Liberal refuses to apologize for questioning Tory grants including $19K to frat house

[RedHot25]

Fair enough, FireFly, but .... do you honestly think it will come back on the agenda? Or will it get 'sidetracked' with what the liberal member should or shouldn't have done, and....

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Fair enough, FireFly, but .... do you honestly think it will come back on the agenda? Or will it get 'sidetracked' with what the liberal member should or shouldn't have done, and....

Do you honestly think the liberals will just leave it alone?

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Do you honestly think the liberals will just leave it alone?

Is that not their job, however? And by "their" I mean any opposition....to not leave things like this alone?

If its no big deal, why doesn't Stelmach just come out and say "look there was no money...or there was but this is what it was legitimately used for ...or..." whatever valid reason. Then he can say "well look its valid, but look at the ridiculous liberal member...etc".

But has he done that? To me it seems kind of weird....that the focus is almost exclusively on should the liberal (in this case) member have done that or not.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Is that not their job, however? And by "their" I mean any opposition....to not leave things like this alone?

If its no big deal, why doesn't Stelmach just come out and say "look there was no money...or there was but this is what it was legitimately used for ...or..." whatever valid reason. Then he can say "well look its valid, but look at the ridiculous liberal member...etc".

But has he done that? To me it seems kind of weird....that the focus is almost exclusively on should the liberal (in this case) member have done that or not.

Well those are the questions. However, since we have no answers at this point in time, it's pointless for us to ask them. The Liberals however, can and likely will continue to ask them, and as soon as they know, they'll let you know.

Perhaps he hasn't done that because he doesn't know. In which case, he'll do it as soon as he knows, and then this will all be resolved, perhaps. The focus is on the Liberal because that's all we know.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Well those are the questions. However, since we have no answers at this point in time, it's pointless for us to ask them. The Liberals however, can and likely will continue to ask them, and as soon as they know, they'll let you know.

Perhaps he hasn't done that because he doesn't know. In which case, he'll do it as soon as he knows, and then this will all be resolved, perhaps. The focus is on the Liberal because that's all we know.

A bunch of "perhaps".

If that is the case, he should say, "I don't know, I'll find out and let you know by XXX". An acknowledgement that they will see whay is going on and a set time for an update would be fine by me. Otherwise it smacks of a coverup.

It is any parliamentary opposition's duty to continue to ask questions until there are answeres, or baring that an investigation.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

A bunch of "perhaps".

If that is the case, he should say, "I don't know, I'll find out and let you know by XXX". An acknowledgement that they will see whay is going on and a set time for an update would be fine by me. Otherwise it smacks of a coverup.

It is any parliamentary opposition's duty to continue to ask questions until there are answeres, or baring that an investigation.

But there's the catch. You're also assuming nothing will be done or said about this in the future.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by FireFly

But there's the catch. You're also assuming nothing will be done or said about this in the future.

Well....shouldn't the premiere/gov't want to "rectify things" as soon as possible? As in there is/was nothing there/wrong?

I.e. what are they waiting for ?

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by FireFly

But there's the catch. You're also assuming nothing will be done or said about this in the future.

You are correct, I am not going to assume that something will be done.
I expect politicians to try and sweep things under the carpet when the results may not be to their benefit.

If something is going to be said or done, then tell us so we have it on record.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Well....shouldn't the premiere/gov't want to "rectify things" as soon as possible? As in there is/was nothing there/wrong?

I.e. what are they waiting for ?

Finding out what went on. What were the dates of these grants? Any idea? Was Stelmach in office at the time? Does he even know about all this? According to a previous post, one was a 2004 grant application. Now if it was granted at the time, how is he gonna know about anything off the top of his head? Not to mention that he wasn't the one who approved the thing as he wasn't in office at the time.

In addition, we don't know what was actually said on either side, do we? We just know that the one guy said something that got him kicked out of the ledge. Do we know what was said in response, other than "apologize"?

[Bobblehead]

So the Liberal member has apologized.

A Liberal member of the Alberta legislature is back in his seat after apologizing for remarks he made about the government.
Bharat Agnihotri was booted by the Speaker on Tuesday for suggesting ``secret friends' of top Tories may be getting the inside track on lottery fund grants.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

So the Liberal member has apologized.

