg on 11.05.07 12:36 pm
To think I even voted for the NDP years ago, albeit under Alexa. At least I can say I was not taken in by Stevie – who, IMHO, is worse than any PM I’ve lived with in my 60 years.
Personally, I think there are more than enough skeletons in Chretien’s closet that will make anything Mulroney has done pale by comparison.
By Ed Brooks on 11.05.07 12:35 pm
Ed – Gotta agree that Chretien and Martin have skeltons in their closet – just not sure that will make anything Mulroney has done pale by comparison. What’s that old saying – power corrupts – and, unfortunately, we’ve seen this corruption over several decards within Canada. Should we just accept it as part of ‘doing business’. No. If we do, where does it end? Look immediately south of us where Rove. Rummy, et al have eroded the US constitution. And who has benefitted?
I, and I sincerely hope others, will NEVER BUY Mulroney’s book. BOYCOTT the Liar!
By Bill-Muskoka on 11.05.07 1:41 pm
Hey Billy, I agree with you. The same goes for Chretien’s book. Won’t waste a cent there either! And when Martin’s book comes out, I will avoid it too.
By Catherine on 11.05.07 4:00 pm
Why would I spent $.01 on any of the above books. They’re only out to promote themselves. Agree, boycott all of them.
By Good Grief on 11.05.07 3:30 pm
Yes, yes I am.
Leasa
Do something useful with my tax dollars for a change Leasa, go powder Steven Harper’s nose.
By Elias on 11.05.07 3:47 pm
Hi Elias, I am sorry if I repulse you, I really didn’t intend to. I wonder if you had the same indignation during the many liberal scandals that involved billions of your ‘tax dollars’? Or do you reserve your feelings of being repulsed strictly for us Conservative folk? For example, Mr. McGimpy recently ran a program in my area that involved 15 MILLION of your tax dollars, used a third party to ‘hand it out’ which is was in a most corrupt way and attached no over-sight, accountability or ethics to it in any way? Does that also repulse you? Just wondering what it really does take to ‘repulse’ you?
Repulsively Yours, Leasa
- And when Martin’s book comes out, I will avoid it too. -
By Catherine on 11.05.07 4:00 pm
Don`t worry Catherine,
Paul Martins book will likely be a paint-by-numbers colouring book. I`m quite sure this is all he could put together. If that.
Very clever Garth. Do the Liberals know you are a double agent? I hope someday you become the leader of the Libs and then the NDP. Wow! what a strategist you are!!!!
Hey there Garth, I’m not trying to change channels here but this is an article every living breathing Canadian should read:
http://www.growersjournal.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=165&cat=23&id=1070574&more=0
~Forget the Arctic: How about a little food sovereignty here? Consumer protection? Educated choice? Safety or our children? Leasa
Elias,
if memory serves, Mulroney’s testimony was that he may have had coffee with him (Schreiber) once or twice. Does the oath/solemn affirmation still include “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”?
If the Libs don’t push this issue to the hilt, Charles Gordon will be right, and they will be entitled to their single vote in the next election – if Dion doesn’t abstain.
The major parties may seem quite prepared to let sleeping dogs lie – and prove that the whole system is rotten? – but the media will give the Mulroney factor the legs it deserves, provided we still have a Fourth Estate and not merely media profit centres.
Patrick Ross:
What again was the basis for Mulroney to claim libel? Oh yes, that the police had made false assertions/claims within an investigation to see whether he had received money from Schreiber/Airbus. Guess what, he allegedly did receive such monies as he left Office. Therefore by keeping this quiet while under oath so as to allegedly allow misrepresentation WHEN HE IS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT HIMSELF by way of being a LAWYER and then also allegedly lie directly under oath in regards to how well he actually knew Schreiber so as to claim 2.1 million taxpayer dollars that was used to “repair” his good name via his lawyers and PR employees it appears that he allegedly committed a fraud to cover up his own potential wrongdoing AND to protect his reputation and have the taxpayers on the hook for 2.1 million dollars to pay for his costs in allegedly doing an apparent fraud and cover-up.
Therefore you have grounds on legal ethics rules to investigate him so as for disbarment, grounds under government ethical/regulatory grounds, and you *MAY* have a basis for criminal charges, but that must be PROPERLY investigated to determine. Therefore having the government simply refuse to have such an investigation done at the minimum on ethical/regulatory grounds looks bad enough, the one is left wondering whether the RCMP see enough to do a criminal one let alone without any interference from the political levels, which with this government is no small concern given its actions as a government to date.
I would suggest before you try and claim I have no understanding of the law you might try reading more closely what I have been saying. Part of the problem for Mulroney here is that he is a lawyer bound by the ethics of his profession, and that lie of omission within the context of the libel case especially when combined with the direct lie regarding frequency and intimacy of contacts with Schreiber to create a false image/lie to be seen as the truth/reality and then to collect 2.1 million taxpayer dollars to pay for his PR firms as well as legal costs likely allegedly places him in direct violation of legal ethical rules and potentially criminal ones as well.
I used to work as a commercial P.I. Mr. Ross before I became too disabled to work anymore, and I had to understand the Canada Evidence Act backwards and forwards at the time as well as other aspects of the law to do my job properly. So I have some understanding within this area of the law for a lay person (not to mention growing up in a family full of lawyers) if not the expert opinion of an actual member/instructor of the professions and I know there are real potential problems here for Mulroney on these grounds.
If he had told the truth in his sworn testimony about Schreiber and his relationship for example it is far more likely once that was honestly described that there would have been questions asked about his receiving money from him. Therefore there would clearly have not been sufficient grounds for him to win any libel lawsuit let alone be settled with which means he appears to have committed/perpetrated a fraud upon the court to claim damages and reparation of those damages (the legal and PR costs in this case), and for any officer of the court to do so is bad enough, for a former PM and member of the bar to allegedly do so is significantly more offensive still.
Understand something Mr. Ross, I am not stating for a certainty that he is guilty of these things, what I am saying is that there is far more than sufficient information in the public domain by this point to reasonably believe this could be the case, said reasonable belief standard also is usually seen as enough grounds to investigate by reasonable and in this case non-partisan people (which clearly lets you out given your history to date). This if it is what it has every appearance these days of being namely serious corruption and abuse of power/prestige regarding the way he fought a libel case knowing the allegations had merit/truth to them despite his vociferous claims to the contrary at the time and that is not something which can simply be brushed away as no big deal by anyone that actually believes in accountability and ethics in governance.
