Week two of the Harper regime finds a second request for an investigation by the Ethics Commissioner, this time requested by Anita Neville, on the activities of Brian Pallister.
The Dan Report has the deets, but readers may also check here for some of the background.
This is on top of the NDP MP Peter Julian's request concerning David Emerson. Julian has asked the Ethics Commissioner to investigate whether David Emerson is in violation of Section 8 of the Conflict of Interest Code which says:
"When performing parliamentary duties and functions, a Member shall not act in any way to further his or her private interests or those of a member of the Member's family, or to improperly further another person's private interests."
Julians letter cites Shapiro's decision on the Grewal-Dosanjh inquiry which says:
"… if Mr. Dosanjh had offered a reward or inducement to Mr. Grewal for crossing the floor at this time, he would have been acting and/or attempting to act in such a way as to improperly further Mr. Grewal's private interests. Either of these would amount to an extremely serious breach of the Members' Code."
Emerson denied that Harper made any offer to induce him to cross the floor. This may get difficul to argue as Emerson stated on CTV:
"The reality is I was elected. Once the election was over, I was faced with a decision on how to best serve the people of the riding, and that's all the people of the riding ...," he said. "I concluded that I could better serve them, I could get more done, I could get more results for British Columbia if I was in the cabinet than if I was not."
But hang on, Harper did not offer any inducements... how could Emerson come to that conclusion before he crossed the floor?
Hmmm. Good luck with that David.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I have been chastised by several Conservatives for saying Harper bought Emerson, yet given the statements both men have made how can one not come to that conclusion? I mean we know from Emerson's own words that he would not have become a CPC MP without a seat at Cabinet, and that Harper offered him a seat in Cabinet for whatever reasons of his own. Indeed Harper's own words make clear that he understood that Emerson would not have crossed without a Cabinet position.
One set of questions though has been bothering me since this all happened. How did Harper know that Emerson would be receptive to being approached the day after the election, especially given Emerson's speech of election night? Had there been prior contact, and if so when? If there was prior contact was there any arrangement made between the two regarding what he would do in the case he won his seat but his party lost government? I wonder this because throughout the election there was talk of a Liberal mole to explain how the CPC kept getting their hands on Liberal documentation/policies/plans during the election, including the platform itself. Emerson could explain this if he had the contact prior and there was an arrangement.
I am not saying I think this is true, simply that the circumstances surrounding Emerson make him a possible candidate if there was truly a mole. However, it is the ability of Harper to know that Emerson would be receptive to being bought with a Cabinet seat right after the election that really troubles me and something I would like to know the answer to. I expect to be disappointed, but it is something to keep in mind.
As for Pallister, I hope he enjoys the same scrutiny he loved placing Liberals under, although at least in his case people are trying to keep to the facts instead of making all kinds of stuff up only to have to take it back a couple of days later when the facts contradicted him.
Prospective Writers, Editors, and Freelancers in Advertising are invited to participate in a new Trudeau 'Just Society' inspired newspaper called The Canadian. E-mail cosmopolita_rc@yahoo.com.
Post a Comment