If Trudeau was to prorogue parliament I wonder if that would cause Singh to reconsider the supply and confidence agreement?
Doubtful, when asked several times by reporters, all he could say was tools in the tool box (which he could not name). Did not appear to be on the table for him
If Trudeau was to prorogue parliament I wonder if that would cause Singh to reconsider the supply and confidence agreement?
He's already said that he's not going to make it a confidence issue.
I think the first time, he didn't want an election until he was sure that the elections wouldn't be compromised.
The second he could still use the confidence issue to demand things from the government.
I mean lets be honest these votes don't mean much, they're non binding motions anyways.
Does it matter about Proroguing? The house is about to go on Summer Break until September and the Liberal's will hope and pray that this story doesn't get oxygen til then.
On a side note the stories from Trudeau's national security advisors were so confusing yesterday. She didn't know about the foreign interference til she read it in the Globe and Mail a couple of weeks ago concerning O'Toole etc. Then she threw CSIS under the bus. then nobody got briefings. She was all over the map and went against what she said the last time she was testifying. Also supposedly there's a top secret email system for classified documents, but Bill Blair never got a log in from IT or something like that. Oh I forgot, she was on vacation when the Michael Chong 2021 document came out and never read it, which means that she didn't learn about it until 2023.
Oh also she did confirm that opposition MP's were getting briefings on the documents that went to the report, but they couldn't talk about it, which confirms what PP and Blanchett (sp?) were saying.
The one thing that should be demanded is the tracking documents for all of these briefing documents that CSIS is sending out. They're not classified and will show the distribution of the documents.
Blanchett (sp?) said it best "Why are the Liberals willing to destroy their party over this. What the hell are they fighting so hard to hide?"
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Last edited by CaptainCrunch; 06-02-2023 at 08:54 AM.
Does it matter about Proroguing? The house is about to go on Summer Break until September and the Liberal's will hope and pray that this story doesn't get oxygen til then.
Yes, it matters. They still have a full month on the schedule and that includes the potential for extended sessions which was agreed upon. I'm not sure what work/bills they are undertaking at this time though and how important they are but anything ongoing would be killed. Outside of the regularly scheduled business the bigger issue with proroguing is the optics in that it basically shows us that the government is not accountable and it continues to erode public trust. Obviously that action would mostly poorly reflect in the Liberals and Trudeau but it still has ripples across our entire parliament and future governing parties. They shouldn't be able to go into hiding just because their backs are up against the wall.
What's dubious is the ability of a parliament to vote to make an appointed official "recuse". Recusal is voluntary. And there are obvious problems with independent appointments being at the whim of parliamentary votes.
Parliamentary votes aren't binding unless they have a vote of confidence attached (see the Uyghur genocide vote for which the Liberals cabinet abstained). They can vote on making GioforPM
The role "rapporteur" was made up by Trudeau. It has never been used at any point in Canadian history.
A vote at least sets the tone that Canadians want answers on this and the Johnston charade needs to be eliminated, but now Johnston and Trudeau's response was effectively "LOL make me".
This is where Singh comes in. He does have the ability to rescind his support for the Liberals as a result of this which would all but assure an election unless Trudeau balks on the inquiry, but Singh continues be all bark and no bite.
Unfortunately NPD has have just blocked a vote which would have had Johnston testify on his PET dealings (again that foundation that is at the heart of this whole mess and which its whole board of directors recently left)
Singh is looking like Trudeau's lapdog and destroying any credibility the NDP has. An NDP MP was targeted by foreign interference, and Singh is too busy clinging on to the illusion of power to do something about it.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
And here's the thing about inquiries, they are not always negative for the party in power.
Trudeau was vindicated in invoking the emergencies act as a result of a public inquiry.
Martin called in the Gomery inquiry in the hopes that it would clear himself of any wrongdoing after he took over as PM, so he can have a clean slate ahead of the election. While he did retain power he lost the majority, but not doing the inquiry may have been even more damaging.
I mean all Trudeau has to do is show up with golf balls for the inquiry like his predecessor.
Ironically Chretien claimed that having Gomery as head of the inquiry was a conflict of interest and should be removed.
According to Liberals, Gomery was in a conflict of interest as he once criticized Chretien publically. But according to same Liberals, Johnston is not in a conflict of interest in his rapporteur role, despite being close family ski buddies with Trudeau, despite being a member of the PET.
What the heck is Trudeau so afraid of when talking of foreign interference potentially impacting our democratic process? Are the revelations that bad? He should be jumping in head first.
Trudeau did not “make up” the role of rapporteur. Rapporteurs have been around for a long long time.