So perhaps when next you choose to try and show me to be in error you might actually try to do a workmanship like job of it because this was not such. There are several grounds/bases for further investigation by regulatory bodies from the bar to Parliament to the Justice system, to claim otherwise at this point reveals either ignorance/blind spot or deliberate deceit out of concern for who it is and the ramifications on the political level in my view at this point with what is out there. While Schreiber’s own motives are questionable he is providing not just his words but a fair amount of contemporaneous documentation as evidence to corroborate what he has claimed to date and that is not something one can so simply brush aside, not if one actually believes in things like the rule of law anyway and things like evidence and preponderance of the evidence.
You might also want to watch the personal attacking there, I don’t recall calling myself “esteemed†anything, unlike some I do not feel a desperate need to have my ego stroked, although I will always appreciate genuinely felt compliments like any reasonable person, and for you to be mocking towards me personally to try and undercut any credibility I may or not have does not speak well towards your own intellectual honesty and integrity in terms of how you debate/argue with others. That always comes back to haunt a person in the end, not that judging by our prior encounters elsewhere that appears to matter to you.
On that note, I have to call it in for a few hours and likely the night, my father just got taken to the hospital with at least a broken ankle (late 60s otherwise a in great health man) and my mother would appreciate the company of my wife and I for the night. I hope everyone has a good evening.
By Leasa on 11.05.07 4:43 pm
Leasa, on what *facts* do you base your allegations of “the many liberal scandals that involved billions of your ‘tax dollars”.
The *facts* in the Mulroney issue are that he allegedly lied about his involvement with Schreiber, that he allegedly accepted money from Schreiber, that he allegedly asked Schreiber to ensure that there was no paper trail, and that he allegedly took the $2M settlement under false pretences.
Stephen Harper, Peter Van Loon, etc. are still talking about ‘brown envelopes’ and ‘the most corrupt government in the history of Canada’ in the Question Period even last week. Unless they stop that, you cannot blame the Liberals, especially those who were in the cabinets then, such as Stephane Dion, feel angered by their double standards. He who lives in glass house should not throw stones at others.
Hey Garth, see you’re still trying to convince the faithful that you did the right thing. Actually you’re a poor fit for the Liberal party – I’d have put you closer to NDP with all that hot air; then again, the NDP do have principles . . .
Thanks for taking a dump on my blog. — Garth
The political immaturity of the Harper-haters on this fine forum has been brutally exposed.
MP Garth is too principled to grovel in a smearmongering attack on his past pal Mulroney, as opposed to the Liberal party and officially confirmed on http://www.liberal.ca.
This will now be a test of political independence within the Liberal party. Can the Liberal party tolerate MP Garth’s rejection of their political tactics that reeks of vendetta.
Now the forum Harper-haters must decide if MP Garth is too principled for their tastes … vile bile tastes.
Thank you Garth for elevating political debate on your weblog and forum, and, those who want to destroy the Conservatives regardless of principles must now eat their own mire.
Why would I spent $.01 on any of the above books. They’re only out to promote themselves. Agree, boycott all of them.
I don’t know , when Cretien gets around to his prison diaries , I may just spend 0.01 dollars on them .
Here is a 29 April 1996 MacLean’s article on Mulroney’s testimony to refresh our memories –
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=M1ARTM0010654
You might want to compare it with the CBC’s “Fifth Estate” allegations at
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/unauthorizedchapter/video.html
There have been so many questions about this, it’s time there was an enquiry. You may have liked Mulroney but this doesn’t pass the smell test, it never has. Mulroney said under oath he had never had any dealings with Schreiber. I want a resolution to this; I want a public enquiry. Nothing lasts this long without something to it. Sorry, I disagree with you on this one.
Hello Garth …
Well … if new information has come to light about Mulroney, then, why not reconsider it … i think we have to establish if there is anything there in the first place, but, is it alos possible that Mulroney is culpable of somehing wrong with the 300 thousand …
Can anyone provide information on what a public judicial inquiry would cost? — Garth
By Scotian on 11.05.07 5:22 pm
Well said, and very informative.
Can anyone provide information on what a public judicial inquiry would cost? — Garth
Tens of Million$$$$, and if the government is forced to launch an inquiry into Mulroney, would you agree that inquiries must also be made on Chretien and Martin .. because we still have to find that missing $40 Million of Sponsorship funds and the suspicious awarding of $160+Million for CSL ??
nicely put Mr.Turner.
Onward… NOT Backward!
Garth,
it doesn’t matter what a public inquiry would cost. What does it cost to have the public question the honesty of all governments and politicians?
Balance $20 to $100 M on one hand, and the breakdown of public confidence on the other. If it shows the odd low-life in politics that there is a good chance of getting caught, it will be worth it.
PLEASE make it happen!
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth
Hello Garth
Thank you for your response, but, can you put a price on justice denied … in BC we have this ridiculous ‘charge approval’ Crown Prosecution Policy … i wonder how many criminal trials don’t move forward as a result either because the cases are unwindable or too expensive …
Can anyone provide information on what a public judicial inquiry would cost? — Garth
More than it’s worth to Canadian taxpayers , that’s for sure . Is Mulroney in the wrong here ? It seems likely . Having said that ,
Sidewinder
HDRC
Wheatboard
Gun Registry
Shawinigate
Foundations
CSL
Where do you draw the line . Many Liberal partisans want answers regarding Mulroney , fine . My questions deserve answers as well . If anyone here doesn’t think the RCMP MIGHT have an axe to grind over their PERCEIVED willingness to toe the party line over the last few decades , I’m sure there are more than a of our finest officers that will come foreward to set the record straight , and explain the reasons for their actions , or lack thereof .
… a FEW of our finest officers….. of course
This is an excellent column from Sunday’s Kelowna Capital News as to why Harper can’t get aove 33-34% in the polls, and it is driving CRAP crazy.
Thanks to Adrian Nieoczym, who supplied the link.
http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/kelownacapitalnews/opinion/11002871.html
By Leasa on 11.05.07 4:43 pm
Leasa, on what *facts* do you base your allegations of “the many liberal scandals that involved billions of your ‘tax dollarsâ€.
The *facts* in the Mulroney issue are that he allegedly lied about his involvement with Schreiber, that he allegedly accepted money from Schreiber, that he allegedly asked Schreiber to ensure that there was no paper trail, and that he allegedly took the $2M settlement under false pretences.
By Good Grief on 11.05.07 5:24 pm
Good Grief, you are absolutely right.
