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

[Winsor_Pilates]

Do we even know he said "thief"?
The source doesn't even say that. From what it does say, I see nothing that should have had him kicked out.

He raises some important issues that should be looked into, and hopefully they will be.

[ken0042]

It may not have been thief; but it was something that directly indicated dishonesty. (I was half asleep when I saw the news article this morning.)

From what I understand, name calling happens, and then the name caller has a chance to appologize. At that point the MLAs can continue on to address the issues.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Right... one issue we seem concerned with (an MLA breaking the rules of procedure/decorum/whatever), and one that we don't seem to be (an MLA may have funneled public monies for private ends). I guess it just seems odd that the focus is on the guy who raised the issue (regardless of how rude he was... lots of easily hurt feelings in the Legislature?) rather than the potential corruption.

Funny. I always thought that we could have more than one focus at the same time.

We can debate whether what happened to the Liberal is acceptable or not.

We cannot debate anything about the MLA funneling money as of yet, as no details are out.

To imply that one is getting swept under the cover is extremely premature.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by FireFly

He didn't call him a liar, he called him a thief, and that's slander. Whether in the ledge or not, buddy could get sued over it.

Members can not be sued for anything that is said while in the legislature. There are rules however.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by ken0042

It may not have been thief; but it was something that directly indicated dishonesty. (I was half asleep when I saw the news article this morning.)

From what I understand, name calling happens, and then the name caller has a chance to appologize. At that point the MLAs can continue on to address the issues.

I'm pretty sure I've seen people calling each other names, hooting, and hollering at each other quite loudly on CPAC House of Commons. They insult each other regularly, they rarely apologize.

[sadora]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/...14951-sun.html

A Grit MLA became the first politician to be ejected from the legislature in nearly a decade yesterday when he demanded to know what "secret friends of top Tories" received more than $2 million in grants.
Edmonton-Ellerslie MLA Bharat Agnihotri was turfed by Speaker Ken Kowalski for refusing to apologize for impugning the integrity of the premier and leadership contenders in his cabinet.

.....

Agnihotri was grilling Culture Minister Hector Goudreau over why the province doled out 43 non-matched grants between 2003 and 2005 that exceeded the government's $10,000 limit.
"I simply said the government has broken its own rules. I want to know why."

......

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.

It should also be noted that the Speaker is of course a Torie. That's pathetic. Opposition should have the right to ask any question, especially those that question "the integrity of the premier and leadership contenders in his cabinet."

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I'm pretty sure I've seen people calling each other names, hooting, and hollering at each other quite loudly on CPAC House of Commons. They insult each other regularly, they rarely apologize.

The difference may well be that this MLA accused and convicted the Tories all in one sentence. He didn't ask what happened to the money, he asked what party insiders got the money. Huge difference.

[Slava]

I hope that the focus shifts to where it should be...where is the money? This should be the entire campaign for the Liberals next time around. Where did it all go? The debts been gone for a couple of years now, but there never seems to be enough...maybe there are more skeletons in the closet?

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Of course I'm interesting in finding it out.... but at the same time, that wasn't why this was brought up in the first place.

Well, in all honesty calculoso, I brought this up because I'm interested in finding out where the money went. I think the Liberal MLA thing is a complete side-bar. If you think he should or shouldn't have been kicked out, that's not the point to me anyways. So what? If anything, it brought the issue to attention. I would think its a good chance that it doesn't make the spotlight, or takes a lot longer to. Really, to me, this thread has been sidetracked a bit.

[Frank@75]

If the Liberal member has information, he has an obligation to inform the house. If he does not have a reasonable grounds for questioning the integrity of another member, he must retract.

This is to prevent questions that slur a member without reasonable grounds. There is nothing illegal about having friends, someone who agrees with the government or belongs to the party can still be honest
and a contributing Albertan.

Lets see his information.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Frank@50

If the Liberal member has information, he has an obligation to inform the house. If he does not have a reasonable grounds for questioning the integrity of another member, he must retract.

This is to prevent questions that slur a member without reasonable grounds. There is nothing illegal about having friends, someone who agrees with the government or belongs to the party can still be honest
and a contributing Albertan.

Lets see his information.

Exactly. If he indeed has information, submit it too the house, and 'prove' that the Conservative MLA is in fact a thief.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Azure

Exactly. If he indeed has information, submit it too the house, and 'prove' that the Conservative MLA is in fact a thief.

Well, isn't he saying that he knows of all these improper grants and is wanting to know why they were approved?

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.

Rosko, a former Alberta treasury communications director, worked on the leadership campaign of second-place finisher Jim Dinning. Rosko is vacationing in Europe and couldn't be reached for comment.

The circumstances of the grant raise "exactly the kind of questions we're asking in the assembly," said Liberal Leader KevinTaft. "We really need some answers."

So hasn't he laid out what he knows, and is now looking for the explanation?

[Azure]

And you get answers by calling someone a thief?

I still see it as an accusation...because everything is still an allegation. In other words, nothing has been proven yet.

[calculoso]

There are 2 ways to ask it and one is a lot more respectful than the other.

If he wants to go in, guns a-blazing, accusations everywhere, then he's going to face resistance and sanctions.

If he wants to go in, present the information in a respectful yet strong way, he's going to get a lot farther.

That he doesn't even want to re-phrase his accusation into a question, or even just re-phrase his accusation says a lot about the man as a person.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Azure

And you get answers by calling someone a thief?

I still see it as an accusation...because everything is still an allegation. In other words, nothing has been proven yet.

Originally Posted by calculoso

There are 2 ways to ask it and one is a lot more respectful than the other.

If he wants to go in, guns a-blazing, accusations everywhere, then he's going to face resistance and sanctions.

If he wants to go in, present the information in a respectful yet strong way, he's going to get a lot farther.

That he doesn't even want to re-phrase his accusation into a question, or even just re-phrase his accusation says a lot about the man as a person.

Outside of how he asked (which is a red herring, imho)...

Do you agree that this grant can look suspicious?
Does the public deserve an explanation for how our tax money was spent in this specific instance?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Outside of how he asked (which is a red herring, imho)...

Do you agree that this grant can look suspicious?
Does the public deserve an explanation for how our tax money was spent in this specific instance?

Absolutely agree.

We should know where every single tax dollar, provincially is spent.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Azure

Absolutely agree.

We should know where every single tax dollar, provincially is spent.

OK.

There are 2 issues here, and they should be separate.

The eviction of the Liberal member is probably fine. There may be politics being played, but I have no doubt both sides are playing. This should be its own story and should not overshadow or muddle the other story.

The money spent on unmatched grants is the only issue I care about. How and why is this money being spent?

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

The money spent on unmatched grants is the only issue I care about. How and why is this money being spent?

Yes....how come this issue has not really been touched by people in this thread? We've talked about how the liberal member should or shouldn't have said what he said, but yet this actually remains....

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Yes....how come this issue has not really been touched by people in this thread? We've talked about how the liberal member should or shouldn't have said what he said, but yet this actually remains....

Pretty much what I'm getting at as well... seems wierd.

[FireFly]

Because for now, there are accusations and nothing more. Soon, it will all come out, and then we'll know for sure, and then we'll discuss the situation. Until then, we're all refraining from jumping to conclusions.