Quote:
Originally Posted by Rerun
Because the expense account rules are somewhat fuzzy (their intention is clear to most people but apparently not to these three... or at least that's what their argument is)
|
Right, and so, after a proper hearing, where all parties have an opportunity to call evidence, test the opposing party's evidence, and make argument about the evidence, in front of an impartial tribunal, the tribunal will decide: (a) what the expense account rules actually are; (b) whether any senators broke them; and (c) whether any senators knowingly or intentionally broke them.
I don't understand why you think that, having had the benefit of the above process, the tribunal will get it wrong whereas you have it right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rerun
He's not firing them... he's suspending them without pay. They will still continue to be Senators.
|
Yes, I know that. You were the one who appeared to be calling for their dismissal (by stating that if they were employed in the private sector, they would have already been dismissed.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rerun
I'm sure, if they are proven to be innocent, all pay and all the expense $$ that they returned will be returned back to them.
Just because they are being suspended without pay (hopefully) doesn't mean that any inquiry into their wrongdoing dies with their suspension... and certainly any RCMP investigation won't.
|
Are you suggesting then that the Senators be suspended without pay, having not been proven guilty of any wrongdoing, and then, sometime in the future, hold a hearing to determine whether there was in fact any wrongdoing? What would be the advantage of that approach? It seems completely unfair to the Senators involved, while having no advantage for Canadians.