The “facts” are “allegations” from a guy in prison waiting extradition for crimes in another country. I wonder if he is capable of lying. So we have “allegations” regarding a former PM that was investigated by the RCMP for nearly a decade and exonerated.
We also have “facts” regarding missing millions in the sponsorship file. We have “facts” that there are billions unaccounted for in the gun registry file. We have “facts” on a billion misappropriated in the HRDC file.
So those are the “facts”.
Hello again Garth
Well … thank you for your time and attention, i sure wish there were more politicians who were as concerned as you – truly participatory … anyway … there probably doesn’t need to be a full blown Royal Commission … just get a forensic accounting firm, or, just ask the Cons for full disclosure … or … just propose third year law students to formulate a graduating project that looks into this … ha … ha …
CALL THE PUBLIC INQUIRY. CALL IT NOW! CALL FOR A VOTE DEMANDING THE INQUIRY!
By Elias on 11.05.07 11:34 am
Now wouldn’t that be interesting. If Mr. Harper wants his election, maybe here is his chance. Libs yelling inquiry, Cons vote against; who stands up, who sits down?
Methinks the Libbies figure this one is a sure bet. No way, Jose. Not gonna happen. It is pretty good diversionary tactics though, to deflect the Dion is not der Leader campaign.
Not to minimize the significance of the events in Pakistan, as they surely are of grave concern. I did find this aspect interesting though. They are arresting lawyers.
Pity.
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth
Now this I can agree with Garth. We need our government to value our money and with that provide value for our money.
By Harry S on 11.05.07 5:32 pm
Again we hear from Harry all over the place. Shhhhhh, be vewy quiet. Nobody likes a suckhole.
Harper-hating honkers have blood in their eyes .. and in their abject desperation they demand a Parliamentary inquiry to satisfy their blood lust for a vendetta. What a pitiful bunch.
They are only beating their heads against a hard wall that says Garth Turner .. who would most likely and vigorously oppose such an inquiry because it is not value for money.
Let them vent, Garth .. they’re desperate ..
I think you would know. — Garth
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth
No need for an inquiry .We need a POLICE investigation into perjury, income tax evasion, and crossing international borders with undeclared cash.
Having said that ,
Sidewinder
HDRC
Wheatboard
Gun Registry
Shawinigate
Foundations
CSL
I would hope that the RCMP has investigated all these things thoroughly.
The reason people are on Mulroney is because there is new evidence,including his pal Schrieber admitting the fact he gave Mulroney money and the income tax problem he had , as well as the border crossing with undeclared money.
What happens if you or I broke these same laws?
Finally some common sense coming from the turncoat.
Mulroney is old news and it is not the job of the government to call inquiries on private citizens and their financial dealings. If Mulroney has done soemthing wrong then any investigations should be done by the police and the crown prosecutors. The Liberals are barking up the wrong tree and while it may appear good TV Canadians are watching and asking has this Liberal party lost its collective minds. It abstains from the key issues of the day and tries to find scandal where there is none. In the meantime there is no opposition/suggestions for making the country better. Jack Layton has a point. The Liberals are ruderless and are quickly falling to the point of irrelevance. Is this what you signed up for Garth? Mudslinging and helping promote a new rock group called Dion and the Abstainers. Better think again buddy.
Why are you Albertan Cons so friggin’ angry all the time? — Garth
What happens if you or I broke these same laws?
By Keith Phibbs on 11.05.07 6:48 pm
Nothing if you’re a liberal MP on the government side. Cash changing hands in brown envelopes. Who went to prison for that laundering scheme. No liberal.
Give one shred of evidence an MP was involved. Gomery could not find any. Deliver, or suck it up. — Garth
“Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth”
Who wins if we don’t, Garth? Public money is not cheap, but integrity in government and public service should be priceless.
Why are you Albertan Cons so friggin’ angry all the time? — Garth
We’re not .You want the line defined , here we go . I think you ( leftists ) are wrong ……you on the left think anyone to the right of your beliefs is EVIL . Not much of a fine line eh ?
Leftist, LOL! People used to call me a hard right-winger in the PC party. Man, things have changed since the Reformers took over Ottawa. — Garth
The cost of a public inquiry is the cost of doing business, the governments business that is. After all the fooferall regarding the Liberals adscam it seems only logical to go after a former P.M. who admitted taking money from a crook.
By Jim on 11.05.07 6:26 pm
Don’t forget the “fact” the Harper hasn’t (and won’t) called an inquiry into any of these. Or the “fact” that instead of investigating these (and proving the validity, or non-validity) he would rather just have the accusation stand.
If there was any truth to these, he would have the RCMP investigate. Instead, he is now part of the coverup.
” So long as there is a single rock in all the worlds’ oceans , without socialism , there will be boat people . “
Revel , How Democracies Fail .
Why are you Albertan Cons so friggin’ angry all the time? — Garth
By Helen on 11.05.07 6:48 pm
Because we have been under the thumb of liberals for far too long.
Trudeau flipping us the bird, “why should I sell your grain?” “Because you won’t let us sell it”.
Liberal National Energy Program shutting down a vibrant oil and gas industry do central Canada can have cheap gas. Mulroney fixed that.
Gun registry that makes farmers and duck hunters criminals under the guise of stopping gang violence in Toronto.
Need I go on? Yes there is cause for anger against the libs.
Putin’s view of controlling mankind.
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1757822007
Anyone want a freebie? 20,000 empty homes in Phoenix.
Great golf, tennis, sunny weather! Last one remember to turn the lights off, please!
http://housingpanic.blogspot.com/2007/11/welcome-to-real-estate-hell-phoenix.html
This is a complete waste of time. And the Harper Bot Trolls and Harper are more than willing to allow the Liberals to spin their wheels in this issue. There are far more important issues that are directly linked to Harper and the CPC. Take for example Harper spending between 150,000 too 200,000 to poll 4000 Canadians about Capitol Punishment, or any of the other scadals Harper and the CPC are currently involved in.
Let the RCA and the RCMP and courts deal with Mulroney, if there is anything here to deal with. This issue is a no win issue for the Liberals, yet it is a very useful distraction for Harper, and he is more than willing to let the old Chretien Clowns run this three ring circus show.
Jesus, get back to the real work.
This is notable, if only for the fact that China is the missing player here, and China wants oil a lot more than the US does.
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=50010
By Jim on 11.05.07 6:26 pm
When Mr. Mulroney was exonerated the RCMP did not have all the facts.