Man if I was him I wouldn't apologise, and I would probably demand judicial review of the whole procedure. Calling someone a liar or a thief in legislature is nothing, seems the Alberta legislature has grown a bit touchy. Hell here in Australia you have members of Parliament in session accusing a homosexual High Court judge of "trawling for rough trade" with no punishment whatsoever.

[Agamemnon]

When you're suspended without pay its probably difficult to stick to your guns on moral grounds... unless you're independently wealthy I suppose.

[RedHot25]

Will be interesting to see if anything happens, or if this all just kind of fades away now.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Will be interesting to see if anything happens, or if this all just kind of fades away now.

I wonder what page this was on in the Herald and Sun?

On the Calgary Sun website it was well down the list of articles, and I couldn't find it on the Herald's site (I may have missed it, but that would just show how low an issue it is). Doesn't appear like either of those consider it to be newsworthy.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

So the Liberal member has apologized.

Good. Now the sideshow (which never should have happened - he shouldn't have worded his statement as he did) can fade to the background and the actual issue can come to the forefront.

I wonder if the sideshow was deliberate though... thinking that it'd all be swept under the carpet without the fuss. Sad commentary on today's world....

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Good. Now the sideshow (which never should have happened - he shouldn't have worded his statement as he did) can fade to the background and the actual issue can come to the forefront.

Do we know how he worded his statement?

I wonder if the sideshow was deliberate though... thinking that it'd all be swept under the carpet without the fuss. Sad commentary on today's world....

Considering the story's locations in the Sun/Herald it seems this is true...

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Considering the story's locations in the Sun/Herald it seems this is true...

Yes... because the location of a story in a newspaper is a true barometer of the importance of an issue.

The Auditor General / RCMP / etc should be the ones to determine if there are any wrongdoing in this case... not the general public who's apparently told what is important by the news.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Yes... because the location of a story in a newspaper is a true barometer of the importance of an issue.

Yes... in many ways the location of a story in a newspaper tells us a lot about its perceived importance... thats why Bobblehead pointed it out. It doesn't establish the truth, but it does establish how important the newspaper perceives the story to be.

The Auditor General / RCMP / etc should be the ones to determine if there are any wrongdoing in this case... not the general public who's apparently told what is important by the news.

... why are you condescending to the public? Of course the news is the main source of information for the public... what do you expect, each of us who are interested in the story to hike up to Edmonton to figure it out first hand?

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Yes... in many ways the location of a story in a newspaper tells us a lot about its perceived importance... thats why Bobblehead pointed it out. It doesn't establish the truth, but it does establish how important the newspaper perceives the story to be.

How important to the newspaper, yes. Otherwise, Karla Homolka and her new baby would not be on the front page of the Sun.

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

... why are you condescending to the public? Of course the news is the main source of information for the public... what do you expect, each of us who are interested in the story to hike up to Edmonton to figure it out first hand?

There are billions of more important events that happen every day than what is reported in the news, and yet only these select few are what are supposed to matter?

There is stock fraud investigated by the RCMP and other police detachments all the time, yet this one MLA should garner front page news?

There are murders in Canada / Alberta all the time that are never reported in the news, and yet a MLA being kicked out of the legislature is major?

The media influences "important events" more than they should be allowed to, and usually do so by creating some kind of a panic or fuss about events that don't need such dramatics.... and those that fall victim to these false panics are the ones that receive my contempt.


Take this case as an example.

Agnihotri also referred to an $18,760 grant to a University of Alberta women's fraternity house.

Sun Media has learned the 2004 grant application was filed by the daughter of Tory insider Gord Rosko.

Erin Rosko declined to comment on allegations yesterday she got the grant because of her father's connections to the Conservative government.

How can we (as the general public) prove, one way or the other that something happened here? For all we know, Erin Rosko found out from her dad that there were all sorts of grant programs and where to find a list. Erin then did the research, submitted the application, and received the grant without any favoritism. What would be the problem here?

The problem is that we, as the public, will have no way in knowing what happened. Neither will the news.... but the "perception" of *maybe* something happening, no matter how slim, is enough to sell a newspaper. Of course, if these people are cleared, no retraction or notice of this will be anywhere to be found.

If charges are laid, or rules found to be broken, then that is the time for a news story... not before.

/rant