hypocrisy

More on Harper's ethics hypocrisy from some letter-writers to the Globe And Mail.
As a rule, public servants should avoid interfering in the electoral process. It's a good rule, but one that was violated twice in the last month.

First, in December, the RCMP announced an investigation into whether Ministry of Finance staff leaked information on an income trust ruling. The Mounties offered no smoking gun; neither did they justify publicizing an unsubstantiated accusation at so critical a time.

In a much different example, Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro waited until the election was over to announce that, for four months ending in November last year, Stephen Harper dodged an ethics investigation. Even as Mr. Harper campaigned on ethics and accountability, Mr. Shapiro kept secret Mr. Harper's own refusal to stand to account.

In the first instance, the RCMP shared speculation without cause. In the second, Mr. Shapiro withheld factual, and relevant, information. In so doing, both parties failed to protect the impartiality of their positions and the interests of an informed electorate.

Richard Littlemore
Nanaimo

*

So, the Ethics Commissioner delayed releasing his report on Mr. Harper's failure to show for interviews regarding the Gurmant Grewal affair. If only the RCMP had been so circumspect.

Jack Troughton
Kingston

*

The RCMP and the Ethics Commissioner: Do they sing from the same Book of Ethics?

Frank Felkai
Toronto
This really burns me up. I haven't checked in (yet) with many other Canadian bloggers. Does anyone share my outrage?

Comments

  1. Anonymous27 January 2006 at 07:46

    It's the same in any government, though. For example, had Layton won, similar dirt would have been dug up for the papers. Indecision and flip-flopping are just a part of the game. I'm no CPC fan, as my own readers are no doubt already aware, but at this point, ethics hypocrisies really don't bother me anymore. We'll see them time and again with any gov that comes to power, be it the CPCs of now, later incarnations of the Liberals, or even the NDP should they ever rise to power.

    In other words, big deal. I think there are greater concerns regarding Harper's government than this, such as his party's view of women (the childcare plan/handout suggests a woman-should-stay-in-the-kitchen mentality), his views on participation in international conflict, gay marriage, abortion and privatization in the health-care field.

    Remember how the Liberals originally got back into power after the Mulroney 80s? Scandals and hypocrisies in the Conservative government. Now the CPCs are back in, due to scandals and hypocrisies in the Liberal government. Round and round we go, until a scandal in the CPC government arises, and the Liberals get back in. And then the game begins anew. Again.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Echomouse27 January 2006 at 09:23

    Lots of bloggers are upset about it. Have you checked out LibLogs? They're tracking all this stuff in detail. I'll try to find some specific links and come back and post them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. laura k28 January 2006 at 05:19

    Thanks again, EM. I'll check those out and post the links.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

sharia

This morning I see that Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, is banning the Muslim religious court known as sharia . This ends months of debate about whether sharia would be legal and binding in Ontario. I'm quoting at length from the story in today's Toronto Star because many US readers are likely not up on this. In a surprise announcement that caught both supporters and opponents of sharia law off guard, Premier Dalton McGuinty says he will move quickly to ban all religious arbitration in the province. McGuinty made the announcement in a telephone interview with The Canadian Press yesterday after months of debate and controversy surrounding use of Islamic sharia law in family arbitration. "I've come to the conclusion that the debate has gone on long enough," the premier told the news agency. "There will be no sharia law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians." The announcement prompted t...
Read more

can of worms

I'm opening a sticky subject here, my need to understand causing me to throw caution to the wind. It's about Alberta. Alberta vs. the rest of the Canada. The Globe And Mail runs something about Alberta's gripes every day, and I try to follow along. If it weren't for wmtc's resident Albertan , and the ensuing arguments in comments, I would've had no warning. It's not something Americans know about. As is, observing for more than a year, I have only the smallest of clues. Here's what I know. Please pardon my ignorance and oversimplification, but I have to start somewhere. The province of Alberta is rich, because it has oil. The province of Alberta is conservative, relative to the rest of Canada. Hmm. Funny how those two go together. Because of its great oil wealth, Alberta revenue helps fund services in the rest of Canada. (These are transfer payments?) Apparently many Albertans resent this. They want to keep Alberta's money in Alberta. They don't...
Read more

low confidence

I'm excited about today's no-confidence vote . Only three months after moving here, we'll get to see a government fall, a campaign, and an election, in a system very different from what we're accustomed to. Even the expression "the government will fall" strikes us as oddly dramatic and revolutionary. My sense of current Canadian politics, for what it's worth, tells me that very little will change from the upcoming election. I'd be surprised if the Liberals didn't win. So it's kind of cool to see this happening without a lot at stake. On a semi-tangential note, have I mentioned I'm completely down with "Corner Gas"? Excellent show; I love the deadpan humour. (Great website, too; check it out .) So was that really Finance Minister Ralph Goodale ragging on Brent Butt's camera last Saturday night?
Read more