Mr. Schreiber is not the only source of information about Mr. Mulroney’s activities. Mr. Mulroney’s assistant and former speechwriter, Paul Terrien (currently chief of staff to Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon) has talked publicly about the meeting between Mulroney and Schreiber in 1998. Then there’s Schreiber’s Swiss Bank account in the name of ‘Britan’. In 1999 Mulroney’s spokesman, Luc Lavoie told the CBC that Mulroney had not received money from Schreiber. If Mulroney didn’t get the $300,000 from Schreiber, then why did he eventually make the voluntary tax disclosure?
http://tinyurl.com/yw4nfu
“…it can be said with certainty that Mr. Mulroney did not disclose the cash payments as income in the years that he received the money. He later exercised the legal right of any Canadian to come forward to the Canada Revenue Agency and paid what he owed.
…One of the key stipulations for making such a disclosure is that the income has to be declared without any hint of an investigation by the agency. In other words, people can’t wait until tax investigators discover they made a mistake on their taxes and then try to make things rights by disclosing the income. A valid disclosure must also provide a complete explanation of the circumstances behind the unreported income.
Those facts raise questions about when Mr. Mulroney filed his disclosure and what he told investigators about the income. If Mr. Mulroney made his voluntary disclosure any time after Nov. 2, 1995, he would have been aware that he was the subject of an investigation by the RCMP, a highly publicized probe that focused specifically on his relationship with Mr. Schreiber – the very person who provided him the undisclosed income.
According to CRA spokeswoman Béatrice Fénelon, a person who is the subject of a criminal investigation can still file a valid voluntary disclosure, but the taxpayer must be completely upfront with investigators.
“If he is the subject of an investigation and is aware of it, [he] is under the obligation to disclose that they are under investigation as part of making a complete disclosure of information,†she wrote.”
Mr. Mulroney’s spokesman, Mr. Lavoie, has repeatedly referred to the cash payments as a “retainer.†Stevan Novoselac, a partner at the law firm Gowlings and a tax expert, said in an interview that a retainer isn’t taxable income until the funds are taken out of a lawyer’s trust account and a bill is rendered to the client.
- The sponsorship file was dealt with by PM Paul Martin as soon as he became aware of the facts, and launched an enquiry into the activities of his own party. Perhaps Mr. Harper could do the same.
- Are you suggesting that someone is profiting from the gun registry fiasco?
- Where would I find the *facts* on the HRDC file?
It is OK for the Conservatives to keep on and on and on and on about ADscam.
It’s OK for Harper to threaten inquiries over the Golf Couyrse (Chretien) .
It’s OK for Harper to threaten an inquiry into CSL (????)
But it’ NOT OK for the Liberals to get to the bottom of the Election irregularities perpetrated by the Conservatives.
It’s NOT OK for the Liberals to want clearer answers about Mulroney’s dealings with Karl Heinz Schreiber.
I rest my case !
Give one shred of evidence an MP was involved. Gomery could not find any. Deliver, or suck it up. — Garth
By jim on 11.05.07 7:03 pm
Gomery was not a criminal investigation and thus terms of reference would not allow blame. Thats convenient.
For you to straight faced deny liberal party conspiracy is a complete joke on your part.
Oh, btw, didn’t you campaign against this specific liberal corruption? Another flip flop.
Where is any evidence an MP was involved? Are you just making that up? I am interested. — Garth
Many moons ago, I held the view (still do) that women, by far and way, are the more intelligent and creative of the two sexes,
This post proves my theory beyond all doubt!
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/ODD_DIAMOND_FOUND?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Leftist, LOL! People used to call me a hard right-winger in the PC party. Man, things have changed since the Reformers took over Ottawa. — Garth
And Einstein’s Theory of Relativity doesn’t explain how now with the New Reform Party (CPC) those that were right of centre, now appear to be left of centre!
Or maybe it does. A extremely dense mass, thinking that its the centre of the universe, causing a gravitational well thats trying to suck everything in and we see it as a red shift.
Of course those Con Trolls have been caught in the event horizon and can’t get out.
Care to name the dense object?
Answer: PMSH and CPC right of right policy, sorry ideology.
We have “facts†that there are billions unaccounted for in the gun registry file. We have “facts†on a billion misappropriated in the HRDC file.
So those are the “factsâ€.
By Jim on 11.05.07 6:26 pm
HRDC scandal was the figment of Diane Ablonczy’s imagination. She badgered Jane Stewart about it daily in QP for weeks if not months. In the end it turned out , after an audit, that there was an amount of $ 47.5 that could not be accounted for.
Is it de rigeur for Prime Ministeres in their last week on the Job to invite the Presidents of Goldmining companies for lunch at 24 Sussex and ask for a job ?
If Mulroney only met Schreiber a few times and really did not know him, why was Schreiber invited to the official PM’s Resort (Harrington Lake) for lunch to be told that the outgoing PM was short of money and badly needed C-A-S-H.
Is this how Prime Ministers normally leave their jobs ?
You Conservatives may feast on adscam but in all fairness now it is Dion’s turn to demand answers and an inquiry. Don’t you think ?
Let’s face it , one thing is certain…, Schreiber is helping Mulroney sell his MEMOIRS.
I don’t know what the royalties to Mulroney amount to. I’ve seen the book. It is bigger than a Websters Dictionary.
If Mulroney had spread all those memories over THREE books , would he not receive three times the Royalties ?
I wonder if George Bush Sr is going to help sell it in the USA. Three books could be a runaway success.
I believe Mulroney has stated that he and Chretien are friends. It would be understandable that, based on the fact that the RCMP ran into a brick wall in Switzerland and Mulroney testified under oath that he only knew Schreiber superficially, that Chretien wanted the Libel Suit cleared up as soon as possible ? Hence the $ 2 mln settlement.
It is the new evidence that prompts the Opposition to demand an inquiry. And rightly so.
No matter how much you bring up the Golf Course, CSL HRDC and other matters , this is new eveidence that should be investigated.
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garthâ€
Who wins if we don’t, Garth? Public money is not cheap, but integrity in government and public service should be priceless.
By Herb on
Adscam resulted in the Liberal Party owing the Government $ 1.4 million, yet the Gomery inquiry cost $ 60 million plus.
Do I hear correctly that now that we have a new Government that wants to clean up the Government and strives for transparency, would not wish to get to the bottom of this matter. It does not even concern the CPC. All this happened under the Progressive Conservatives. I know Mulroney is one of Harper’s mentors but that mentoring should be put on hold for a while until Canadians have the answer they deserve.