Like all rapporteurs Johnston’s job was defined by the terms of reference. And the evidence of conflict is weak, since he has had as much relationship with Conservatives as Trudeau or other liberals. I appear in front of judges I know socially all the time.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
Trudeau did not “make up” the role of rapporteur. Rapporteurs have been around for a long long time.
Like all rapporteurs Johnston’s job was defined by the terms of reference. And the evidence of conflict is weak, since he has had as much relationship with Conservatives as Trudeau or other liberals. I appear in front of judges I know socially all the time.
Know socially, vs lifelong family friends and a member of a organization heavily implicated in issues hes supposed to be investigating.
What would the threshold be for you to acknowledge a ethical violation? Employed by Trudeau ( basically has already agreed to this with his comments post vote in parliament.) Part of the scandal itself? actions under taken by Johnson are starting to bring this into question.
Know socially, vs lifelong family friends and a member of a organization heavily implicated in issues hes supposed to be investigating.
What would the threshold be for you to acknowledge a ethical violation? Employed by Trudeau ( basically has already agreed to this with his comments post vote in parliament.) Part of the scandal itself? actions under taken by Johnson are starting to bring this into question.
I go by
Quote:
For the purposes of the Act, however, the Commissioner considers that there should be “a close bond, a feeling of affection or a special kinship" between both the public office holder and this person. If the relationship is close enough to reasonably call into question the judgment of a public office holder's decision making, then it is friendship.
Several indicators may assist in determining whether an individual is a friend for the purposes of the Act. These indicators include:
1. the duration of the relationship and the context in which it developed;
2. the frequency of interactions;
3. the exchange of personal communications;
4. the sharing of meals or gifts in a personal setting;
5. the mutual display of trust, respect, affection, or admiration;
6. the perception of the relationship by others within the same social or professional circles.
So from what I can tell, he was a friend of PET and they went skiing as families but it doesn't look like it would be anything considered "friendship to Justin" by the Ethics commissioner. So no, I don't think there is an actual conflict of interest here. Johnston was a board member of the foundation, but he joined well after the incident in question so I don't see any conflict there either.
I will condition that with, I think he is a poor choice because of the appearance of a conflict. I have no reason to doubt his report and think there is far too much of a push to impugn his integrity, but I agree that he should step aside for someone who at least has the appearance of impartiality.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to belsarius For This Useful Post:
Trudeau did not “make up” the role of rapporteur. Rapporteurs have been around for a long long time.
Like all rapporteurs Johnston’s job was defined by the terms of reference. And the evidence of conflict is weak, since he has had as much relationship with Conservatives as Trudeau or other liberals. I appear in front of judges I know socially all the time.
Ok, find me a Canadian with the title rapporteur prior to Johnston. It's a role and term that is mostly utilized in the UN, but has no definition here in Canada in our government.
Typically you appoint a commissioner (see Gomery and Rouleau).
Semantics of the title aside the bolded is a big LOL.
Did Johnston go on skiing trips with Harper outside of his governor general role? As governor general, was Johnston in charge of investigating Harper and give a decision that could impact his political career? So you meet judges and chat with them from time to time and you think that is the same? Are you being investigated and is a ski buddy you hand picked to be in charge of investigating you?
The same exact petty rebuttal was used with Marron Rosenberg as well (being chosen as DM by Harper). Apparently if the Conservatives can be impartial in their political selections, it automatically defaults that choice for Liberals as safe even if it's a huge conflict of interest should they do it.
Trudeau could have almost literally picked anyone else and criticism would be much harder to stick, but he picked someone that could be loyal to him and his family. The only worse choice would have been to appoint Sacha.
Also a large majority of Canadians as well as all other parties disagree with your claim there is no conflict of interest (or appearance of conflict)
Sounds pretty overlapping in the provided list as to a conflict of interest to me.
everal indicators may assist in determining whether an individual is a friend for the purposes of the Act. These indicators include:
1. the duration of the relationship and the context in which it developed; 2. the frequency of interactions; 3. the exchange of personal communications;
4. the sharing of meals or gifts in a personal setting; 5. the mutual display of trust, respect, affection, or admiration; 6. the perception of the relationship by others within the same social or professional circles.
Sounds pretty overlapping in the provided list as to a conflict of interest to me.
everal indicators may assist in determining whether an individual is a friend for the purposes of the Act. These indicators include:
1. the duration of the relationship and the context in which it developed; 2. the frequency of interactions; 3. the exchange of personal communications;
4. the sharing of meals or gifts in a personal setting; 5. the mutual display of trust, respect, affection, or admiration; 6. the perception of the relationship by others within the same social or professional circles.
"Family Friend" and "Friend of my dad" are hardly damning comments, or would hardly be the main indicators of a “a close bond, a feeling of affection or a special kinship"
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
