After much prodding by other bloggers, I set this up for my own writings. The name is in honour of the two women that mentored me throughout my life on politics and intelligence issues, as well as being wonderful family members, now alas deceased. I hope to live up to their standards at this site.

Friday, March 03, 2006

Ethics Comissioner investigating Harper-Emerson deal

CBC is breaking the news that the Ethics Comissioner is opening an investigation into the Harper decision to "invite" Emerson to change parties by becoming a member of his Cabinet. Good to hear. More details to be provided once I have them. Still though, it is a start. I have maintained from the outset that Harper bought Emerson with a Cabinet seat to cross parties, everything they both said confirms this. It does not matter whether Emerson truly believes he can do more as a Cabinet Minister for his riding than in opposition, he signed onto a party, supported that party in the last Parliament, supported them throughout the election especially opposing the CPC and Harper, and as soon as he was no longer a Liberal Cabinet member because of an election, he was willing to cross to the new government, but only if he was in the Cabinet. It is that last point that is particularly disturbing. I have from the outset challenged any defender of Emerson to provide any evidence other than his preference to be in a Cabinet, any Cabinet, for why he became a CPC. To date zero alternative evidence has been provided. I also found it disturbing to have Harper on Day One of his government taint it with the act of bribery. So good for the Ethics Commissioner.

It also is important to point out that Emerson looks to have the record on shortest time from an election to crossing a floor in our history, let alone straight into a senior Cabinet position. Emerson does not understand that while in the Business world this is acceptable behaviour it is not in political life, the two are NOT the same. I think Harper also needs to understand this, which given his lengthy history in poitics is more than a little disturbing that he appears not to understand this. It is and never has been Emerson's qualifications for a Cabinet position that has been in question, it is his ethics/morality/principles that his actions brought into question, as was Harper's in his willingness to increase his weak minority by a seat by passing over all those CPC MPs that actually ran as such to Cabinet in favour of Emerson. Remember, by Emerson's own words he would not be CPC now if there had not been a Cabinet position offered, and Harper (starting the day after the election no less) was the one making this offer knowing in all probability that without such an offer there would be no way Emerson would have crossed. If Harper really wanted him solely for his expertise, he should have appointed him as a Liberal and then once the Liberals got upset then there would have been some basis to make this look like there was any principle other than expediency/power desire behind Emerson's actions, and it would have helped Harper look less like someone willing to buy MPs with a Cabinet position.

Remember, Emerson right up to the Feb 6 2006 announcement was still claiming to be a Liberal, including being a part of party strategy discussions the weekend immediately preceding his new Cabinet position being known to Canadians. What does it say about the ethics of a man that knows he is about to change parties that he continued to be involved in such discussions? Nothing good in my books. If the Ethics Commissioner does find fault with this act, will Emerson resign as he said he would if such a finding came out of such an investigation, or will it be further words he said that he didn't really mean. You know, like being Harper's worst nightmare, CPC policies would be crappy, that a CPC government would be bad for Canada, etc.


Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat said...

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

Fri Mar 03, 05:26:00 PM 2006  
Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat said...

Previous post was a mistake - I meant to post this:

Gotta love it. The Ethics Prime Minister being investigated by the Ethics Commissioner for enticing an elected parliamentarian to walk away from his voters and join another party.

“Superficial criticism” my foot!

It will be very interesting to see just how much of this investigation is made public, and how cooperative Messrs Harper and Emerson will be.

I am sure the voters of Vancouver Kingsway would like public disclosure of the materials provided to and part of the Ethics Commissioner’s investigation.

By the way, I wonder if the Commissioner will be calling for evidence from others directly involved? I could just imagine the number of disaffected Liberal party members who volunteered time and money to elect Emerson, relishing in his statements of opposition to Mr Harper’s New Tories, who would now welcome a chance personally to explain to the Commissioner just how much they feel cheated by the defection of their MP.

Must be at least a dozen voters who would like to explain their dismay, perhaps hundreds ...

Could be a long hearing.

Fri Mar 03, 05:29:00 PM 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home