Wha’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander
Thus, while a lie by omission may still be a lie, it does not constitute perjury.
By Patrick Ross on 11.05.07 2:17 pm
You are quite correct on your point. A witness is under no obligation to assist nor enhance the counsels’ examination while under oath.
In fact, those who understand the process know the answer is ‘Yes’, No’, or ‘I do not know!’ Beyond those three replies is pure theatrics by a witness.
Oh, I long for ‘This is Wonderland’ to return, where we can see realistic judges keep things under control. LOL
We have “facts†that there are billions unaccounted for in the gun registry file. We have “facts†on a billion misappropriated in the HRDC file.
So those are the “factsâ€.
By Jim on 11.05.07 6:26 pm
Jim, it is Government record that the Gun registry set up, including computers, overhead, personnel, training and actual tregistration over about 6 or more years cost $ 950 million , I repeat $ 950 million. This amount was not spent in one day, month, year. If you don’t know what you are talking about you should refrain from commebting on the Gun Registry, which was interminally badmouthed by the CPC but from what I believe still inforce. Only Albertans and Sasakbushies don’t like it. Oh yea and a few Ontario nad Quebec hunters. For a Government that is so hot on Gun laws it has conducted itself in a very hypocritical way. And you are blatently repeating the nonsense.
By the way HRDC resulted in $ 47.5 being unaccounted for. Pretty good program , eh ??
You Conservatives may feast on adscam but in all fairness now it is Dion’s turn to demand answers and an inquiry. Don’t you think?
By Bob.R on 11.05.07 8:08 pm
Very RARELY by my observations.
The people who get to the top politically have always managed to enrich themselves to some extent – the problem nowadays is that they don’t even pretend to be ashamed at being seen to have their hands in the cookie jar – as one person recently put it when questioned “I am entitled to my entitlements”.
It is this lack of shame that annoys and alienates the ‘man in the street’.
To Scotian at 12:31 pm -
My sentiments exactly – you said it perfectly. When something clearly stated and laid out in detail can be so forthcoing and obvious, too bad the political will is not. Thank you for sharing your well-thought views.
I’m pretty much with you on this one Garth. I haven’t paid a whole lot of attention to the events and don’t much care to, rather lukewarm to the whole thing except perhaps in the negative sense as expressed through your sentiment: … then we need new strategists. Mr. Harper has enough real shortcomings of his own to do him in. Please do what you can in caucus to influence this choice of strategy and nip it; you’d think the party would’ve learned a thing or two after experiencing the damage caused by Paul Martin’s advisors, and through observing the fractures being created by Findley for the Conservatives via his questionable actions as of late.
The media articles are enough to place seeds of doubt in the air for those who care; leave it that way. Otherwise, it has the potential to spiral down to the level of that of the Alliance/Reformers when they were scraping bottom, using Access-To-Information requests to troll for any hint of scandal that they could uncover regardless of degree, almost to where they would nickle-and-dime anyone who had a lunch that consisted of anything more than a ham sandwich. I understand the principle element, but sometimes the diminishing returns require a prudent pass, especially when it can devolve to pettiness that may backfire in unexpected ways. Bring ‘em back to ground and move on.
I’m sure if the media find anything more, we’ll hear about it.
By Bill D. Cat on 11.05.07 7:07 pm
So, How is Opus since the breakup? Pfssssst?
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth
Not only that, but consider the opportunity costs of having 308 top elected representatives of the people focusing on trivial BS that happened 20 years ago, when they could be focusing on REAL problems (like THIS, and this ) and showing LEADERSHIP in facing our rapidly developing future.
Please, please please, GET ON WITH IT!
If we don’t get our act together on getting our society off oil dependence, our entire livelihoods and our future are at serious risk.
Who wins if we spend, say, $6 million on an inquiry into $2 million paid out to cover legal costs? Is public money so cheap? — Garth
Canadians win. We all win. No matter the verdict. We all win. Justice prevails.
Anyone want a freebie? 20,000 empty homes in Phoenix.
Great golf, tennis, sunny weather! Last one remember to turn the lights off, please!
http://housingpanic.blogspot.com/2007/11/welcome-to-real-estate-hell-phoenix.html
By Charles Oxley on 11.05.07 7:29 pm
Oh Charles – I think that’s the funniest obit you’ve given yet -LMAO.
“…if Dion doesn’t ABSTAIN.”
By Herb on 11.05.07 5:18 pm
“Liberals are barking up the wrong tree and while it may appear good TV Canadians are watching and asking has this Liberal party lost its collective minds. It ABSTAINS”
By Helen on 11.05.07 6:48 pm
YESssss, 5% GST!!! Courtesy of Stephane Dion and the Liberal ABSTENTION
Thanks for the reminder Herb and Helen.
Sincerely,
MB
Her butt she now leveled
And delivered a clump
The Crackers lament
By Greg on 11.05.07 3:47 pm
ARRRR! ‘Tis a joy to be holding such an earnest creation (in your double-thick rubber gloves with a clothespin on your nose.)
Well… Garth we’re at an agreement here… This witch hunt must end, I’m disgusted with M. Thibault’s assault upon Brian Mulroney’s character. Mulroney did a lot of great things for this country, NAFTA, the GST, the Acid Rain Treaty, worked to end apartheid in South Africa.
Mulroney is easily within the top 5 Prime Minister’s in Canadian history! Liberals would be screaming bloody murder if any backbencher Tory wanted to investigate Pierre Trudeau in Mulroney’s era in government.
People can say what they will, say what they think, say what they feel. That’s a good thing. It’s free speech and protected by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Saying something under oath that you know to be untrue, that’s another.
Are Canadians to pick an choose between those just speaking freely and those just speaking falsely?
Canadians cannot, and cannot be asked (or forced) to, consider anything and everything as true; and who would want a country of morons or sychophants like that anyway?
Some wise man once said, “The truth shall set you free.”
Is it not interesting that now the tables are turned relentless persecution is feared by the same people who still inst there are Liberal politicians who collectively stole $40 million (adscam)
and that there were exchanges of envelopes with money (no THOUSAND ($1000.00) dollar bills mind you)
Really folks get a life. If it is good for the Liberals to be put under pressure it is equally good for the CPC to be put under pressure so they will understand what it is to be persecuted.
By John G on 11.05.07 4:10 pm
Actually, it doesn’t explain a damn thing.
Where’s your witty reply to this posting on yesterday’s “Daily Zorpheous”:
By Ed Brooks on 11.05.07 12:17 am
I was so disappointed that you didn’t post your usual thoughtful response.
Scotian,
You have been neglecting your own blog!
I hope your dad is ok and it’s not a bad break. All the best.
Geo
Daniel Paillé, to look into Liberal polling practices before 2003.
What a very small, petty man this PMSH
By Emilie on 11.05.07 12:48 pm
That’s different. That is looking at perhaps another scandal of a Canadian elected government. That is not going about trying to screw one man over. Chretien hated Mulroney. It was personal. Mulroney isn’t the only one to have suffered Chretien’s wrath. L
By Leasa on 11.05.07 2:19 pm,
You are too funny, Leasa. Harper going after Chretien and Martin is not screwing them over but Liberals going after Mulroney is?
Bawhahahaha….
Leasa, what I find repugnant about you is that YOU are using our TAX DOLLARS to post comments on this blog. Instead of being a tax payer funded CPC troll, why don’t you get a real job? Maybe if you got a job in the private sector and started paying taxes, you could appreciate good government.
Like I said before, since you have your snout in the public trough, at least do something useful with our tax dollars and go powder Harper’s nose.
Squeel away Leasa, squeel away.
Scenario:
A Liberal MP, any MP, has , allegedly, according to a business associate, received on three different occasions, an envelope containing 100 one thousand dollar bills. He does not declare these “gifts” to Revenue Canada.
Later he feels remorse and goes to Revenue Canada and reports the money he received years earlier. He pays the taxes due and also a hefty fine.
The CBC’s Fifth Estate devotes an entire hour to this and interviews the donor (business associate) at length.
What would be your reaction ???
Should he/she get a free ride in the House of Commons ? No questions , no further inquiry. Maybe just a mild slap on the wrist ?
All honest partisans , what would be your reaction ?
By Frank Frink on 11.05.07 1:36 pm
Marsden_Rachel/Toronto Sun
That’ll teach you to read such foolishness in the am. Try the Tyee and ease into your day.
Don’t you remember Rachel Marsden from back a few years ago when she was making the news not making it up in a, I’m not quite sure how to refer to the TO Sun, but it’s not the first fishwrap I go for for news.
Our Rachel was oh so busy accusing her profs, one in particular, the swim coach, at UBC for stalking her. I guess she hid from him in the bottom of the pool. Exciting stuff. The city was a twitter with the scandal. I think another prof was accused too. Maybe a bit later. But anyway, it was found that all the stalking and phoning and emailing was all done on Rachel’s part. Poor swim coach and his wife went thru hell because of this woman.
All is quiet for a while. Then she pops up on Fox News. The CNN thing must have been some sort of ploy. My guess is they sent her back to Canada and she is now on the no fly, no cross the border list. My bet is she’ll get them back. TO Sun!! LOL!!
2 cups of coffee first Frank! And no more Rachel.
Geo
Hey, Liz …
Why don’t you (and others) crack open the Charter before you tell us about ‘free speech’ … read section one, and, familiarize yourself with ‘reasonable limits’ … then … good luck finding ‘our’ Canadian right to ‘free speech’ … you moron … educate yourself …
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/
I agree with your arguments except for the part where you say that Mulroney was wealthy, he was not. After spending more then 10 years as an active politician, he was not generating the kind of money that would allow him to go back to the Westmount lifestyle that he was used to (before politics). Kids in private schools, renovations on a Westmount mansion, a wife who loves to spend and man who enjoyes the finer things in life, is a recipe for disaster. Mulroney was not a multi millionaire before running for office nor was he after retiring from politics but he was living the multi millionaire’s lifestyle. Therefore, when Karlheinz Schreiber offered him 300,000 dollars cash in hotel rooms, at a time when Mulroney was spending a lot, it would make perfect logical (not ethical) sense for Mulroney to accept under the circumstances.
By Charles Oxley on 11.05.07 7:29 pm
LMAO! All the Californians moved to Phoenix to escape the consequences of their own greed.
Then, VOILA!, they’ve done it again! Too funny. Sob Sob with Baby Crocodile tears.
Like I say ‘Insanity is repeating the same act and expecting a different result!’
good luck finding ‘our’ Canadian right to ‘free speech’ … you moron … educate yourself …
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/
By Blind Ref on 11.06.07 1:16 am
Seems you have had no problem finding your’s?
How about reading it yourself?
Try Section 2a and 2B
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other
media of communication
By Olivier on 11.06.07 7:31 am
Mulroney’s financial status has no legal bearing on whether or not he committed a crime or perjury.
All are equal under the law. Ask Conrad Black, especialy on December 1, 2007, he can assure you wealth is meaningless.
Thank you Bill Muskoka for sticking up for my free speech! Take that, Blind Ref! A little bit of education for you. It’s a good day when you learn something.
In my opinion this issue does not justify the millions of dollars for an inquiry even if it might justify a further police investigation. The purpose of an inquiry is to identify systemic problems not to persecute or prosecute individuals.
The $300,000 payment appears shady because it appears to be than a payment to a former PM to peddle his influence. While it may smell bad it was not illegal and this kind of activity by former high profile politicians is widespread. Having it become public knowledge does nothing for Mulroney’s public image.
That he failed to report the income is an issue for Revenue Canada.
As I understand it the whole issue is currently before the courts in a civil litigation. There is potential for a further police investigation if the results of that case raise questions of criminal behaviour. It is not the same issue as the one in which Mulroney received the settlement from the taxpayers of Canada.
Oh mhy …
how horrible … as it happens, i am very well acquainted with section 2 … on the other hand … neither of you seems to be acquainted with reasonable limits set out in section 1 … so … freedom of expression in s2.b, as you so aptly pointed out … is nevertheless subject to reasonable limits … oh ya … for your convenience, here is section 1 … don’t exert yourself too much trying to understand how section 1 places reasonable limits throughout the Charter … 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
By Liz on 11.06.07 10:12 am
You are welcome. We must all Stand Up for our own, and other’s rights. Like was said ‘We shall all hang together or individually!’
Polite rhetoric is still greatly respected and appreciated by most.
By Blind Ref on 11.06.07 11:10 am
Oh, I understand, you need to have a legal basis for descent conduct. Most people learn it through socialization as a child.
I suggest you go over to the CPC website and ‘educate’ them on such matters. You might start with something simple as they seem to be a tad retarded, and unable to comprehend basic principles like ‘Answering questions’, polite listening, behaving like adults, etc.
Maybe you missed all that because it wasn’t presented to you in Braille?
So, please tell us..Are you a new commenter or just another recycled, formerly banned one that Garth has not had the time to look at yout ISP?
“Scotian,
You have been neglecting your own blog!
I hope your dad is ok and it’s not a bad break. All the best.
Geo” By Georgine on 11.05.07 11:20 pm
Thank you very much for the well wishes for my father. I just stopped by my home after visiting him in the hospital and he is waiting on surgery, he broke two ankle bones and wrecked the ligament connections there apparently, not a minor injury and one that is going to have him laid up for a while. I suspect that this will eat up into my online time even more than my life the past few months already has, which BTW is one of the reasons Saundrie has been so “neglected” as you described it. I am hoping though to do a proper post there on the Mulroney issue this week, since as you can tell from my comments here already I do consider this a serious issue because of the way he derailed the criminal investigation and claimed millions of taxpayer dollars to cover up his clearly unethical conduct and contact with Schreiber.
He may not be guilty of criminal wrongdoing in the money he got from Schreiber, and if he had been willing to take the lumps of his name being damaged because of his actions instead of fighting this libel suit as he did then there would be nothing IMHO more to it. It was his unwillingness to be honest about his actions and accept the responsibility for them which caused him to take the deceitful libel route and to apparently scam the taxpayers to protect the truth of his relationship and financial dealings with Schreiber from coming out, and I strongly suspect that if this were someone other than a former PM in these circumstances who had done as he did to the same outcome that once the truth came out they would be under investigation, especially if they were also officers of the court as Mulroney is.
While I do not think this should be the primary focus for the Liberals, I do think it should be one of the main secondary ones, because this is about ethics and scamming taxpayers and lying under oath by all appearances now by a former PM and current consultant to the current PM/government as well as a member of the transition team that set this government up. This is something that is also an ongoing activity given Mulroney’s refusal to come clean to this day and to pretend/claim he is totally pure as the driven snow despite the knowledge now that he lied about his relationship with Schreiber under oath and that he withheld relevant/pertinent/central/core information regarding the basis of his libel suit namely receiving money improperly from Schreiber. His track record for being honest and having a basis to be given the benefit of the doubt about all this has long passed.
For me this is about principles and having PMs treated the same way under the law far more than partisanship, which since I am not the partisan of any party is something I am not capable of. Too many CPCers seem to think that to be against Harper and his Straussian politics means being a Liberal partisan or some kind of partisan (which only goes to show how poorly they understand the meaning of the word, not alas an uncommon problem I find among the Harper/CPC partisans), but I am not, I am a Straussian foe pure and simple and a proud Canadian nationalist who resents this imported movement conservative thinking and style of politicking the Calgary School Straussians in Harper et al have brought to this country. I want my Canadian based Conservativism back as an option and not this abomination fraudulently passing itself off as Canadian Conservativism these days.
Well, have a good day, I may be able to come back later on but I do not know. If not take care and be well.
Blind Ref: I don’t understand your point. Section 1 does NOT say that we do not have freedome of speech. It only says that reasonably limits can be placed on that right, provided that those limits are “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. In other words, its acceptable to have laws against libel, slander and hate. It is NOT constitutionally acceptable to pass a law that limits speech which is either unreasonable, or (if it is reasonable) is not demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. The word “demonstrably” is important, because it requires that the law in question also be found in other free and democratic countries.
I was so disappointed that you didn’t post your usual thoughtful response.
By Ed Brooks on 11.05.07 11:08 pm
Sorry Ed,
I’ve just gone 26 days in a row 15 hours a day without a day off…….musta missed it!
(and people call me lucky)……..
By Scotian on 11.06.07 1:59 pm
I sincerely hope your father heals fast and well.
Good comment, and my sentiments exactly…no one, not even a PM or former PM is above the law. That is reserved for oligarchies and dictatorships.
Be well.
By Elias on 11.06.07 2:52 pm
Prime example would be the classic forbiddence of yelling ‘FIRE!’ in a crowded theater or room, when there is no fire.
THE DANGEROUS PATH
Some argue the Brian Mulroney ‘mystery cash’ issue begs attention suggesting a third party investigation. What’s the point?
Here’s what we know: Mulroney allegedly took $300 thousand in cash, and then said under oath he never received any money from anybody. Then with the sound of clomping RCMP boots allegedly behind him, he declared the income five years later but couldn’t remember who gave it to him or why. What’s to know? Hans Schreiber, who was allegedly acting as an agent for Airbus, says it was a payoff for Air Canada to buy planes from his client, and he would like the chance to say so in an open court of law.
A child can connect the dots. Charges can and should be laid today against Mr. Mulroney for perjury at the least. The evidence is there. The rest of the story about where Mulroney’s mystery cash came and for what, would quickly unravel in a court of law before a jury of Mr. Mulroney’s peers.
There are two notable jurisdictions in North America where the dead are encouraged to vote, and often answer the call: Quebec and Illinois.
In Quebec, a Trudeau-like shrug of the shoulders is the rule rather than the exception when buses of drunks picked-up from local poorhouses vote. Sometimes more than once.
A friend of mine who used to be a VP of Gulf Canada, would laugh about the increased orders for asphalt at election times in the ‘je me souviens’ province. “A lot of private driveways got done,” he’d chuckle.
Pierre Trudeau got an indoor swimming pool installed at 24 Sussex thanks to private anonymous donors. Naturally none of them ever received a dime in government business as a result.
Jean Chretien, when out of politics was allegedly alllowed to buy company stock at $8 a share when the stock was trading in the $12 range, and then allegedly turned the shares around a week later at $17 a share. No one naturally in Quebec would suggest insider trading was involved, or even ask why he’d be given such a deal in the first place.
And while questions were asked about Mr. Chretien’s golf course deal allegedly written on the back of a paper napkin, with government grants allegedly going to the new owners…in the end everyone who mattered agreed that is the way legal documents are done in Quebec. Business as usual.
Former Conservative Senator Michel Cogger, almost got away with it. He allegedly took $212 thousand dollars in bribes to help a Quebec company get a government grant of $45 million. Twice Quebec courts found him not guilty. Surprise Surprise Surprise. But alas the Canadian Supreme Court (before the days of PMO control of the RCMP) found the bum guilty. It is naturally a coincidence that Cogger was a great hand-picked pal of then Prime Minister Mulroney, to enter the sleepy upper chamber.
And let’s not forget the sponsorship program during Mr. Chretien’s days in power with Mr. Martin his bean counter carefully monitoring the treasury. Perhaps hundreds of millions went to Liberal party benefactors to do ‘let’s make nice with the french in Quebec’ work only to find, no work was done. C’est jolie alright.
And of course, we all know of the botched Chretien government investigation into Mr. Mulroney’s, alleged Airbus dealings which like a body dumped into Lake Michigan without enough weight has bobbed back to the surface. Were it not for the bumbling of a lawyer in the Justice Department with the sleuthing skills of a newt, we might have been spared this re-occurrence. But then ya get what you pay for. In that case $2.1 million for the costs of failing to nail Mulroney. $200 thousand of which went allegedly to his long-time and still paid, PR flack, Luc Lavoie….who knows how much?
In my very much a minority view, Quebec is more trouble than it is worth, as it skews domestic policy issues such as this completely out of whack. Canada will never be a nation until it demands that Quebec leave the federation. But that is a debate for another time.
IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION
The current Canadian Prime Minister, Steven Harper, having dumped Toronto from his electoral vote finder is rolling the dice to win Quebec seats big-time this coming federal election. Not wanting to offend the Mulroney political base there, Harper says it is ‘dangerous’ to go after political adversaries after they have left office. He points to Mr. Chretien’s golf course deal on the one hand and Mr. Mulroney’s ‘mystery cash’ on the other. Tit for tat. Don’t ask. Don’t tell.
Why the Opposition parties are focusing on the $2.1 million payout to Mr. Mulroney, rather than insisting on charges based on new revelations ought to be a mystery but isn’t. Mr. Schreiber says he had $20 million in bribe money to spread around. $300 thousand is just a small slice. Did Opposition parties get their noses into the trough? Questions. Questions. Questions.
Besides with the current Prime Minister holding onto the short chain of the Solicitor General, who in turn barks orders at the RCMP, no charges will ever be laid against Mr. Mulroney.
As an example of this approach we need only to review the case of Alan Eagleson, the hockey agent. The RCMP had proof Eagleson, a fine Conservative bag-man, was guilty of stealing tens of millions from his clients, including hockey star Bobby Orr.
Prime Minister Kim Campbell, said she would not allow any charges to be laid until the Law Society of Upper Canada did an investigation. Eh?
Naturally, the Law Society said it had no intention of investigating Eagleson. The case was dead. Almost.
Eagleson received over-whelming support from the Canadian media. Columnists, reporters, Editorial Boards all went to bat for Mr. Eagleson, the crook. He had done many good things for Canadian hockey, and was a great source of ‘scoops’, and his fine accomplishments should forgive his taking money from dumb and trusting hockey player clients.
Disgusted, an RCMP officer licked a stamp and sent the Eagleson file to the FBI, which prosecuted him in a US court, where he was found guilty and sent away for what everyone thought was a well-deserved long time.
Eagleson’s political pals got him extradited back to Canada to serve his time, but he was let out shortly afterward escaping his sentence. He saw less time behind bars than people who make their living stealing cars in Detroit.
Justice–Canadian Style– mirroring Prime Minister Harper’s, interesting view of how the political and legal systems ought to interact (turning Canada into a Mexico del norte mind you). Or to quote that paragon of virtue, US President Richard Nixon, “If the President does it, it is legal”. .
Mr. Harper, in defending Mulroney, is arguing immediate defacto clemency from prosecution for all high office holders, or at least Prime Minister’s–just cuz.
Certainly despite just a few calls to ‘clear the air’ on the Mulroney issue, many newspapers have already buried the story. After it broke on the CBC’s 5th Estate, for example, the Ottawa Citizen neglected to mention what ought to be a front-page story. The Calgary Herald, also turned a blind eye saving a large chunk of its front-page real estate for a tell-all about the Rolling Stone’s romp with Margaret Trudeau.
Reporters in the meek Ottawa Press Gallery depend on access to information. Scraps thrown off the table to lap-dogs. Going head-on demanding charges be laid against Mulroney would be the best way I know of to find oneself reporting for the Timmins Daily Beaver.
So far, just yourself, the Montreal Gazette and the Victoria Times are timidly suggesting maybe a third party of some sort–should kinda take a look at this.
What’s to look at? We all know the score.
Eagleson case deja vu all over again.
Which brings us back to the United States.
In Illinois, where three former Governor’s have been found guilty of taking bribes (a tip of the ice-berg), a trip to prison is the remedy. Today for example, former Mulroney Illinois Governor George Ryan, is a guest of the state for taking bribes and influence peddling. The state of Illinois has not collapsed. The republic remains strong and free.
Mr. Ryan no doubt wishes he had run for office in Canada.
Meanwhile, with Prime Minister Harper, dressing as Kim Campbell, in drag–there is one hopes–an RCMP officer with a file, an envelope and stamp…as one of the alleged payoffs to Mulroney occurred in New York….voyons!
Justice American-style!
If the Mulroney mystery cash story spins out of the control (unlikely) of the Luc Lavoie’s of the world, Mr. Harper may one day find himself facing obstruction and conspiracy charges. A very dangerous path for Mr. Harper, and perhaps even for Opposition parties purposely hunting up the wrong trees. Perhaps Mr. Harper is already arguing for his own future clemency?
As the theme song from the reality TV show goes, “Bad boy. Bad boy. Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?”
Richard Fallis
Marshall, Wisconsin
“Harper calls for special prosecutor to watch gov’t
Updated Wed. Nov. 30 2005 7:43 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
As the Liberals pushed their national unity agenda in battleground Quebec, Tory Leader Stephen Harper offered a tough solution to combat the sort of corruption that plagued the Liberal party in the province.
Harper said the players behind the sponsorship program should be sitting in jail, and he promised that a Conservative government would appoint a special prosecutor to deal with any federal crimes.
“This election is an occasion to turn the page and to go to a new chapter in the history of this country — a positive chapter to put behind us this sponsorship scandal and to offer ourselves a responsible government for all,” said Harper from the Chateau Frontenac hotel in Quebec City.
Harper said under his leadership, an arm’s length, independent office of the Director of Public Prosecutions will be put in place to “take over responsibility for all federal criminal prosecutions.”
Under such a system, said Harper, politicians will no longer be responsible for holding other politicians accountable. Harper said he would only appoint that official after consulting opposition parties.
“There will be a new code on Parliament Hill: bend the rules, you will be punished. Break the law, you will be charged. Abuse the public trust, you will go to prison,” he said.”